Yeah. Yeah. >> I saw Stand around. Thank you. No, no, it's a big 100 mile. Okay. Very old. glad to learn. >> Yes, that's true. Yeah. All right. Yeah. downstairs. I hear have to sell Cody, are you ready? >> Everybody ready? >> All right. Good afternoon and welcome to the uh Monday, July 28th, 2025 Orno Town Council meeting. Uh roll call shows we have councelor Rob Lway, councelor Andrea Hardison, councelor Sarah Marx, myself, councelor Demerit, councelor Matt Powers, and councelor Jacob Baker. Uh councelor Kenny is out of town and won't be able to join us this evening. Um so there'll be six of us. The first thing we'll do tonight is we're going to have a public hearing regarding a dangerous building located at 69 Margin Street. And for those uh for Clint, can um Clint Dashan, our town manager, can you walk us through kind of the process and why it is that we'll potentially be casting a vote tonight? >> Yep. So, the this came from a recommendation from staff is pursuant to state law and we've consulted with the town's attorney. So, we have to have a more formal public hearing. Um many of you are familiar with public hearings here of the council um when there will be a later action item. So, they'll have a public hearing on a new business license and then action will be later. This is a true administrative public hearing where the council has to take uh information from both sides. One side being the town's recommendation, the other side being the land owner, and then we'll open up additionally for public comment at which the council can also then ask questions and deliberate. And then they will make a decision. There is no proposed order on the agenda because the proposal of an order has to be subsequent to the public hearing itself. Staff's recommendation is to declare it a dangerous building. We have not heard from the um owner uh outside of some recent contact today, but again they will be given an opportunity to present tonight if they're here. >> Okay. So with that, we'll let the town uh begin the we'll call the uh public hearing to order and the town would present with it's going to be code enforcement officer Pat Estes. >> Yep. >> Hello everyone. Pat Estie, code enforcement officer. Um, so this process um has been going on um since 2021. Um, and the reason really why it's taken so long is I always like to work with the property owners. Um, we all have some hardships that come in our life. So, I like to consider that. Um, but as of um May of 2023, um, I really just had to put my foot down and say, "Hey, we got a write a violation. the the building is dilapitated and it's due to the foundation. It doesn't have a foundation. It's on footings. Um and those are starting to give way. Now the center of the roof is starting to cave in. Um we got young kids in the neighborhood. We don't want to see something happen. Um I know when I was a young kid, I'd be curious and want to go in there. So we want to prevent that. And um so we've given the the violation to him. our lawyer um has uh reached out to him as well. Um and he has failed to fall follow through with his plan of action. Um so I would recommend um that the building be removed as of right now. Any questions? >> When you speak about the building, you're talking about the garage as well. >> So I went over today just to take a quick look at the garage and it's not in good shape. Uh there is one wall that's starting to come off the slab. Um but that could be repaired. Um I would love to see it come down because it is an eyesore, but as a building inspector, it can be repaired if need be. >> Okay. Council Marks, >> can I just ask for clarification? Is the garage attached or separate from this building? >> It's a detached garage. >> Okay. So, we don't see a photo of that here in the photos then, >> right? because it wasn't part of the violation as far as dilapitated. >> Okay. So, the building itself is what we're talking about requiring being demolished. >> Yes. >> There any other questions for Pat? >> Yep. Now, are there anyone is the property owner here or anyone representing the property owner who'd like to be heard? and then we'll open it up to comments uh you know for the town's recommendation against the town's recommendation and then comments neither for nor against anyone representing the property owner here this evening that no >> Hey council council this is Richard Conungle calling I'm on the zoom I'm on the zoom right now um Mr. Yeah. >> Okay. Mr. Conungle, is that that's how you pronounce it? Yep. Um, good afternoon. Thank you for joining us. So, we we've just heard from, if you've been tuned in, we've just heard from our code enforcement officer and now we'd welcome your comments. >> Um, over the last few years, over the last five years, I mean, I ended up acquiring the property from my brother and um, you know, I paid all the taxes. I took care of all that stuff for him and took over the piece of property, gave him a couple thousand dollars and said whatever. I went up there. I spent I don't know how many days bringing dumpsters in, cleaning up the yard. The yard was full from the driveway, from the beginning of the driveway throughout the whole yard. Um, cleaning up, picking things up, throwing it in dumpsters, getting rid of dumpsters. Pro, like I said, probably uh 430 yard dumpsters in the yard itself. um along with another dumpster for stuff that was inside. Um I've had a lot of home difficulties over the last couple years, so I haven't been able to get up there um to do anything with the property. I pulled a permit um at the time. I think it was two years ago, three years ago maybe um to do some work on the house and so forth and um boarded up the garage uh door and stuff um and just kind of made it so it was least safe. The doors were locked, the windows were locked, everything was locked. Um so that's where I'm at with things. I did talk to um Mr. Huber today, the town's attorney. Um I talked to Asa first, and I not sure if he's in the meeting today. Um I told >> Yeah. >> Okay. Okay. I had to talk to him. Um we come up with something and if the town is willing to still work with us, I'm willing to um work with Abe about he's talked to Mr. Griffin about signing papers to um to buy the piece of property. So, and he'll knock it down or whatever he does with it. Um it kind of falls into his realm of things there. He's got the brewery on one side, the driveway on the front and the back. So, it just makes sense. Um I'm not young no more. I'm 65 years old. So, at this point in my life, I think it's better that I just let him buy it. and um be done with the aggravation of having to try to get up there to get it done cuz I just I'm I'm busy down here in Connecticut. Um I got a couple properties down here. So, it's like I just I don't have time to get up there and do it. So, I think in my best interest it would be um to sell it to ASA if everybody's in agreement with that and are able to wave the fines they were trying to give me for the amount of time it's been sitting. uh vacant and whatever. Um and which me and Pat had talked about a year or two ago. And um like I said, I've had a lot of personal issues with the family. So that's the reason I really haven't got a hold of him. Um I've explained to Roger uh Huber what the issues were and yeah, I don't have to throw it out there and address it all. There's just a lot of things going on. So, I think in the best interest that would probably be the best thing to do. I'm from Maine originally. I like Maine. I was from Oldtown. I grew up in Oldtown. I graduated from school in Oldtown. I thought that maybe my kids would get on the right direction and want the house, but um it's best maybe just to let it go. You know, it's uh my brother had a lot of issues. Um his family, his daughter does, and everything else. and I just didn't want to move anybody back into the house to do anything with it cuz it was uh you know it's just a lot of stuff. >> Okay. >> So that's where I sit with it and if uh >> and if everybody's in agreement me and Asa can start um doing what we have to do and um go from there. >> Okay. Can you stay with us as we um as we talk through this a little bit? Okay. Um yep. Great. Any questions though for Mr. Kungle before we let him off? >> Yep. Anyone would like to speak with us about the four? >> Yeah, I'd open up those in favor and then those opposed and then neither for nor against. If there's any no one that wants to speak, then we can bring it back to the council. >> Okay. Okay. So, anyone in favor? Anyone? A you want to join us? Hop up. Please introduce yourself. Good evening. My name is Abe FTH. >> Green light on. >> Yeah, it's on. >> Coowner of Hub LLC, which owns 61 Margin Street, as well as co-owner of Orno Brewing Company. >> Um, as Rich Conungle stated, we had a chat today and um we'd like to proceed with um purchasing the property from Rich Conungle. And um at that point, we take responsibility for cleaning it up and taking it down. Um we're happy to I I've been in touch with um Griffin and Jordan today after chatting with Rich. So, we're working towards getting a timeline on whatever title work has to be done and um we'll we'll uh in our in our chat today, we talked about us taking care of closing costs and outstanding taxes if they are about what we think they are. Um, so we can just get it done quickly. Um, so that would be that'd be great for us. I think that the the the building owner and my partners and I feel good about that option. So here to answer questions if there's any from council uh with that plan. >> Anybody have any questions for a right now? You can stick around with us for a few minutes as we get into the discussion. So, councelor Lowe, >> so um I like the sound of this. Uh is the ask from council that um the current fees that have accumulated be waved as part of this deal? Okay. >> Yeah, we'd um I I spoke with uh David who owns Heirs Island and he's one of the contractors I know that has heavy equipment. I talked to him today as well and he said he'd be happy to help with with the project and could move things around and get it done quickly. So we'd we'd just, you know, clean it up, get it done, and then I think um just have that be kind of behind behind us and Rich in the town. >> Okay. Any other questions? Okay. Um we'll open it up to anyone else who wants to speak on the topic and then we'll have a council discussion. >> Thank you. >> Anyone else either in favor of or favor of the declaration? Anyone opposed? Anyone neither for nor against? Anybody online? Doing the best I can. I'm still participate. Yeah. No, I know you are. Thank you. >> Um >> I just wanted I want to tell everybody I appreciate their patience and uh and working with Bat was a pleasure. Um, like I said, it's I know it's been a tough road. So, um, that's where I sit with everything and hopefully I can get this fast me and we can all get it past us. >> Okay, great. Well, given what we heard today, does anyone have any I guess Clint, I would turn it over to you to kind of is there any modification of the town's re recommendation at this point? >> Yeah, staff has had been hearing conversations regarding Mr. Conko coming and what was and wasn't happening. We have had the opportunity to talk. If you want to bring the staff up, I think they could share more. But I would I would summarize in saying that I would like to see the we would like to see the council review this to determine if it can be declared as a dangerous building. Do not delay this any further. We're sitting here 5 years at least into this conversation. Um understanding that with that declaration, town staff is in agreement. We think this is an excellent solution and once that can be resolved and formalized in writing with all the deeds and paperwork that needs to come through, we'll come back for any orders council would have to take to um effectuate that decision. So, in other words, yes, do you or don't you think this is a dangerous building? If you do make the declaration, understanding the staff's going to work with the owner and this prospective buyer to make sure the deal goes through. Should it fall through, we would still have that declaration and the town could step in and tear it down as it needs to. And so there'd be the town wouldn't take any action to tear it down. We could act tonight, but the town won't won't take any action unless until the discussions >> Yep. >> work themselves out and Okay. >> Correct. >> Council Marks. >> So again, just to clarify, we're being asked simply to declare it um a dangerous building and not to wave the fees at this point or anything further. Just to declare it a dangerous building tonight. >> Make the decision if it's a dangerous building. We will deal with future orders should those become necessary. >> Yep. Okay. Anyone have any? Okay. So, seeing none, hearing none. Um, with that in mind, anything Abe, anything from you on that in terms of we act tonight, the declarations in place, but you'd still be empowered and able to make your make your um acquisition if you want to. Yeah, that that makes sense to me. And in talking to the building owner, the current building owner, I think that that that made sense to both of us. Okay. We would just work with uh town staff on timeline and we're work, you know, uh Griffin and Jordan right across the street. So, uh we're working with a great local attorney and um really the only thing that would be of any uh timeline in my mind would be the title search >> would be the what? >> The title work. Title work on the property. So that's I think that's what we'd be waiting for and I'll have more information tomorrow on what that would look like. But as long as it's not complicated, those things usually don't take too long. So we'd be ready to go as soon as the paperwork was signed between the current owner and us and then let Griffin and Jordan do the work on just making sure it's a, you know, it's a clean closing. >> Okay, great. And Mr. Kungl, does that make sense to you? Yeah, like I said, I talked to Abe today and uh as soon as he starts checking things out, I'll take a ride up there and it's just next week. I told him I couldn't make it next week, but the following week I'd be up if he needed me to do anything any sign in or anything like that. >> Okay. And obviously, if we act tonight, Yep. If we act tonight, we'll have the order on the books and the town will have that >> in their pocket if they need it. But obviously, Yep. >> Yeah. Yeah, if we can work it out without having to do all this. I just I'd rather work it out and just be done with it for right now, you know, get it done with it and >> Okay. >> Is what it is, you know. >> Yep. Thank you, sir. >> You guys all get me. Pat gets me. And so, all right. I appreciate, like I said, thanks. Thanks for everybody's patience. And uh >> I didn't mean to make an eyesore. I wish I could have fixed it up, but it is what it is. >> Sure. No, we appreciate it. >> Okay. >> Yep. >> All right. I'm gonna I'm gonna sign out of the Zoom meeting. >> All right. I think we're gonna we're gonna vote if you want to stay here for 90 seconds. I think we'll be done. But >> Sure. >> What's the right Sure. Um >> the language for the order. >> Okay. >> Uh I guess we would consider unless there's any discussion or concern. >> Guess we'd consider an order. We need a motion um pursuant to MR to 17 MRS section 2851. The council hereby orders that the above identified building or structure located at 16 margin street orno maine said property being described in a deed recorded in the Ponopskot County Registry of Deeds in book 16824 page 73 page 73 owned by Richard Conungle shall be disposed of as follows. You want me to read all four paragraphs? >> You don't have to. >> Well, you want >> I don't think you have to read all four. It'll be part of the record. We'll include it in the minutes and then we'll include it there. So, >> etc., etc., etc. Okay. Okay. Do we have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Any final discussion? Okay. All those in favor? >> It's unanimous. Six to nothing. And that's the So I'll declare us out of the public hearing. And thank you, Mr. Clunko, for um being a part of our our hearing tonight. Abe, thank you for coming in and the work you're doing on it. So we'll leave it up to >> a dinosaur. I'm a little bit of a dinosaur with these computers and Zoom meetings and stuff, but I got through it. >> Yeah. >> And uh like I said, thank thanks everybody. >> Thank you. >> All right. >> And we'll thank you. >> We'll declare the public >> Yep. >> We'll declare the public hearing uh closed and move on to our agenda. Action item number three in order 25180. Resolution award awarding Friica Smith with the Lee Cooken Volunteer Service Award for her dedication and multifaceted volunteerism. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Uh town manager Clint. >> Yeah. Just getting the motion second. Yes. So um thank you council for entertaining this resolution. Uh this came forward as a joint recommendation I think from the from the town clerk's office as well as the library. Um, Shelley couldn't be here this evening, so she shared some thoughts with me. I've actually had some great opportunities in one year to to work with Frederri as well. But I thought I'd just share some of what it was that Shelley and Lori had put together for me. Um, it started off with a quote that I thought was amazing that said, "Never doubt that a small a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it's the only thing that ever has." quote, "Volunteers don't get paid not because they're worthless, but because they're priceless," by Sherry Anderson was the quote came from. And I don't think it could represent Frederica any better in the one year I've known from being here in the town and all the years of service they put together. Um, she's been here with us since uh 2016, volunteering on Thursdays, as well as being a full member of the library board of trustees. Um, Frederria started volunteering with the elections team. She's done archival record, vital records work. She has got perfect attention to detail um due to her medical background in trainings. She's spent the last nine years um working from 1890 to 1950s in chronological order for all births, deaths, marriages, and burial records to create an archive. This had been priorly stored in banker boxes with no archival measures, index, or order. So, finding a record and then handling it could be so difficult and detrimental to staff time. Um, to summarize, she's she's assembled, archived, and cataloged 96 3-in binders consisting of 190 records each or 18,240 records. The time spent on this project on Thursdays alone over the last nine years is easily over 3,456 hours and $55,000 in donated time. So I have the resolve, the staff has presented the resolve here for the council to share. I would only add that this is the first recipient since we created this award just a few months ago in the name of Lee Cooken. And at the time we said there would be no criteria. It would be case by case and no annual award but only as they become evident when we learned that Frederri was moving. Um, this is an award she would have won at a later date and we're sorry to see her leave now, but we're so glad she is receiving it because she's more than earned everything she's done for this town. So, Dan, >> excellent. Any um any clarifying questions? This is an action item, so we'll do it like we always do. Any clarifying questions from council? Any comments from the public or members of staff? So, so noted for the record, there was three whoops. Anyone else? I just want to say I I've been on the council for three years now and it's always enjoyed um Frederica participating in our process and and seeing her in the town office. Um so thank you very much for that. I told Lee on the walk-in today that I thought we'd have a tough standard finding somebody to win the first award named after him, but I think we've lived up to his standard as well. So thank you for for all you've done. Um and with that there's no further comment. Okay. All those in favor, it's unanimous. Thank you very much. >> May I make one comment? um which is that there are so many people in this town who volunteer for so many things both for the town and its government directly and also for all of the other organizations in the community. I don't think I stand out in that group but it's a pleasure to be part of that group and I greatly appreciate the recognition. So thank you. We're gonna get a picture. >> Fria, can we get a picture? >> There you are. >> Right up there with Dan. >> Right. >> Chief to join us. The first time more Okay. Uh, next up on our item. Thank you very much everyone and um for that and thank you for staff for bringing that forward. That's wonderful. Um, agenda review. This is a time in our meeting when we have an opportunity to look at look ahead in the meeting and add or um ask clarifying questions. We also list here but we don't go through them the various items that have been referred to committees. And we've now added we've upgraded um added a point where they're going to be reviewed and brought back or where where they stand with the committees. So, uh we do that for the public and our own information as as members of the council and for staff. Um, I'd ask if any um if any counselors have any agenda review items or clarifications they'd like to address. >> Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to item five, which is approval of minutes of July 14th, 2025. Could I have a motion? >> Moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Any discussion? Okay. All those in favor of approval of minutes? Okay, that's unanimous. Uh, public comment. This is an opportunity for members of the public to give us their feedback. We ask that public comment um in these public comment sections be limited. Well, I don't know if it's limiting, but not include things that are on the agenda. So, I guess it's pretty you talk to us about anything that's not on our agenda. If it is an agenda item, we ask that you uh you wait and talk with us during the during the agenda item. So, is there anyone here who'd like to provide public comment this afternoon? Come on up, Harrison. Please introduce yourself. There's also a public comment period in the at the end. People rarely wait around for the last one. >> Uh, hi there. My name is Harrison Goldspill. Um, I live at Seven Cassidy Lane and I just want to talk really quickly about our graduate student community here in Orno. uh and ask for the town council's support again uh in uh supporting our union and our bargaining efforts which are now uh going on over 600 days since we began. Um some of you might remember me from uh over two years ago when I came and sat down with the town council to bring this union to your attention. Uh we were just organizing then we had received supermajority support from graduate workers across the state. and most of whom are in Orno uh at the University of Maine. Um and we asked for your support then uh to support our um effort to unionize and be recognized as a legal union so we can begin negotiating for a contract with the university uh which you did support. So thank you again for that support. Um it's been over 600 days now that we've been bargaining for this first contract. Um which is well above the average for a first contract uh in higher education. Uh and we are struggling uh and I'm not part of the bargaining committee. Uh so I'm just coming here as a graduate student um who uh is an organizer with this union uh and recognizing that uh this length of time uh to bargain towards the first contract is uh it doesn't need to be this long. Um and as we continue to bargain for this contract, graduate workers in this community continue to struggle uh with various essential uh day-to-day aspects of life from housing to insufficient pay to incomplete health care uh limited processes to address grievances uh and safety in the workplace. All of these are items that we have proposed that have been negotiated or are waiting to negotiate with the University of Maine system. Um, and it doesn't really seem to me that there is any clear end in sight as a university continues to um not want to entertain various items specifically related to economics. uh or um reject certain proposals and counter with things like pay cuts uh to the status quo. And we find these to be unacceptable um and not really in the spirit of our community uh and our town of Orno. So, I'm here just asking uh for the town council's support and reiterating their support and calling on the university uh of Maine system um in reaching a fair and strong contract as soon as possible so this isn't drawn out even longer than it needs to be. And that's all. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Is there any other public comment with us this evening this afternoon? It feels like afternoon when it's still light outside, but come December, this will most decidedly be evening. Okay. Uh thank you, Harrison. We'll move on now to presentations and discussion items. Um proving that uh public comments lead to council discussions. We'll have a council discussion on the steeple restoration fund request from CUF and based on um public comments that were shared with us at our last meeting. And I would ask first um this was a organization in the community. Is there anyone who would like to notice for us or the public that they would will be recusing themselves from these discussions and decisions based on Okay. Council marks. >> Yeah. I will be recusing myself from any vote for sure. Um I participate and sit in the discussion. Thank you. >> Okay. Do you say you will sit in the discussion or >> I will sit. You don't need to be part of the discussion. >> Okay. I just have a comment to make. I was involved in this church um for maybe about 4 years and I have not been involved. I've not been to a service. I have not uh contributed. I've not done anything except um meet with my friends who are in the church since 2020. So I am not recusing myself from from this. But I want everybody to know um where I stand and that you guys know who I am and and um I probably am on the books as a member of the church, but I I'm not a member in any meaningful way. >> Okay. So just going to be me on this one or Yeah. >> Um so I I will not recuse myself, but I have performed at various times at the church. I do find it to be a very valuable part of our community. Um but I'm not a member of it. Just worth saying. >> Fortunately for councelor Baker and I, there are very few organizations that would have us as members, so we're usually we usually don't have to recuse ourselves from much. Um, well, let's jump into it. Um, and we certainly welcome the chance to talk with people. Um, anyone want to lead off? I'm happy to share some thoughts, but I'm open to and if we want to hear from anybody else or this is a request for $5,000 as part of the save our steeple campaign. >> Sure. Right. Um I was not a part of the last meeting. Um I'll just share my thoughts as a as a starting place. So first of all um the church of the universal fellowship has been a um exemplary member of the community as a community organization. and they um have uh they have um hosted um school functions um continuously since I've been here for 11 years. They have um always had an open door for any community um program that is going on and they don't charge the community for doing that. And um and with that, this is not your normal typical um um like private um building. This is a very public and a very communal building and it is a gateway to downtown and um I am very interested in preserving both the historical um feel of Oro to the extent that we can and also as as Main Street is a gateway um to our downtown. I think it's in our best interest as a community to be aware of and to help when we can. um the the feel and aesthetics of downtown because that's how a lot of people will come here because of that. And so I think this is an important building and it has historic ties to the town um in terms of the town um having helped with different aspects of the steeple. And so I find this to be something um that I'm in favor of particularly because they have gone out and gotten quite a large grant. They've done everything they could to to bring in money for this project and so this ask is not from lack of work. >> Anyone else? Council >> question than a statement. Um Matt had mentioned community events at the church. Um, do we have an approximation as far as how many community events at the I mean, you're right. I mean, there there always does seem to be communitywide events at the church, but you know, any sort of direct partnership between the church and the town. >> Anyone from the church community want to give an estimate to It's pesky how councelor Baker likes to ask questions, but >> and an estimate is perfectly fine. >> Yeah. >> Don't have it. That's >> Thank you. I'm Dave Griffin. I live on Bennett Road in Arno and I was the the presenter a couple of weeks ago when we first uh had the request. And uh you know, it's kind of hard to answer that question when you're talking about a church that's 181 years old. But I can say u and it really um appreciate the comments from uh counselor um about powers about u a little bit about uh his thoughts about the church. Um I guess it's not numbers that uh that really are the the factor. it it's the fact that we have had over the years an open door policy as it turns uh to community events and um I think it's probably that's the best way to summarize it is that whenever there has been a community need for an event uh and and needing a location that's right here in center part of town, the church is there always. >> Yep. Great. Any other questions for David while we have him up? Okay. Thank you, sir. We'll call you back up if we need you. Appreciate you being here. Anyone else? Cali. >> I think it is worth sharing. I know uh councelor Kenny isn't able to be here with us tonight, but he did uh share some thoughts. Uh and I'm I'm not necessarily endorsing his positions. I just feel like it's worth bringing that to the discussion. Um councelor Kenny said, "Well, I appreciate the work that the church is doing to maintain their steeple and the clock that has been an orno landmark for many years. I could not vote in support of using taxpayer money to support the maintenance of a privately owned property. And I'm hopeful that a majority of the council will agree that this would be a very dangerous precedent to set. Um he goes on to discuss how he's concerned that um this might set a precedent for us to uh weigh into repairs on a lot of different buildings and historic districts and historic elements of town. Uh as for myself, I'm more torn about it. Um, I do see it as a really valuable part of the community landscape. I think it does provide a lot to the community in terms of an event space, as a safe place for many people to go for many needs. Um, I think I am not quite there yet. Either way, I I I think about the use of public funds for uh religious purposes as um questionable in terms of the separation of church and state. Um but at the same time um I think this is a valuable part of the community. So I I don't have a clear position yet. Councelor, >> I can I am in the same situation as Rob, the separation of church and state, but I also see the value of preserving the downtown and the staple. Um, so I'm wondering if we could consider an adjustment of the amount to maybe 2500. Um, so that we're still helping with the steeple, but at the same time, we're considering tax dollars and where they're spent. >> Okay. Um, I had a couple questions for the town manager. Um, ready? Yeah. Is there any um is this building within the tiff zone? And if so, is this a tiffable expense? So I I did look into that briefly with with uh uh the economic development department. Um I think one of the issues is that tiff district doesn't call out preservation of historical properties as one of the purposes. So that would probably put us in a unique situation. It does have some some uh facade loan opportunities that were built in there. But I don't know if that's really on point with the question that's been presented to us. We'd have to have a different look. But again, so that one probably wouldn't be there. um or we'd have to amend the tiff district to include some things like that and that would require some time with the uh attorneys Bernstein Shore that that advise us on all our tiff districts. So that's the best I can answer is right now is no the downtown tiff district would not be eligible use of the funds. >> Another you want a harder question? >> Sure. Um what would your advice be to us about you know we did the Caribou Bog Center when um before you got here and we made some a financial contribution to that. We um what what is your what would be your thoughts for us about how you manage these in a way that's orderly. You know, we want to be a town where it's that's responsive and it's easy to engage with and we want people to come forward and talk to us and then, you know, two weeks later be thinking about and we're not going to vote tonight anyway. There's no there's not a vote on the before us tonight, but there could be on our August 11th agenda, >> but what is your thoughts on um you know, every two weeks someone could come in? I get the precedent argument. Is there a mechanism to create a once a year type? you if we did this and then we agreed moving forward we were going to set some kind of once a year I mean these capital projects as we know from the work we do take a long time to plan would it make sense for us to have and Sarah if you want to weigh in on this kind of thing please do but would it make sense for us to have you know a once a year time in our municipal calendar where we might entertain something like this um and then we could wait if we had a meeting a year or something or some some period a year and we'd kind of have to assess the asks versus our resources and make decisions because um you don't want a preference or create some kind of bias for the first actor. >> And so what happens to the group that comes in next week with a similar similar um standing in the community and a and an ask of the council and the taxpayers? >> I guess I would say I mean being here a year not knowing the history of the town and what it has or hasn't done but understanding that it's probably similar to what other communities it's case by case. So you have this unwritten policy that it's case by case. There's no guarantee you can ask. We may or may not do it and it's just up to the council at the time to decide and review those. If you were to take it outside of that, which is probably not a bad suggestion if there was to be a time, there needs to be some criteria. And again, I'm going to point towards your your uh council grant >> process that you kind of endorsed >> that this is this is probably something that could be even aligned well within that if you wanted to. Um full disclosure, I never thought of the separation of church and state and shoot with all the background things I've done. That wouldn't be a bad one to just do a quick check on if you were to be seriously considering doing it. I don't think there's a pro problem here because you're doing it based upon the building structure itself if you wanted to. But again, it is a church that's in that building. So, I would like to double check that, but I would not recommend donating to specific functions of any religious organization. Um, that would be probably beyond what I would recommend as your manager because that's getting into some beliefs that we try to stay out of that not picking sides at all as a council. Um, just like you're apolitical, you're also uh you don't get into the religious conversations as well. Um, but yeah, those are the only recommendations I'd have is some sort of criteria or policy and maybe just doing a quick check on what a donation like this is for a president. >> Yep. We did um we did have a inquiry from the um Bangor Daily News and I I did a little research and um found some examples of like the main historic commission you know they don't give money to any I iconography is that I pronouncing that correctly and programming religious programming but there have been there are examples of buildings um you know of historic significance or otherwise where public funds have gone so it seems like there's some gray area in terms of the law, but it seems like there's plenty of room to be um to act in the space as long as you stay out of the you know the programming or iconography. >> Yeah. And I would suggest like I'm pro for this for for a number of reasons, but I would suggest that we definitely if we proceeded with a yes vote and added money that we had a statement that went along with it talking about this is specifically for building and not you know an endorsement of any um ideology or any thought process >> forward. Yeah, the order itself could be worded pretty carefully. Yeah. Jacob, did you have something else? >> Yeah. Um and in my mind so it's not yes there is some um distinction between the the the religious aspect but it's it's the private use of the funds or I guess is is what I am struggling with and um the bog center it was before my time but that was done through the I thought it was done through the Orono economic development council >> um correct me here that request. Yep. >> Um, which that organization is set up and and I think would be more appropriate to to fund projects like this. Um, I I Yeah, I guess sorry. I think it's a it's a I I love the fact that it's downtown. I love the look of our main street and and but it's Yeah, it's I guess it's the funds to a private entity which I would have to get over. I guess >> I guess I would ask um in the interest of time and moving things along. It sounds like we've got one I think councelor Kenny signaled his concerns and you know I promised you know he we the expectation was we weren't going to vote tonight anyway so he'll have an opportunity if does it make you Matt we could bring an order any one of us can put an order on the agenda for the next council meeting to fund it and that would give all of us a chance to you know it feels like people are on the fence um there's some people are on the fence I think I'm I'm inclined to support it with the with the understanding that we'll develop work with staff to develop kind of a a process moving forward for these types of requests. So, they're all considered at least in a as a package comprehensively as opposed to one-offs, you know, just happen to catch us in a you know, couple months a month after the budget's closed or um so I would I'm inclined to support it with that in mind. Are the those of you who maybe are on the fence, do you need more time than August 11th or can you get you think you can arrive at a position between now and August 11th? I don't want to put anybody on the spot. If more time is helpful, you know, but >> two weeks, >> I think the timeline is fine. And I I do find myself in inclined and support. When I say I'm on the fence, I would really just like to understand a little bit more about the legality around particularly the um the the public place in uh terms of religion. >> Okay. >> I my thinking on this I even though this is a uh a private church, it functions often as a public third space within this community in a way that men that buildings don't on Main Street. Like if somebody came to me and it was their private home and they were asking for money to help keep that private home open, I would not be for that. If it was a um if it was a business that was um making specifically trying to make money and they were taking on those risks that I would not I would not go for it necessarily. Um if there you might be able to convince me but it would be more difficult um because that is an a a private company that is specifically trying to make money and is trying to um move forward. This is none of those things and it's and it's a gateway to our community. It is not a private person's you know home. And so um so I think of this as a very unique situation that is not going to come up probably especially as a prominent historic building on Main Street. >> Yep. CL does it do you think Roger or someone could give us kind of a one pager on the legalities for our August 11th meeting and we have an order to you know the council will work up an order on it and we'll vote >> just with two weeks notice I mean there's a few other projects we are working on if that didn't come together that quickly is that a problem >> we have to well if we don't vote on it August 11th we're not going to have another meeting in until September >> September I know >> what's your timeline like if we get you an answer in September would that >> work for you >> don't work schedu October. >> So, I'll aim for the 11th. >> Aim for the 11th. >> Just I know I've got a few other We've got a few other things that we have been working on. I just didn't want to >> Yeah. detract from already ongoing projects >> and we'll keep everybody informed of what the schedule's going to be. So, if we're going to vote on it the 11th, you'll know, you know, we'll let you know again and then we'll go from there. Does that make sense? Everybody okay with that? >> Good. All right. So we'll close the public discussion on this and then the public, you know, the foreign or against, there'll be a public, you know, as an action item, the public would certainly be welcome to come talk to us about their views on it before we vote. Um whether it's August 11th or our meeting in September, first meeting in September. Okay. Thank you. Um all right, public hearing. Uh we're going to open a public hearing to consider amendments to the town of Or oro code of ordinances chapter 20 law enforcement article 3 disorderly property. Uh I don't have to take a motion to open a public hearing. Right. I just can do that because I get the gavvel. So let's do that. Um Clint, do you want to present on this at all or I just an intro? I don't want to present formally. There's been a great process. This has been a committee that's met weekly through the entire summer. Um, starting 1st of June, I believe it was June 2nd. Um, there's been engagement on citizens, neighborhood, business owners, uh, landlords. The University of Maine's had a student involved. So, there's been a lot of engagement in and around this. And I want to send my thank you to all of those that participated. Um, overall, this is a recommendation came out with some review from the town's attorney to get advice back to the committee. Um there are a lot of other pieces that this neighbor good neighbor committee was working on, but this is one large component was to look at what all good neighbors should do if they're hosting an event and what leads to being a disorderly property. This is not focused at an a resident, tenant, occupant, or other. It's at all people. Um there is a focus towards people that live in mixeduse neighborhoods, meaning that's where you have a mixture of residents and rentals as well. That's where more of the problems occur. When you're in a more singular neighborhood where it's only renters, this is less problematic, but it would still apply. This is a townwide ordinance that would affect everyone. It is not a what I would consider a significant revision. It's kind of a this process was early shared with us by one of the committee members to have been touched upon many times in this town and they have served on multiple committees similar to this one. So, I think it's just been in a little over 10 years and it's been time to revisit again and look and see what's working and what's not. So, there's been a lot of pair care and thought put into this. We're definitely looking to hear uh public input at this public hearing and I know some of the other counselors have some other ideas as we move forward, but hopefully the public has some other additional ideas to share now that they've seen a draft of the new proposed ordinance. >> Yeah. And I would say um as Rob and I co-chared and Leo was on the committee as well from the council. I would thank we've got some of the members of the good neighbor committee. We spent I think seven Mondays together um in from starting on June 2nd. And I would say thank you very much to the committee members including landlords um who partic landlords who participated and I would say um later in our for those who are want to participate in the public hearing um and for the council's information just we have a couple more orders regarding the good neighbor committee recommendations later in our agenda right after the consent agenda. So we'll close this public hearing. We'll bang out the consent agenda and then we'll talk about accepting the good neighbor committee recommendations and we'll talk about whether we call another public hearing on August 11th. And at that point during that action item, I'd entertain I think we should entertain any changes we'd like to ask staff and the town attorney to look at for the final version that would come back for the 11th for a public final public hearing um and action at that at that council meeting. Does that make sense, >> Jacob? and and I'm fully supporting of the or supportive of this. Um I Why do we need a second hearing? >> Because if we want this to be um if we want this to take effect ordinary when we pass an order when we pass an ordinance change, it typically is 30 days unless we decide as a council that we want a different date, a more an earlier date. Um it includes the term emergency. I'm reading that expansively in terms of but any the council a majority of the council if we want it to be you know we can't go backwards you know we don't have the the time stone here or anything but if we want to decide it's going to be we meet on August 11th and our normal course of making an ordinance change it wouldn't be effective until September 11th which is kind of two weeks after the start of the the semester >> we can't just use this current hearing that we're going to have right now as our hearing has notice >> yeah you have to notice the emergency piece in our in the or >> and to clarify if you you could vote tonight. There is the we have clarified that precedent, but you're at that 30-day window from the date. So, you would not be taking effect until the end of August. >> Yeah. >> Um which then and again, there's some conversations we could have back and forth about whether what the pros and cons are the end of August versus August 11th. >> Yeah. And it made sense, I think, to because I think we'll have a couple minor changes in the ordinance. It's in front on the agenda. I think it makes sense to have the second public hearing if anybody else wants to come in and then act with the expediency that's available to us in the charter. >> So Dan, just to reiterate so I'm clear, if we were to vote tonight, it would be under regular public hearing rules, not emergency public hearing rules, and it would take effect 30 days from tonight, which would essentially be the end of August, August 27th or something like that. 28th, >> uh, probably 29th. 30 days past. So it would be in effect on the 29th if we voted tonight. If we do this other process, we hold a second emergency public hearing. We can vote on August 11th and it takes effect August 12th. >> If that's if that's the date we pick. Yep. >> Gotcha. >> Plus, it saves us from spending an hour trying to word smith an ordinance, you know, on the fly immediately after a public hearing, which we typically is something we don't want to, you know, haven't tried to avoid. All right. So, now that we've taken up so much of the public hearing time just talking amongst ourselves, was there anyone from the public who'd like to participate in our public hearing, please come on up to introduce yourself, please? >> Hi everyone. Uh my name is Alana and I'm a property owner in Orno, Maine. Um, I'm here today, um, as I just found out about this new noise ordinance, and I'm here to express my perspective on the new ordinance being considered regarding noise disturbances, particularly concerning the proposed allocation of responsibility for fines. I have owned and rented out my property in Orino for several years, and I'm not opposed to the principle of holding individuals accountable for noise disturbances and issuing fines to those responsible. However, I am strongly opposed to placing the responsibility for these fines on the landlord. To illustrate my point, I'd like to offer an analogy. If a friend were driving my car and they received a speeding ticket, would you expect your friend driving your car to get the speeding ticket or would you expect yourself to get that speeding ticket? For me, I would expect the driver of the vehicle to get it even though I was even though I owned the vehicle. In my view, this situation in my view is directly an analogous to the proposed noise orderance. It makes logical sense to charge the person directly responsible for creating the noise disturbance. In this case, the tenant rather than the landlord. As a landlord, I diligently perform due diligence in screening potential tenants, which includes conducting background and credit checks. Despite these efforts, once a tenant signs a lease, they aren't an adult capable of making their own choices. I am not their parent, nor do I have direct control over their day-to-day decisions or behavior. My hope is always that my tenants will be considerate individuals who desire a safe and peaceful living environment. The consequences for landlords when a tenant proves to be problematic, are already significant. Dealing with a poor tenant can lead to a costly and lengthy eviction process, often incurring hundreds to thousands of dollars in legal fees and loss rent, not to mention potential damage to the property. Adding the burden of fines for a tenants's noise violation over which the landlord has no immediate control seems an unfair and unnecessary additional penalty. I respectfully urge the council to reconsider this aspect of the proposed ordinance. I believe the fine for noise disturbance should be levied directly against the person who is responsible for creating the disturbance, not on the property owner who beyond their initial tenant screening ultimately does not have control over a tenants's individual actions. Thank you for your time and consideration of my comments. >> Thank you, Alana, very much. >> Anyone else like to be heard? >> Yes, my name is Bryant McIll for Peter Street. Uh, I had the pleasure of serving on the committee that helped put this together. Just want to make a couple of quick points. First, I would urge the council to think about this as a recurring public safety problem. Yes, it's a noise problem. It's a nuisance problem, but uh when you have a large group of people who are drinking and not being supervised according to the rules and regulations that a bar or a nightclub requires uh and those, you know, I see the parked cars in my neighborhood all the time. I know most of those students, most of those people uh whoever they are are not walking home, right? They're driving home. And just in the, you know, in the past decade, I've lived here 15 years, but in the past decade, there's been three people who were assaulted as a result of these types of events. There was a student who did walk home and fell into a snowbank and died. Uh, there was a student walking across the bridge from home from a party and died. Um like I said and many many people who come out of these events are hopping into cars and driving and that's just an accident waiting to happen. Not aware that you know there's been a fatality as a result of a drunken driving event but um it's not that hard to imagine it's in the future. So I've been asking for change for the town council uh and the town for this for 15 years. This is not some like last minute uh kind of thing or it's also not just a response to a single incident. It's an ongoing and recurring problem in several neighborhoods. And I appreciate that the current town council and staff are the first group in 15 years to actually take this issue uh as something that they own and can take action about. Um I actually think that the changes to the ordinance are common sense and they actually move in the direction that we heard the last speaker talking about. Uh currently the ordinance is primarily directed at uh the the property owner. it it's kind of vague when it comes to fines. It says the property owner and the tenant are responsible, but in practice, my understanding is it's usually been the property owner who's been responsible because the town has a hook on the property owner and doesn't have much of a hook on a tenant. Uh that said, the property owner has always had an option to recover the fees from the tenant, whether it's through um you know, the security deposit can be withheld for things like this if they're you know, charges to the house uh as a result of tenant behavior. It can also be written directly into the lease and I know many landlords have taken the time to write into the lease that any fines that are incurred will be uh the responsibility. But the changes are actually moving it to make it clear that the first event is on the tenant and that subsequent events start to become a shared responsibility of the tenant and the property owner which is different from the current writing which is that it's primarily a consequence for the property owner. So I I I think it is moving I think there's some shared agreement with the last speaker in terms of where responsibility lies. I I I agree. You you can screen a person only so far and it but once you find out that things are happening, the landlord does have some responsibility. Uh you know, rents vary, but uh there are very few properties in this town that run for less than $1,000 a month, which is $12,000 a year. And fines we're talking about on the scale of 300. So on a certain level. Uh and you know any property owner in this town has certain obligations. One of which is not to be disturbing to your neighbors. Um very quickly right now for small events which is less than 20 people they have to happen three times before there's any fine which is not much of an incentive for action. Uh under the proposed ordinance the first event would be a $300 fine to the tenant only. And it's now very explicit it's to the tenant. It's, like I say, it was previously vague. At the second event, it's $600 to the tenant and $600 to the property owner. But the property owner does have lots of choices and power in here. Uh, right. They they write the lease. There's lots of things they can write into that lease uh that uh impact that. And so, I feel it's important to incent the property owner to take those kinds of actions in terms of writing things into the lease. If it's a large event, which means more than 20 people, uh that's when it used to go directly to a $200 fine. Again, very vaguely assigned to everybody that you could point a finger at, but it mostly went to the uh property owner. And it usually took several days for that to happen. It was a report that the police uh p officer would write up and then it would go to the police chief and it would go to the town manager and they'd sit there and they talk about it. three or four days later you would get a decision about whether there was an event or not an event. The current uh rewrite makes it so that there is an instantaneous decision on site that there's an event and in this case with the more than 20 people it does currently go 600 to the tenant and 600 to the property owner. I think if you were go to the full spirit of this uh change maybe the first event even if it's more than 20 doesn't go to the property owner it goes to the tenant. And then with that notion that once the tenants's been put on notice, there it's required that the land owner be told what's happening, once they're on notice, they can start to have those conversations and actions. And I think it's fair when they're taking in $12,000 plus to have a $600 fine as an incentive to make sure that they're taking all of the actions they can take to encourage a good behavior. Um, just very quickly, I deeply appreciated the process. It was seven meetings, 90 minutes a meeting with the bridge out. So, it was often a two and a half, three hour process to attend those meetings for some of us on the other side of the river. Uh, but it was a deeply respectful conversation. I think there were four tenants, four land owners. There was a student uh there were a number of residential property people who don't rent uh who live in neighborhoods where there was an issue. There was an individual who had had a dangerous encounter with a student who was part of this conversation. police chief was there, uh, counselors were there. It was a deeply respectful conversation. I think we all learned a lot. There was a lot of thought, a lot of debate, a lot of discussion. And what emerged out of this was a very strong consensus. I won't say every single item was an absolutely unanimous consensus, but it's about as close. I spent a lot of time in public service, and it's about as close as I've ever seen getting to unanimous decisions. It's now in it's a recommendation of the council. is now in the council's lap and I would encourage the council to move forward with the spirit of uh immediate feedback to whoever is having these events and consequences immediately for tenants and consequences in the long run for uh land landlords who uh don't take responsibility for changing behavior. Thank you. >> Thank you, Brian. >> Would anyone else like to be heard during the public hearing? We have somebody online. You want to We'll do the Sydney. We'll go to Sydney and then we'll come back to people in the audience. Sydney, um, could you just introduce yourself and >> Yeah, my name is Sydney Record. Um, I live over on University Place and I just want to reiterate that I think that the so I I I have a close relationships with students at the university and I want to see them succeed. However, I'm also part of the town um and live really close to some of the houses where there's a lot of parties and um I do think that there needs to be immediate action rather than a warning. Um and I do think that it needs to fall although um just to reiterate the kind of the safety issue. I was walking with my children home um one evening last May um you know right around the finals time and there's a kind of notorious house that always has lots of loud parties um that we more or less put up with but in this instance someone pulled out of their driveway did a U-turn onto the sidewalk and almost hit me um and my my two children and my dog and um I think that you know we were lucky we jumped out of the way, but they they they went over the curb. Um, and they were extremely drunk. And we we did call the police. Um, everything had happened so quickly that we didn't have a license plate number or anything, but those people then continued to drive around town. Um, and we're we're really wasted. So, I think that we need to do this before a child gets killed walking down the sidewalk um when a car jumps the curb. Thank you. >> Thank you, Sydney. Okay. Anyone else in the room who'd like to join it? Anybody else? Yeah, please come on up. Hi, my name is Alice Kelly. I live at 121 North Main Avenue. Um, I lived there since the early 1980s and I have been a property owner of a rental uh apartment in that neighborhood for approximately 15 years. Um, so as a resident I understand how this affects uh affects the neighborhood, the time, the vandalism and then the assaults. We have experienced vandalism on our apartment or excuse me not our apartment but on our property um of people just walking from party to party. Um also as a property owner and a rental unit owner I am concerned about this as well. Um and I understand the concerns that Atlanta raised. Um, I think that we are probably not the problem, but it is the person, the people who are out of town, out of state, um, not connected to our properties. And so, I do not like the idea of imposing more fines, but I think it's justified in this case. Um, I can write things into my lease that restricts how people have parties. Um, I'm willing to do that. I already talk about noise to my tenants. One of them happens to be here, so if you have questions, you can speak with him. Um, I'm concerned that property owners were not being contacted when there was an issue. That should be happening and it should be happening immediately. I don't think we need an ordinance to do that. Um, renting a property is a business and businesses have the responsibility not to impact a butters and neighborhoods. I'm sure that there are some sort of ordinances that control how businesses operate in an area and how they uh impact people. So, I support the work of the committee. I understand that change is is sometimes scary, but I think that we need to see a change in these neighborhoods. We've been living with it for a long time. 10 years ago, there was some uh some progress made, but I think this would be more progress in the right direction. So, thank you very much. >> Thank you. Anyone else? Yes. Come on up, Jody. Hi everybody. I'm Jodie Clayton. I was served on the committee. I've lived in Orno since 1986 as a college student, as a residential property owner, and as a business owner. I currently have an apartment in our house. I have a commercial property in Bangor where I have my business and I have tenants there as well. I just want to reiterate first of all how well this committee worked and I was thinking about this today. uh driving to work think realizing somewhat belatedly how amazing it was to me that the decisions that we made as a committee were almost entirely unanimous. I mean it really was a consensus amongst this group of people which included at least four landlords and I'm really I was it's remarkable. I felt that this was an incredibly positive experience and gave me a much more positive and happy sense about this town that I love so much. I want to make it perfectly clear that there was no um agenda, no gotcha agenda for landlords whatsoever. This was really all about prevention. In the last 20 years, I know two people at opposite ends of Pine Street that have been punched out and beaten up as a result of a disorderly property activity. And that's not acceptable. You know, we've got to do something. And since I've lived in Orno for almost 40 years, I can tell you that there are regretfully have been over time consistently the same properties that demonstrate these behaviors. And that goes beyond the tenant resident piece to the landlord piece. So adding that layer seems critical in terms of accountability. I thought about and I think I even mentioned one of our meetings that same analogy about a car, right? Because it it does apply except here's the difference. You're not making a profit loaning your car to your friend unless you're renting it to them. These are businesses and I guess as a town we have to decide what is an acceptable degree of externalized cost that we are willing to put up with from a for-profit enterprise. And I would argue that uh we've been very very lenient in that regard. And these are for-profit enterprises. And externalized costs come in the form of our taxpayer dollars going to the police department and emergency services. they can also come in the the form of somebody getting assaulted, right? So, I think about it that way. And I know that as a business owner and a and a landlord, um it's on me to do what I need to do to make that work. And I agree with Alice. I I don't think, you know, the landlords primarily that were on this committee or or us are the problem. There are but there are landlords that are problematic and that just are raking in the money. And what we want is not to be collecting fines. We want the behavior not to happen. We want our neighborhoods to be safe. This isn't about, you know, kaching. This is about let's not have this go on anymore. And um because it's been a really long time since I think we've taken a brave look in the mirror at this issue. And um I think that this is a really great first step. So, I want to thank everybody on the committee and I really enjoyed uh getting to know you all and working with you. I look forward to going for forward with it. >> Thank you, Jody. >> Anyone else with public comment? And again, we'll be discussing this quickly uh right after we get through our consent agenda and nothing goes faster around here than the consent agenda except the motion to adjurnn. Okay, that we'll all set online. Um we'll close the public hearing and thank people for the participation. also note that I think the council got probably eight or nine emails today um which for us is kind of blowing up our their inboxes um for so thank you for that um for those folks who weighed in uh largely supportive I would say but you know we'll all make our own determinations on on what those were um we're now moving to uh the consent agenda the consent agenda did I miss something oh acknowledgements by council members Jacob let's start with you >> nothing at this I just wanted to um say that the students are coming back and um I'm excited about that. I want to acknowledge that. And to the community members who maybe put out a a blue main sign um just to welcome the students back um we're a community that it's always going to be a push and pull and I want students to want to come back. I want to have that pull and them to have a great experience here being in in Orino. And so thank you for the graduate students who came out and talked today too. I just want to acknowledge uh your participation in our community. >> Okay, council marks. >> Um yes, >> sorry I was actually trying to look I took a picture on my phone. Um I was reading my MMA magazine this last month that we all get as counselors and I was really happy to see that there was an Orono student being honored there um for one of the recipients from the 2025 Douglas M. Ugli memorial scholarships for public service winners. Um Asia Marzili, who is an Orno senior this year, was honored with that award. Um and there's a really nice write up about her in there and all of the projects she's been involved in and what she hopes to do next and how that would connect connect to continuing public service in our state hopefully. So thanks to the MMA for that award and congratulations to Asia. >> Great. Council Artison, >> just going to put a plug in for September 6, the Oro Festival Day. Um, we've got a lot of activity planned, pancake breakfast, yard games, concert, arts and crafts. So, please take a look at the Orno Facebook page, neighbor to neighbor Facebook page, and keep an eye out for activities that are going to happen. >> Yeah, councelor Larway, nothing at this time. >> Yeah, I would add echo uh what council Hardison had to A lot of people are coming forward with the ornal festival days for September 6th and uh I'm eager to get past the we're kind of wrapping up buttoning up the present the uh organizational part and we'll get into our there's a lot more still to do but we'll have uh a lot more promotional work which I think will be the fun stuff coming up soon. So watch for that and thank you to everyone who's stepping up and helping with that. Um all right uh now can I do consent agenda now? Okay. Um, consent agendas are moved and voted on. Our items we move and vote on as a single action item. Any member of the council or any member of the public can choose to ask us to remove something from the consent agenda and uh take it up as a regular action item with a discussion. Seeing nobody can get a motion on the consent agenda. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Any there's no discussion. All those in favor? It's unanimous. Great. Now on to action items. Um, order 25183, an order accepting the consensus report from the good neighbor committee and extending the committee for quarterly meetings until June 2025. Can I get a motion? >> Moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. I guess I'll if that's all right, Rob, I'll present um from the committee. So, we shared with you we discussed the consensus recommendations at our last meeting. This um is just we're not asking the council to endorse. We're asking the council to accept but also extend the committee so we can do quarterly. One of the recommendations is that the committee meets quarterly. So it would be November, March, and July into 2026. So we can work with this the um the staff and the police department to look at the data that would come in from disorderly activity calls and uh calls to the Orno's 24-hour police line for noise and nuisance complaints. Um, so we have that ongoing conversation, provide that transparency with the public and invite the public to come in and talk with us about how it's going. So that's all I have. Does anybody have any clarifying questions? Any comments from the public? Okay. >> I have one clarifying question. Sure. >> You said quarterly, but then you listed three meetings. Is it quarterly or is it three times a year that I don't really care, but just whatever I get on the record, I want it to be whatever the committee wanted. >> Three times a year. So what's it what's that? It's not it's not by it's >> I thought this was discussed though that it's quarterly because you met your last time in July and there would be three more meetings for a for one meeting every quarter now through June 30th. >> Okay. Yeah. >> That's why it was worded that way. >> Yeah. >> Uh I think we even talked about what dates we wanted. >> Anyway, four times a year. Just as on the record what the committee wanted is all that's important to me. >> I think they said something about November, February, and June. Wasn't >> November, March, and July. I thought >> November, March, and July. >> That's three. So maybe >> three or four. Let's just say three or four, whatever they choose. >> Okay. >> Does that sound okay? >> Yeah. Can is that a motion? Is that a >> That is a motion to amend to say three or four times a year as the committee sees fit. >> Seconded. >> Okay. Is there a second on that motion? >> Seconded. >> Okay. Any discussion? All those in favor of that motion? Okay. Um now we need to move to the underlying question. Any more comments or discussion on the underlying acceptance of the the recommendations? >> This is just on the recommendations, not at the actual ordinance, >> right? >> If I could only sneak things through that fast. You know, I try sometimes and you you all call me out on it. So, um yeah, this is accepting the recommendations allowing the committee to meet three or four times. So, all those in favor as amended. All right. So, that's unanimous. Uh, order 25184. Order setting the date of August 11th, 2025 at 5:00 p.m. for an emergency public hearing to consider amendments to the town of Orono Code of Ordinances, Chapter 20, Law Enforcement Article 3, Disorderly Property. Could I have a motion? >> So moved. Seconded. >> Moved and seconded. So again, it's okay. I'll present on this one, Clint, unless you want to rob. So couple things. one um Orno has an ability, our charter gives the council the ability to enact something if we if we vote on something um it doesn't go into effect until 30 days unless council uses what's called an emergency uh provision where we can set the date of the enactment. So, we could have set um we could have put an action item on the on the meeting on agenda tonight to act on the ordinance and then it would gone in effect in 30 days. If we're going to use the emergency provision that we have in the charter, um, and I use the term emergency loosely, I'm defining it loosely. Um, we can choose the date that it goes into effect. And it would, I think it would be handy, um, for this ordinance change as part of our roll out and welcome back to the start of the new year to be in effect um, in the middle of August instead of the middle of September. So, I I wanted to raise that for a discussion first and foremost, see where the rest of the council was. Of course, we could take I guess we could take um we take public comment on it, but that would be that's the first part of it. And then um I think that we I know there are um a few minor technical changes or and not really all that material, but some changes I think we need to discuss about the ordinance that was printed with tonight's agenda. And that so that would give us a second chance to have a hearing with the final final ordinance. Yep. Anyone have anything they want to any clarifying questions on that? And then we'll get into the discussion about the ordinance changes. Um, anyone in the public want to comment? Yep. Good. Thank you. Now, um, in terms of council discussion, anybody have any thoughts on the the choosing a date in sometime in mid August to make this effective? >> Yeah, I mean, I'm fine. I I am supportive of the ordinance. Um, I guess my only thing is on process and procedure and whether this truly does fit emergency um, use. Again, I'm fine doing whatever the will of the council is. That's just my only thought. >> So, do we know when the last time we used that emergency? >> Mike Griffin left. So, I can't Yeah. So, it's kind of why don't Yeah. Yeah. Um, yeah. >> It's not Yeah. Yep. And I think having the second public hearing is a, you know, is another step. That's I think that's a step to the good. I don't love love using the emergency designation. Um, but having the second public hearing helps and being transparent about why we're doing it. So, >> did we ask the lawyer? I mean, is there any definition of emergency or do we simply decide as a council that we think it's important enough that it needs to be enacted sooner? Yeah, I think I think it's a council discretion when you read the ordinances and the way it's read, you know, that that gives you the discretion as a council to determine things that are of great community interest. It's not a legally defined term at the state level that it has to be in reaction to a natural disaster or something along those lines. Um, and if it's worth it, I would say from my review, due to the timing of the work that's been done, the way this came about, it feels that time is of the essence. further with an education campaign that we want to kick off here late summer into early fall. I would say that's a good criteria as well. Only thing forewarned, this is your precedent setting moment as a council as a group. Should you ever do one again in the future, what rises to the level should the community ask you to do one? But again, I do feel it's council discretion. You're the elected body. >> Yep. I think it says four counselors have to agree. So, can >> I ask a question? >> Sure. um of the landlords here. Like if this goes into effect say um mid August, will this will you guys be trying to change like um your rental agreements before then or are you already rented out basically for the next fall? >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you. No. >> The way I set up. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anything else on the emergency piece? I would I would say on process piece, I think I would have been more hesitant to be in favor of this if we weren't having this meeting, this hearing tonight. I think uh and being super transparent about why we're setting it up the way we are. I think we're still making sure people are getting adequate time to give input and feedback. >> Okay. Good. >> And we would actually be having more public hearings than we would normally have on an item. We would normally have one. And this would allow us to have two. >> Twice as many. >> Yep. Um All right. I have a couple of items I wanted to raise with the ordinance that was, you know, spent seven weeks doing it. What's that? Sure. You want to do your questions first? >> I don't care. Whichever you think. >> Maybe my questions answers your Maybe mine. Okay. >> You go first. Yours might answer mine. >> First of all, the committee was very clear um and I, you know, went back and found the I was teaching Jacob up on how to find, you know, transcript references. Um the committee was very clear that the um the person that lives in the home, the you know the occupant of the home who is engaged in a disorderly activity that gets a violation that violates our disorderly activities list um should apply to both a tenant who you know rents an apartment on North Main Street or a homeowner on Page Place or you know Winter Winter Haven. Um, so I think we need to go back with the the manager and the council and make it really clear that occupant the disorderly activity occupant is is someone who's the homeowner or the tenant and make that distin. Does anybody have any concerns with making that clear that um this sort of activity applies to everybody who across the board? We rather just whether they pay rent or pay a mortgage if they live in the property. I thought it already was clear and if there's anywhere that it's not, I would certainly want it fixed. But when I read it, I read that as clear already. So, thank you. >> Okay. Same. >> I can clarify. There's one spot when you look at the actual fine where it says the first fine of $300 is to the tenant. One of the things the committee had to do was define tenant and occupant. And we did some language around there to make sure it was clear that a tenant is anybody that does not own the property. and the owner is the recorded owner of the property. So if you got into the fine, it could be confusing that that didn't. So the only thing would happen is probably is a motion >> to amend the fines to include that a first offense is for a tenant or an owner. >> Resident owner though, don't >> res owner, >> right? We somehow need to clarify resident owner versus non because otherwise someone could pay the fine twice weirdly if we didn't write it correctly, right? It could make stop. No, we're not doing that, Alana. So, >> no, but I'm just saying we need >> If you made a motion to allow to us to bring that recommended change back from the attorney, we could do that. >> Okay. Well, we're not um Yeah, I don't think we're going to motion it. I think we're just going to ask for it. Is that okay? By consensus. >> Yeah. >> I'm just curious. So, then the next step, right? um where you get a tenant and an owner both being fined. If if you have a a homeowner who's the resident who has a disorderly conduct, pays the $600 and then next month has another disorderly conduct, do they pay $1,200 or do they just pay another 600? >> They pay 1,200. >> Okay. >> Because then they're the tenant and the owner. Okay. >> No. No. >> That's why it's distinguished in the second offense that there's a tenant fine and an owner fine. Got >> so works in the second offense. It does not work in the first. >> Yeah. The property owner has to be a nonoccupant owner. >> Correct. >> Yeah. And the tenant or occupant in the first order. Yeah. >> Yeah. We only have to fix the first offense. That would not allow a That's the issue I see. >> But sounds like the committee was clear. Sounds like the council was clear. And we'll work with the manager and the attorney or to make sure that what gets printed in the next agenda is >> perfect is align with that. All right. The second thing, um, so thank you for that. That's important. Um the second item I wanted to raise was um a quiet the quiet hours um at 10 under the fines you see that there's no in our in our ordinance that I think a big part of this is creating awareness and the the second um if the occurrence on page six of the um the ordinance draft the amendment uh it says the occurrence of a disorderly the activity from 10:00 p.m. and before 8:00 a.m. shall be grounds to double the fine outlined in the section. First of all, we we talked in the committee about making that 7 a.m. because that aligns with Orno's noise ordinance. And Ordo's noise ordinance think maybe the easiest it's maybe it's not the most accurate, but it's the easiest. I I think of noise ordinance is is things that f apply to like construction sites and things that are, you know, you can go and you can measure the actual noise at the property line. we could send our code enforcement officer there, you know, to to do that. Whereas a disorderly activity is a different is a different thing. But I think it should have the same time. People okay with that making that change? I'm on page six of eight at the um under 20-60 under penalties, it says the occurrence of a disorderly activity after 10 p.m. and before 8 a.m., but the noise ordinance is seven. So I think they should be aligned. Everybody okay with that? >> Okay. So, we'll make that change. >> And I would like to add my the last piece I wanted to add and I had one more um one more kind of just observation I can make whenever I would like to um under definitions which is on page two of eight between E and F because that's where quiet goes between police chief and resident residential. Um, I would like to add quiet hours in or between 10 p.m. to 7 a.m. >> Where are you suggesting? >> Under between E and F. >> Oh, just to add it here at the beginning. >> Quiet hours and then and then add a definition of quiet hours that makes it clear that they're between 10 and 7 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. And to that end, if we agree to add a definition, I'd probably want to add a definition to that fine piece. So, back on page six, if it says the occurrence of disorderly activity after 10 p.m. and before 7 a.m. is a violation of oral's quiet hours and shall be grounds to double the fine outlined in this section. People okay with that? >> What? >> Sorry, we're back to I'm jumping around. >> Where are you now? >> No. Under if we agree that acquired hours definition is appropriate under the definition section on page two. Mhm. >> I would ask that we also add under the um the the section that the occurrence of a disorderly activity after 10 p.m. and before we're changing it to 7 a.m. is a violation of orno's quiet hours and shall be grounds to double the fines outline. >> Yes, that's right. >> Okay, got that. Clint, I'll be back to you. >> I'll be in your inbox. Yeah, the town council I will call up the town council leas line that um you call our town manager more than once a day and you get you can start getting a little snark um which we enjoy. And I that was it for me. Um I did want to point out and share that um in part in large part because of the recommendations we got from landlords um we did make that pro prohibition that um the the first disorderly activity does not apply to the landlord um and they get a they get a notification and the second the second one does. Um, and we do have in our in the law on page five under remediation process, if the owner at the time provides evidence of an eviction notice, and that would be probably the nonoccupant owner at the time provides evidence of an eviction notice, then all subsequent fines will be will accumulate against the the tenant, not the owner. So, if there's a problem and we know the eviction, we heard from our landlord participants who are all oral residents that, you know, the eviction process takes a long time. We didn't want to punish people um who are working with the town um to resolve an issue. So once an eviction starts, that's your get out of fine free card. Um and that's what we want to do. We want to encourage landlords to be good, you know, good neighbors and and work to address problems and not find people unnecessarily. So okay, anything else now? Questions, I guess. I don't did I answer? I probably didn't, but I tried. All right. What do you have for questions? Are we doing questions? >> Yeah, you had a good one. >> Um, I have a few. >> Yep. >> Um, >> I just want to say I appreciate the energy and the time that went into this. Um, because changes are needed and we do need to bring that ordinance up to date. Um, I've struggled partly because I've lived in Webster Park since 97 and it's not idealic. There's trials every year. Um, but I've never been afraid to leave my home. I've never been afraid to leave my yard. There's problem with speed, but that's another topic for another time with Chief Merrill. Um but we we have kids riding their bikes and playing in the streets and we have block parties and um friendly neighbors. Um but our neighborhood is on a walking corridor for people walking from one party to the next. It's also the location from multi-unit buildings where the a lot of the parties occur. Um, I believe that the lives that have been in jeopardy have been a result of poor choices um that resulted in just severe unjust consequences. Um, with the continuing continuation of the committee, I do ask that we look at expanding the committee members to include some additional students, especially now that the school year is about to begin. We have some great student leaders with very good voices both on and off campus and I'd like to see an opportunity for them to participate. Um my questions uh around this I don't know if you we're going to go one at a time or just give them all to you. >> Sure. >> Um how does this protect regular everyday family and friends gettogethers? um what constitutes as a raging party for one doesn't necessarily constitute a raging party for another. Um how does this address the activity of people leaving a party? Is that falling under the noise ordinance which includes loud talking, whistling, singing, etc. Um, I don't agree with holding a property owner or occupant accountable for activity that occurs as people are leaving an event, especially if it's the police department is there to disperse the event and get people on their way. Um, anyone who chooses illegal or violent behavior or incites violent behavior is a person who should be held accountable for their actions. Um, I'm I looked I is there an option or a steps process to a steps to an appeal process? If there's isn't, I'd like to see that added um in section 28-582B. Is this stating that we're going to publicly list names and apartment numbers of individuals? And while >> what number was that? Uh 20-58 item 2B. >> Okay. >> Well, there their information is public record and we do have the Freedom of Information Act. I don't believe that we should just voluntarily list resident names and addresses for safety reasons. >> All right. I'm going to lose track of some of these. So, can I bring you back up to speed on a few of these as we go? >> Yes. >> Okay. Um we've talked the good the good neighbor recommendation and it's still up to interpretation and implementation by the town would be to list a property name when it's declared disorderly. So if a property if you know 999 page places a disorderly property that would be declared and we we recommended that the town provide an update updates on those maybe through their Facebook the police department's Facebook page or something like that. We're still waiting to hear back how they'll do it. um the committee did not recommend any kind of public listing okay of people's names um whether they're the owner occupant or or whoever. So we decided not to do that. your question about um I brought up your question about the disorderly activities on the way out of a party um with the town manager today and we talked about you know the kind of the drunk and disorderly the call the police department would respond and um this is a dis disorderly property ordinance so it has to be kind of focused on the activities at the location which I think is um is you where we are in the ordinance in terms of what we're trying to do and you know we can't solve everything with this particular ordinance, but there's opportunities to do more work. Um, I'm certainly open to having more students participate. I'm meeting with Keegan Trip tomorrow at 6 to talk about this. He is the president of the USG, US um, Humane Government Association. We've been talking about getting together for a while. I've been keeping them apprised of this via email. I'd be happy to talk with them about what we're what we're looking to do um, and particularly get feedback on how we could best communicate it. I don't know there's an appeals process, but I think that the um I think the we'd count on the town manager and the police chief to work with people a violation as I understand it would be able to be issued at the event for disorderly activity and then the you know the town manager and the police chief would have some discretion about where that goes from there. Is that the case or >> Yes. I mean all the ordinances you have have the discretion what the town will or won't settle to or what we think is fair. That's into the day-to-day operations. You can mandate them out in an ordinance >> and you can mandate things in. But again, the way this is is left up to us to work with those. Again, a little bit like the current ordinance in the past year, we put much more focus on disorderly properties. And we've had measured change just in the past 3 months, you know, with the second offense and working with landlords that we're getting corrections to happen. But again, these will enhance that. Yeah. But as far as an appeals process, um I think ultimately it's going to be that they refuse to pay and will they take us to court. There's your appeals process. They're going to get a chance to make their day. Will we or won't we take it to court? You know, it's I think it's going to be case by case. Um you know, the same as do you give a fine every time an officer, we have a community policing philosophy. Our officers will be using their discretion that they're trained on to determine whether a summon should be issued. Case by case, tenant or owner, it does not matter. It will be uniform. There will be no profiling tenants as violators or profiling owners as violators. They will show up and do what they think's best at the time, >> you know, and that's the best I think our community policing statement, anybody who's curious should review it. It's an exceptionally well-written document and that's what this department operates on. And I'm proud to say that they will do that with this same ordinance. But again, we are also putting some teeth to this, >> you know, >> to get attention to people who aren't otherwise weren't paying attention. >> Correct. And we're also going to have those fines there and and we'll implement them. >> Jody, you had something as a commun. >> Yeah. So it has to get to that level. There's no >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> So there is no to clarify and we did talk a little bit to the committee and I think it's helpful. I'm glad you bring it up. Um the current ordinance before changes allows an officer to issue a citation if they see it themselves. We are doing that internally more. We have been less engagementorientated on it because it's easier when there's a complaint there because we're responding to the needs of the community. But we are going to look and again a good example of this if an officer drives through a neighborhood, sees hundreds of cars parked at one house, steps out of the car, and can audibly hear extremely loud music to the point they would probably would even violate our noise ordinance. That's going to be the beginning. We have no complaint. I'm also quite certain that if they do a review, they'll probably find a complaint and that also this ordinance takes into place that the chief and the manager can look later and determine after the fact even if that did rise to the level of a disorderly one and disorderly two which we put some internal procedures and there's many internal procedures happening here um on how we are going to approach implementation. Yeah. >> Um so that's how those would work. That's the best I can give you of that. But if you wanted to add that, again, this is the council's opportunity to change the ordinance if there's things they know they want to have added. >> Yeah, I would say if you've got I don't want to open that door all that much because I spent, you know, we spent seven weeks getting this to the point when running it by the attorney. I think this is an iterative process. We're going to learn from it. uh we'd be able to include more, you know, look at this stuff with the good ne good neighbor committee moving forward in those kind of quarterly meetings for the three the three or four meetings we're going to have in addition and I would say um that this is about a big part of this and for me the biggest part of this is um making sure people start calling. We're gonna have we're gonna have signs up in the neighborhoods, you know, noise or nuisent noise nuisance 8664000 or those 24-hour police line. We need people to call because it's not the fine at the door even whether it you know, maybe it's a warning and a and a caution. Maybe it's a fine, but it's the work that happens not on the Friday night, but on the Tuesday that follows where the community policing officer shows up, where the the police chief and the town manager, you know, notify the landlord, gather with the landlord. We, you know, it is the the engagement with the university if that's an appropriate step. It's all those things that happen. You know, if you knock if I knock on my neighbor's door and say, "Hey, knock it off." And it goes away there. All the extra all the other stuff doesn't happen after that. And and that's where that's how you get at the persistence, the persistent problems, the the uh behaviors that just where there's not an awareness of what the expectations are. Oh, they knocked on my door. I'll quiet down. Um if we really want to establish a standard and hold people accountable to it, it's the stuff that happens after the incident that I think makes the most difference in the long term. And we need people to call. It's dangerous to knock on someone's door at midnight um when you think there's alcohol involved. Even if you know them, you may not know who answers the door. You know, the person you brought brown who brought you brownies when they first moved in may not be the person who answers the door at midnight when you knock on the door. We need to get our police department over there. They're trained. They're de trained for their community policing agency that we can all be proud of. >> They're trained in deescalation and that sets the path forward for all the other things that are going to make a difference. >> Okay. Um section 2057 A2. Did you consider including property managers because the property managers are the first to be called when there's a problem at a at a >> in terms of finding a property manager? >> Yeah. >> No, we no. >> Um finding >> we did not consider that. We just considered the owner. >> Okay. And then uh for section 2060, I'm just curious why we don't have a three strike rule. Um it's a very new hurried set of changes and we do need to have proper education done. Um I'm just wondering about you know first warn be the first offense being a warning to the occupants property manager and owner then the second offense becomes the zero to the owner the 300 to the occupant with the third offense being the 300 to the owner 600 with the remediation plan in in place. Um, >> yeah. I I just I would three weekends in a row seems like before you get into the meat of this thing seems like a lot to me. Um, and based on we kind of had an ambiguous kind of three-step three-step path to the first fine to begin with. So, I would oppose, you know, we heard from the landlords. Look, if it's part of >> I mean, this isn't something that they like she said, we can't they can't rewrite it into their lease. >> Yeah. >> And it is it does cost money to evict someone. >> It does. And when the land but when the lease the what we heard back from the landlords who participated in our meeting is that you need urgency to get people's attention. And if a police officer writes a citation, a viol, you know, a violation, cites a violation at the door when something's happening, that's now. if you're dealing with someone's, you know, someone's lease and the security deposit being money withheld from a security deposit six months from now, nine months from now, that didn't have the urgency we thought we needed. Um, and that was a big part of the discussion about why um why the current ordinance was wasn't particularly effective um and why we needed some tea. So, that's where we went with it. We could, you know, if if you see we're going to have the data um so we're going to have disorderly activity data. It's going to be reported back to the good neighbor committee which will be reported back to the council. And if we're finding we're just, you know, blowing people, you know, into debt with these fines, we're not gonna I don't think for a second we're going to find that. But if we do, we could have that conversation about, you know, is it too restrictive? Is it too much? You always got to be careful the pendulum doesn't swing too far when you're trying to correct things. That's why we're we just asked and we just approved several more meetings to continue to have the conversation. But I would I would say that's why we kind of came down. It's I appreciate the question, but that's kind of >> I just have one request that >> um as we promote these changes um can we encourage the occupants if they're they are having a gathering and it becomes beyond their control or people show up that were not invited that if they call and ask for assistance that they're not going to get hit with this disorderly conduct list because we do have some conscious conscientious occupants who do want I don't want to discourage somebody from calling and asking for help. >> What do you think of that, Chief Merrill? >> I think I I thought I saw you Andrew. >> There's multiple variations on what a person could or couldn't do and what should or shouldn't be. Community policing says we listen case by case, but I am not going to remove that opportunity to say if you self-report because if they self-report five times in one year, we've got a problem and we're going to find them. So, yes, we will take into account self-reporting, but there is a line where self-reporting has to be stopped and our officers are trained to deal with that. And I am excited to see this happen because I think we're going down a really good road um with this whole process. But yeah, if it's a true one time, never done it before, didn't get way out of hand. >> The other side, if it's a one time 350 people show up, they wait till 1 in the morning to call us. I think that's going to get a different review from our police department. That's just my thoughts. Yeah. >> But we'll see, you know, but again, work with us. That's why we're going to be reporting back and telling you what works and what doesn't. >> You know, this is a community process where the town's involved as a partner with the landlords, with the homeowners, with the tenants, you name it. And we want to hear it. So, we're going to try our best. Nothing will be perfect. And I will say that over again. We will change this ordinance sometime in the future again because it isn't perfect, but it's a growing process, you know, to make it better each time we touch it. So, I just want to just say I feel really good about you guys continuing the meetings with this group through the year to see what works and doesn't. And I would be ecstatic to hear a report next July on what didn't work and what did work. Okay, Rob, >> I'll just uh voice support for uh Andrea's idea about making sure we get a few more students on the committee over the course of the year when they're back around. I think that would be great to have their voices a little bit better represented. >> We'll do it. Okay. Anybody else? Oh, Council Marks. >> Yeah, thank you. Um thank you really to the whole committee and I see several of you out there. I know it was a lot of hours of service. Thank you very much. Thanks Dan and Rob and everyone. Andrea, thanks for your questions. They were great and very detailed. Um I did take a look at the one you were pointing out with the um on the well I'm not having it in front of me right now, but the one about the list of names of tenants. I think that was on 208 2B and I just want to clarify that is not a list that we're public publishing. That's what the owner is being asked to provide to the town. It's in a subcategory that says the owner or the owner's duly authorized agent shall provide to the town the following documentation and number B is one of the things the owner must provide to the town. So, just to clarify, um, and then my questions are, um, so Dan has already touched on this a little, but I wanted to hear, was there some rationale on the committee as to why there's no fee to the landlord the first time around for a smaller party, but there is a fee to the landlord the first time around for a larger party? I wasn't clear what the justification was, thought process. Why is that different? >> Yeah, thank you. That's is I like that question. Um the thought process was um we want to help and Clinton and I have already talked about perhaps the town attorney could help develop some language that we could volunteer to landlords in town. But we wanted to help um the the very first and probably the best engagement opportunity we have with with tenants and some many of them who will be first-time renters, you know, in their entire lives is that lease process. and we wanted to make it um make sure that we got the landlords on board right from the start with helping to send the signal that you know large disruptive events are not allowed in those neighborhoods. So the 20 the 20 number is the number we came at you know was that was in the existing ordinance but that's the thinking is that these are an order you know a few people together who just kind of the music gets a little too loud and some people complain but you know it's kind of a bright line test and if you know you have more than 20 people you know you're getting into a into a larger event with and if there's disorderly activity going on underage drinking you know you've got a different and perhaps potentially more dangerous event. So, we thought that making the landlords and the landlords contributed to this discussion, making the landlords um making the violation apply to that that type of event on the first the first time would make sure that our landlord particularly those who haven't been particularly responsive to Orno on these matters. Um would start to pay attention to what the what the expectation is right from the start. >> Okay. Thanks. And similarly, I think I was wondering was there any discussion about um and this may not even be possible and I don't even know that I'm in favor of it, but I am interested in this idea that people already have leases that they can't alter that have been signed for the next 12 months. Was there any discussion about rolling this out sequentially with um consequences for occupants happening immediately but for landlords not until leases have time to be updated or was there discussion about that? the there was a little bit and I Dan you want to jump but there were landlords present um that I saw a little bit of a partnership conversation if we're having issues and we're writing these violations this is better grounds for them for their evictions and so it is a fine line between the two but I think that's kind of what was starting to come out is that and that's why we wrote in the language that if they're evicting um suspension of fines to the landlords can be done and I think that's something that you will probably see you used with great discretion so that we can build that partnership that they are fixing it especially ones that are highly problematic multiple violations at the same location by the same tenant being one of those highly problematic scenarios I would be referring to but um yeah that's the only thing I remember in the conversation at those meetings there's a little bit of saying that you know this will help them because they have more information and evidence to share with the court as to why they're evicting their >> the yeah they they have language in they shared with us they have language Some do, some don't. But >> yeah. >> Yep. >> My next questions have more to do with does this apply equally to all zoning areas in Orno? Is it irrespective of whether you're in a >> n >> high density or medium density or low density or business district? Does this apply equally? And um does it does it apply to businesses? I mean, it only applies to rental properties, correct? So, I guess I'm just curious if there's a loud event going on at one of our bars or businesses after 10 p.m., does it apply to them or is it only for >> residential properties? I >> think the noise ordinance would apply to the Yeah, it would apply to the business and this would be a resident. This applies to residential and it applies everywhere. And one one clear distinction that gave Dennis Cross who's I think a phenomenal landlord um you know he has I don't know a hundred units and many multi-unit buildings and you know if it's apartment 9 that's apartment 9 is the that's where the the subsequent event if it's if we're always going to apartment 9 for disorderly activity that in itself is is the disorderly activity location and it doesn't cross over to apartment 8 7, six, five, four, you know, so it doesn't >> that gave them some comfort because we've got, you know, some properties with I don't know what the biggest one is, but >> what >> a lot of units. >> Okay. >> I also wondered is the university automatically notified or how does that get tripped? I mean, we've talked about it, but how does that get tripped and when does that get tripped and is that in here somewhere written that I didn't see or is that just something that's going to happen informally or how is that being handled? >> The attorney advised us not to put that in statute. Um, and I I think it's just a process that the town engages with when they have a a reason to reach out to the university as there may be some, you know, that our understanding that that, you know, happened in the spring. Um, and we can't the university can't share with us what their what the responses were to the the people involved with that assault if they were university students. But um there is a relationship between the town and the university and um we >> yeah we didn't want to inter not just the University of Maine because we have students that come here from all over the place. We have residents and visitors people involved with this that may have violated this where we're were neither resident tenant or land owner in some cases in the past year. But so the issue was is we don't want to interject ourselves in a relationship anybody else has with another person to affect whatever that that is. So in the case of a student it could lead to them being expelled. We don't want to interject ourselves in that. Um that being said working with the university whether it's Humane Husten Bangor campus the University of Maine you name it we'll work with everybody. If they want information, we'll share it with them cuz that's what our, again, back to this, and I hate to say it, but the community policing policies we have really push that our police department acts as a neighbor to help make the community better with using law enforcement as the last step in that process. >> Sure. Um, I guess before my last question, I just want to reiterate something Dan said, which is that we did receive a lot of emails as counselors, many more than we normally do on most topics. And in my opinion, all but one of them were entirely in favor of this ordinance change. One had some specific questions and was partially in favor, the ones I received. Um, and I think that's important to note um, as we're looking at our decision. Um, one person did ask, is there some way that the town is able to provide or perhaps other landlords who already have this are able to share the language that they use in their leases? Because we did hear from at least one person saying, "I'm a landlord and I would like some help about what is the kind of language that other landlords are using." I imagine we can't get into the business of recommending legal language to other people, but I don't know if there's a way for the landlords involved in this committee or other people who are private landlords to be willing to share out what they have with other landlords, but just want to put it out there that some folks are asking, can people share with each other what language is working for them. >> I think we're going to pursue it as a, you know, an opportunity. I don't know that it'll be done by the 11th. Um, but I think that the town, I think it makes sense for the town to be a It seems like a value ad from the town. Yep. To provide some language that we think syncs up that our attorney thinks syncs up with um our ordinance. >> All right. Anything else? Okay. Great. Well, if not, the the item uh before us is to call the order setting the date of August 11th, 2025 at 5 p.m. for an emergency public hearing to consider amendments to the town of Oro Code of Ordinances, Chapter 20, Law Enforcement, Article 3, Disorderly Property. There's no more discussion, I'll call the question. All those in favor? Okay, that's unanimous. We'll have that and we'll work with the town manager to get the language uh tightened up as we discussed today. Order. Thank you very much for everyone who um participated in the discussion and all the work that all the counselors put into um into this today. Order 25185, order authorizing the town manager set aside designate up to $29,560 for bond advisor costs of unassigned fund balance. Could I have a motion? >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Um Clint, you got something you want to share other than what's in the agenda? >> Shared with you a good packet explaining the recommendations of why we want to do this. It's a very significant bond issuance and I think using unassigned fund balance is a good use for this purpose. >> Okay. Is there any clarifying questions? Any public comment? Any further discussion? All those in favor? That's unanimous. Order 25186, order authorizing the town manager set aside up to 500,000 of assigned fund balance for 56 Main Street. Could I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. moved and seconded. Uh Clint, >> in your attachments, there's an explanation as to our audited 2024 fund balances being at 25.74%. Um I've done some work with the finance committee on this. Um 16.66 is just a conversational. We're working towards a policy, but that's 2 months. Um so we're in excess of this. Um based upon our current expenses for all purposes, which is town, school, county, etc. um you're looking at about a 23 to $24 million total amount. Should be maintaining about 4 million and we're approaching 5.8 5.9. So we have adequate unassigned fund balance to do this. Um as such as we were looking at doing the the the main street project. I gave you a list. I do not want anyone to say this is the full list and this will 100% satisfy the needs. But the public works department's done a great job through facilities to look at all the things that are going on to get the building back up and running for either a temporary library space but actually putting a better eye towards the long-term location of the Orno Police Department. Um we're hopeful unofficially that the library may not need to relocate for a long extended period of time which may prevent that use. So we're again that's still though in the maybe category. We're working through uh phase one of the design. We need to get to phase three and get the final estimate and bids in. So that'll be quite a few more months out. Um but we have identified quite a few projects. There are things related to the site, but we're holding on site as we do other things. um on the property, but you know, cleaning, roof, um there's some mold remediation that we'd like to deal with, some ceiling issues, some lighting issues, electrical issues, but they're all outlined in the spreadsheet that we attached that the the facilities department put together. Um so, we think it's adequate to start at a half a million dollars to get this building back up and running. >> Yep. Any clarifying questions? Any comments from the public? Kind of wear people down as we get to 7:00, don't we? Um, and then any discussion from council? How much more to put up? You know, Matt P's reserved parking signs over there. Is that going to be >> um All right. >> I want a goldplated bicycle stand. >> Well, we do need more bicycle stands. Absolutely. Um's got a ton of bicycle stands and we don't have nearly enough. All right. All those in favor? That's unanimous. Thank you very much. Order 25187, order authorizing the town manager to issue a request for qualifications for design and engineering services for 56 Main Street. Clint, >> you need motion. >> Order. I need someone to move it. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Almost got me that time. >> Yeah. Continuation of the last one. We are looking for an RFQ to work with a design professional. We want stamp plans to meet ADA requirements, life safety, um, permitting, stamp plans. That's the rule we would put on any other person doing a project of this size. So, but we are looking at doing um a combination of a design build. So, what we're looking for is an engineering firm that can work with us to help us find the contractors and they work and do it together. Um this will not be a formal engineering firm design it then we put it out to bid and then we go forward and build it. We're going to be working case by case to get it up and going as we move forward. Um and I think the RFQ's pretty self-explanatory. We're hoping to avoid additions, but we do recognize the need of uh maybe a garage space, but for right now, we're trying to avoid that. Um we outline that we want to use how we want to use the space, how we want a bathroom on the main floor, want a new roof. Um want to update a few things with the flooring. So, that's where that 500,000 is going towards. We want to get a company in working with us that can guide us through that process. >> Okay. Any clarifying questions? Any public comment? Any further council discussion? All those in favor? Okay, that's unanimous. Order 2588, order approving lease purchase for a police cruiser with associated accessories and attachments with Androskogen Bank. Do I have a motion? >> Moved. >> Second. >> Moved and seconded. Uh Clint or >> the capital improvement plan called for leasing one of our cruisers. It's the cruiser that does not get used front line. This is the chief and the captain. We're going to a model where every four years we would do a 4-year lease on those and they would be on an 8-year ownership model. Um, so this is the lease we're doing. We we went out to multiple companies. We're re recommen recommending um Andrew Scoggin Bank as the uh organization to work with and I hope I just got that right. >> Yeah, it's Andrew Bank. >> Yep. I just been working with a lot of different banks. I'm like that is the right one. Sorry, I apologize for that. But yeah, so Andrew Bank came in with the lowest rate. They do have a pre-existing relationship with us. Um, we looked at uh factory options as well. And Chicago was the best offer. There were some other very good quotes from other banks we work with, but this is the one staff's recommending. Um, and I'm using since it's over, even though it's in the capital plan, this is well over the $50,000 threshold that I think deserves the council taking a vote to authorize the lease purchase. >> Okay. Any couple clarifying questions? Uh, Council Baker. >> Yes. Um, remind me again why we're leasing and not um just buying outright. >> We're buying outright every cruiser that the department uses except for the Chief and the Captain. Both of those vehicles are kept for longer rotations, pushing eight years because they have different usage. They're also a different vehicle than the front line. So, we're recommending that if we lease them, we would always have a consistent level payment for 8 years, always owning two, never older than 8 years old, and rotating them that way. So, that's how that's how the capital plan was built. That was what was approved, and that's what we're recommending. >> All right. Well, I'm not going to relitigate the capital plan. So, perfect. Thank you. Couple more questions. >> Cool. So, is this an actual The term sheet reads like a a a loan, but it says lease. This is >> It's a lease. It's a loan, but Again, government leasings. It interesting. We the we don't qualify for standard leases that the private sector does. So, it's actually a lease purchase. We have a $1 option to buy it at the end, which we will, but that's the way it's set up that we have to have that language in there. >> Final question. Sorry. Uh quarter or uh we're doing annual payments. Is that a municipal financing thing or why? >> We we went back and forth. It's annually funded. We thought we could make the payment. We're going to do the first payment as a down payment. So, the first 25% will be paid this year and then we're just going to roll it and rather than doing the monthly payments, we would just do once a year with them. >> Um, you know, money by doing monthly payments, but not enough. >> Yep. If you want us to look into that, if that's a question, we >> No, he said not enough. Let's just take the win. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. All right. Any uh comments from the public? Any further discussion? I hope it's got heated seats for the chief. >> Yeah. >> Oh, it's captains. >> Yeah, this is the chief's cruiser. >> All right. Take care of our take care of our team. >> Okay. Um, all those in favor? Unanimous. Thank you. Um, council committee reports. I assume we'll move through these with some expediency. Community development committee. >> Um, we're just working on m the main days basically. So, >> oral festival day stuff. >> Yeah. Sorry. Yep. Finance and operations. >> Uh, yep. We'll have a chunk of things to discuss at the council level and potentially vote on likely beginning of September. >> Okay. Excellent. Uh, nominations, evaluations, and council policies. >> We're digging into the policy and procedures manual. >> Good for you. All right. Ordinance review. >> I think we're set to meet at the end of on the 21st of August. Um and uh we'll be discussing the solid waste issue as well as the uh schedule of ordinance review in general. >> Everyone's welcome to join the solid waste conversation. Um diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging. >> We'll be ramping that up in mid August. No >> comprehensive plan committee. Um, we had a a workshop on a land use discussion uh that had uh many well I don't know many members of the public um and we've got another meeting on August 6th. So I'll give an update as we get into our August 11th. I'll come with more on our August 11th meeting. Okay. Council chairs update. I have not sent um the doodle poll out on the paddle with the oro paddlers. I will I apologize for that. Was there anything else I was going to No meeting in the end end of August, right? So August 11th is our only meeting. I think that's all I had, right? Feels like Yep. Okay. Town manager report. >> Yeah. Uh so we're closing the town office on August 12th for a for a staff barbecue. The followup council, we love having you. This is one of those ones. It's a staff barbecue. We prefer you at the actual recognition. Um so we will continue that process to invite you. This is just a uh short couple hour event where we come and have a barbecue. Um so just pass that on. Uh we do have a scheduled date via Zoom to meet with the state, although I see some are canceling out due to other commitments as of this week. But we are going to be meeting on the CDS route 2 funding. to get this out there on the record. This is $3 million that was awarded to the main department of transportation two years ago for planning and work to implement pedestrian and bike safety measures from the bridge to Route 2 uh from the bridge to Kelly Road. So, we're working with them. The $30 million larger project became the priority. That's now going to take more time. So, we're focusing in on this. They have hired Sebago Technics to do the work and we are having that meeting with them as well. Um staff's goals is to get a very strong conversation on the record about the bridge and pedestrian bike safety in and around the bridge and then continuing out with what we can do and not going end to end but really focusing on a phase one here in the downtown of what we need for traffic lights, crosswalks, signaling, sidewalk improvements, bike lane improvements, etc. But we'll keep you posted as we move through that. 3 million will not go as far as we hope, but it will hopefully take us quite a ways. Um, we have a a made an attachment here. A sinkhole is developing over on College A related to some wastewater storm water issues. They're doing a lining. Um, I put this on I'm sharing this because I think it's a great example. We're going to come into spending ordinances. Didn't bring this for council approval. It would have been over my spending limits, but it is an emergency. This is kind of just my chance to give you an educational update of how I'm using it. If you have any questions on that, please let myself or Jacob know on the finance committee so we can work those into policy and ordinance changes in the future. But just wanted to keep that one in front of you. Um, or no stops update. I also did an up attachment with this. This dovetales beautifully with the conversation tonight of our new ordinances. um in that I I'm there's a lot coming together and I see the new ordinance change as an or no stops initiative. This is how I'm working with the team, press, marketing, community development, community engagement. Um so in general, we're doing some stuff with social media. We're expanding our community policing to our ordinance compliance which relates right back. So we're going to do a lot more with community policing on the um new disorderly property. Um, we've updated the entire website on Orno Engage as a component of your voice matters and we've made content changes for people that are reporting concerns to make it clear that the online reporting is a non-urgent non-emergency reporting mechanism. We are putting QR codes on signs that we'll be putting around the town. You actually see a photo template of the sign we will be putting in eight locations for noise and nuisance. It has our phone number. It talks about how it's a 24-hour police line, but it's the non-emergency line. 911's the emergencies. Um, but it will get you an immediate response or contact with someone to speak to you. Um, but then we put the QR code on the bottom which takes you to the simple online reporting mechanism that makes it clear this will not get you an immediate response. So, we put this all together in Orno Engage to kind of bring this forward. We intend to do some mailers to all the registered rental properties. We're going to continue to do our community policing visits. Um we've had multiple requests uh for oh the weekly process to review the issues in the residential neighbors. We're going to continue to do that as a staff and we'll bring back reports to the council as well as the community whether on Facebook or otherwise um of the property itself, but we want the community to be continually educated if that ordinance is being enacted. And last but not least, traffic is the part that we started Orno stops under, which is the, you know, it started with the safe bus, you know, stopping for buses. Um, but has evolved to all the other things we're looking to, whether it's speeding, failing to yield for people at crosswalks. We're doing more and more engagement. Um, we're looking at last year's data to just see how we can grow it, um, and what we can do to improve it, whether that's more ticketing, more stops, more visibility to be determined. But that's how I want to give you an update if there's more. We'll get more clarifications as the summer goes on. But I wanted to make sure I got this out before the 811 because that meeting because it looks like it may be full and I promised at least a beginning of an update of how we're going to implement the disorderly property ordinance. So t crossed I dotted, but I will bring back more meat than just that. That's just to get it started. >> That's it for the manager report. >> I hope so. >> We didn't uh bring it up in the acknowledgements, but just thank you for getting the bridge. what what you did with the bridge, you and staff in terms of getting it open on the weekends. I don't know how much credit you're willing to take for getting it done early. I I take it I mean people are going to give you people going to give you grief when it takes too long, you know, so take take the win when you can. But you did the weekends was definitely all you you brought it to us. um you engaged us in a conversation and it made a big difference I think to business owners in particular, but thank you for that and I just want to call it out and say how much the community appreciated and what you did. So, thank you. Um we do not have any public petitions, any future agenda items and council requests for supporting items. I'd like to talk for a second about the um request from the um the student government. I mean the the graduate student workers for a second, but anybody have anything other than that? >> I sorry you first. >> Sure. Um I guess I just wanted to I I don't know if this fits here or not. Um but I I will say that I did uh I was in touch with the people from the caring community cupboard and also uh was uh emailing a bit with Amanda here. Um so right now I think tentatively we're hoping to have the discussion about um that on the 29th. I am still in the process of getting in touch with somebody from the Oregon Health Association so we can have somebody represented in that discussion there as well. But September 29th, that meeting will be hopefully when we can uh get something moving on that item. And then I'm Yes. Also in favor when it's talking about the graduate student union. >> You'll get us like an email or something as we get closer to the 29th about that meeting. Right. Okay. Um Matt, you wanted to have something? >> Yeah. This isn't going to happen right away, but at some point, um I think we're going to start really the DEIB committee along with um some of us are going to be looking into solutions for the thrift store in terms of of um making it accessible to um to um people with disabilities. And I know there's been work done in the past. So, this is just like uh at some point in the future, maybe getting a little bit of information of what we've looked at in the town on that building, you know, putting in an elevator there and then um Yep. But it's not we don't need it for the next meeting because that one's going to be SL that one and the next one's going to be slam, but sometime in the fall, >> we'll be asking for that. So, it's just a start for that. I just, you know, just to throw it out there, I like the idea we're working on the um the old fire station as one pro, you know, one building at a time that we got and I like the idea of we got we got several buildings we need to dispense with or improve or make decisions about. So, >> thank you for bringing it up. >> Okay. Um All right, let's talk about the graduate student workers. They're you're persistent. So, you know, 600 days and, you know, two hours and 15 minutes. Thank you. Um we did an agenda. We did a resolution a couple years ago um on it. We have a new policy on resolutions, right? So, a counselor has to step up and agree to help work with the the proponents. Is that that's how it works? >> Either a counselor can bring it forward or a member of the community can bring it forward on their own with enough public signatures, which I believe off the top of my head was 25. Clint, is that what you remember too? So, it can happen two ways. Um, they could reach out and ask a specific counselor to decide to sponsor a resolution and bring it forward to council or they could simply draft one themselves and get the 25 signatures of Orono residents who agree that we should consider it. >> I I appreciate the education about the process and also say I'm happy to sponsor. >> Perfect. That was easier than I thought, you know, that was a great >> Thank you for that. play. So the next time staff will be presented with a draft from them. >> So yeah, Rob will work with >> that will be Yeah. Okay. Okay. Good. >> It'll come through. Yeah. Rob be the sponsor >> and we can talk more about what exactly the timeline looks like for when we want to bring that back to council. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> We could do it, you know, we don't >> I like doing it fast. We can. So, thank you for >> Harrison. Would you be the person that I should talk to? Okay. >> Thank you for that. Thank you, Rob. Um, all right. Any um public comment for those who waited around to do public comment? Nope. Anybody online? Cody. Uh, now, do we have an executive session? >> You sure do. >> Nice. Uh, pursuant to one MRSA section 4056A regarding consultations with legal counsel. Could I have a motion? >> Moved. >> Second. >> All in favor? >> Good. And we will not be coming back in after this, right? No votes coming out. >> No action. >> No actions. So, we'll stay right here.