Scarborough Council Weighs Scuttle Hill Road Options, Advances ICE Ordinance

[15:37] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Good evening and welcome to this Scarborough Town Council workshop on Scuttle Hill Road. Today is Wednesday, September 30th, 2026, 6 p.m. Counselors Hayes, Anderson, Donovan, Fellows, and Shoes are here, and this is something that's obviously been on our radar for a while. We've been working through different iterations and working through some different timing challenges. I will hand it over to staff to do an intro. Great, thank you, Mr. Chair, just [16:07] Town Manager (Tom Hall): quickly by way of introduction the council last convened and had a conversation back in february last year not too much has changed frankly in that time frame and i guess we somewhat anticipated that you did however secured sufficient funds in the budget to keep all of your options open and so that certainly remains to be the case and really the reason for getting back together though we don't have much new development is that we've been promising and expecting frankly to hear on a major grant around this time frame. That's been pushed out slightly. As of today, the best information we have, mid to late October is what they're saying for award, but still we think it's opportune to kind of check in. The council still has some decisions available to it right now if you wish to go that way, and so we'd like to kind of walk back through a lot of the same territory we covered last time, I think, just to kind of level set for Council and for the public, and we have a couple of kind of prompting questions at the end that we'd love some direction on in terms of what the next steps are. Our goal is really is to help you understand what consequences of certain decisions are from a timing and cost perspective, and again, I guess the good news is here is that you do have options. They all have pros and cons, I suppose, so we seek hopefully advice and direction from all of you as we conclude this tonight. So that I'm gonna ask Angela to kind of walk us back through much of the territory that we covered last February, but still helpful. I'm [17:47] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): gonna jump right into the closure, which at this point has been quite some time, May of 2025 is when the failure happened. Public Works had to go out and barricade the road. Soon after June 11th is when we met, actually on the site, with DEP, Army Corps, Department of Marine Resources, those agencies that would be critical in any permitting or any replacement or any even quick fixes that we'd have to do in kind of that environmentally sensitive area. We quickly found out that there is a window that can be worked in this particular area that is November to April, and so during those winter months, and that the culverts themselves, there are four in series, are undersized. And looking at our first questions through the agencies was immediately, can we just replace the failed culvert and kind of patch it back up, kind of move back forward and then maybe think of a long-term fix, but just to get the road back open. That was quickly turned down that, no, in fact, there's some minimum sizings that would have to happen in order to do that. The next question asked was, could we replace it, knowing you needed more capacity there, could we just add a fifth culvert? Again, a quicker fix, trying to get the road back open. That again was through Army Corps is not an option. What they laid out for us is what we'll find later on is I call the minimum culvert replacement is what they had told us that day on June 11th would be the minimum that they would allow to be permitted back in this location. So at the time, there were different grant opportunities we had laid out for you guys in February. When we met last time, but at the time of the closure, we had just met missed window of really one of the most vital kind of culvert replacement grants in the state. There's very few of them, there are some national, they're highly competitive in nature because there aren't that many, so at the time we had nothing in the operating budget and we had just missed that window, so it gave us some time to actually kind of walk through all options for council to try to see what opportunities we might have for funding mechanisms to try to offset some of our local cost. Earlier in February I went through a host of other grants, but these were the two that we actually Applied for after that workshop, so the two are one is the main natural resource conservation program, MNRCP, which is removal of the culvert and restoring a beaver brook. This is the same grant opportunity that the town investigated for Sawyer Street when we did that collaboratively with Cape Elizabeth. We ended up in that instance giving the money back and did not accept that. This grant was has been, we have been notified that we are awarded the grant, however the council has not accepted it yet, so We also have gone as far as notifying them that we are also interested in was interested in applying for replacement grant. That's the main infrastructure adaptation fund. The next bullet was to actually look for money to do a resilient culvert there. We notified MNRCP that we were doing that and they actually allowed us to kind of pause that grant so that we can have both if possible. If we are awarded the second grant, then you guys have all the options on the table and they were willing to do that for us so that so we're not down a road that similar to Sawyer Street that we want to get back out of, right, we want to make sure we're kind of making that conscious decision of this is the path we're going. So that we applied for in May of this year, it was expected to be sooner that we would hear. As I said, this is a very competitive grant, so they had a lot of applications. It's Delayed in their review process. But as Tom said, news this week was that we would hear by mid to late October. Take it for what it's worth. It has been kind of pushed down the road. [22:32] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Just if we could, you know, we can't even speculate as to what that additional competitiveness means with our likely success. So I wish we could give you some sense of where that might land. But we really can't. I think we're truly within a month of knowing for sure. [22:53] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): And just to refresh, the MNRCP grant is really it's a funding mechanism that developers pay into when they impact wetlands. So essentially they love to do it in highly developable arrows like Scarborough. I, because of the development that we have in Scarborough, there's a lot of money coming from the Scarborough developers into this fund, they would love to put it back into Scarborough. I think that's why they were was helpful during the Sawyer Street application, I think that's why we were awarded this grant. I think they really want to put it where it's actually kind of offsetting that kind of impacts. Tax and so that application was submitted in 2025 and we were awarded that. The next one was the other grant of being the replacement culvert that is based on a resilient design, which is based on Maine Won't Wait is the climate action plan for the state. It also aligns with our vulnerability assessment that council recently adopted. And as well as coast-wise sizing, which is basically these title crossings are a little more nuanced and dynamic, as you can imagine with the title and the marsh right there. So the state of Maine does have a program coast-wise on how those kind of get sized, how they get designed for a more resilient culvert. And so that narrows us down to what we put into buckets, either a culvert replacement where there are two options or the actual removal. And so at this point, as Tom mentioned, these are still all on the table. But as you see, as we come through, timing is going to be crucial. So we're getting down to a kind of point where non-decisions is also a decision because it affects the timing. [25:02] Town Manager (Tom Hall): One other thing you did in the budget, not only did you secure sufficient funds for a range of options, you also provided design money. So rather than us waiting for the grant, then starting design, that is underway. We've completed survey and all the geotechnical work. At this point the consultants need direction from us as to what to design before they kind of do the rest of the work and that is probably another two or three [25:30] Speaker D (unidentified): months of effort on their part once we give them the direction. So we had summarized the two [25:38] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): options for a culvert replacement with looking at cost estimates and where the grants might play playing into that and also noting that it's either a short-term or long-term solution. I know there's been questions around the cost of that. The cost has been based on past DOT projects or future. Looking at, for instance, the minimal culvert, this was based on what Army Corps gave us as kind of minimum priority parameters for two 10-foot wide culverts side by side, so similar to what is looked at in the photo. That cost is very similar to the Mitchell Hill Road culvert crossing. I will say that's a little different in the fact that, well, DOT did that project in last year, in 2025, and that number came in similar to this one million dollar range, but that was an in-stream crossing, so inland, and so a little different. So that's an older, I would say, cost, but also a simpler design. So that's where walking through some of the other projects that are more of a title crossing is where we came up with these two cost estimates, and I will say the one for the resilient culvert which is most of what the state does is also looking at all of their kind of bids over the past three-year work plan, taking out highs and lows, taking out all those that aren't in the southern Maine region, trying to find really these kind of like similar projects, and that's where a lot of this cost estimating is coming from, and that is also similar to what we did out on Silver Street, so we kind of had some background with that. Just if I, if [27:42] Town Manager (Tom Hall): I could comment, I wish Councilor Doherty was here, but he, Councilor Doherty has countless times mentioned, you know, talk to a contractor, see if they can help, you know, give you a, you know, not a formal bid, but a, you know, a rough working number, and that makes intuitive sense. The challenge with that is that contractors are very busy in their own right, and they'd like some assurance that there's actually a project that's going to follow. And so we don't have that confidence to be able to give them, so it's hard to get them to do us a favor, so to speak. Secondly, we have more confidence in actual projects that have happened in our town, frankly, in our region. So we think these numbers are pretty good for what they are at this juncture. [28:25] Speaker D (unidentified): Angela, can you define what you mean by short-term solution for the minimum culvert replacement? Are we talking 3 years, 5 years, 10 years? What is short-term? [28:36] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): Well, maybe I'll start with the long-term first. What we're showing in the vulnerability assessment is that in the year 2100, Scotto Hill would be inundated, so over topping on a daily basis during high tide, so talking about it being, say, 75 years out, really the lifespan of a culvert like this would be 75 to 100 years, so it kind of would mirror that kind of duration a little bit. A short time, it already isn't inundated during storm events. The modeling is showing that will continue and enhance or increase. So I can't really predict, but it's, it's definitely not a 75 year culvert. It's probably, I'm gonna guess, yeah, more like 10 to 20. And so we, in the course of, we're kind of just, and that road is viable. It might be a few times that we could be replacing it. [Speaker D (unidentified): At least.] It's all prediction. It's all prediction. It's all modeling. I would encourage everybody to go through the vulnerability assessment. It's full of very useful information, but it also shows you the different scenarios to say, okay, if this happens, here's what it's going to look like. If this happens, here's what this will look like. Either all the options really show that we're already have an issue there. It is listed in the vulnerability assessment as of one of the vulnerable roads, it's listed as, I think it was 41st road on the list, and that is based on other factors as far as say evacuation routes or things like that, but [30:26] Speaker D (unidentified): so it 's already kind of a vulnerable location and it's the title component that's you [30:33] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Somewhat unique to this. It's not the inland flows. It's really the tidal piece that is the most challenging. [30:43] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): The alternative two is the culvert removal and stream restoration. As we said, this is really, long-term. It would be opening that up, and then we're not kind of revisiting it. I will say the upstream culvert at Payne Road is something that is also, So it was actually number three on our vulnerability list of roads in town is Payne Road. That is the three culverts. So that is something that staff is already putting in through our CIPs and kind of planning that. As Tom mentioned, there's money in the budget, which I have a slide for to talk through that a little bit, but we're already saying we have to be proactive on the Payne Road culverts and really getting those replacements in, or at least designed in a plan for replacement. So we're not cut off guard there. Again, I know it's just kind of beating the horse a little bit of the three options, but I just want to make sure it's clear that those are still all on the table. And I think this is where we're talking about the capital improvement. What's currently in this fiscal year is, as I mentioned, the Pain Road and Scott O'Hill resilient culverts design. What we had talked through during budget process was, does it make sense for us to design those in series as two resilient culverts as one design, which seemed like that would streamline that process. What has happened out there so far is just survey and geotech, which would help inform whatever option the council takes, that the work being done there is coming out of the CIP. However, we've halted the design engineers until we have the kind of decision if a replacement culvert is the option that the council chooses, we'd like to be able to take them down a path that we're doing design for whatever choice you guys make rather than having to redesign. Design. So that's we're kind of hoping to come out of this. Also, we have a CIP for the Spadohill Road solution, which is essentially if the grant does not come through, there is money in the CIP budget to actually move forward with a resilient culvert at Spadohill. So these two combined would have a design for both, but the construction of the Spadohill. So that's kind of where we'd walk through at budget time, and that money is in place. So really what it comes down to it. I think the real update here is to really, I know it might be a little confusing and messy. Tom and I walked through this quite a few times. But trying to really capture the fact that I think it's hard for people to grasp that we have this window, right? That it's that November to April window. And there's a lot of things that have to happen ahead of that window, which includes really the design or modeling, the permitting, which can be five to six months, or typically it's five to six months. There's obviously a bid process, and then to get boots on the ground, construction activity. And so when you start and you go back, you back your way up, We're basically at a decision point on November 4th is what I put there. I'm hoping that and get back in front of you, saying, I have this grant, I have that grant. Here are your three options. We really need a choice to be made in order to hit the construction season that starts November of 2027, and I know that's kind of hard to grasp. But what I'm fearful of is that if we push that timeline out to say decisions made in December or January, we're really talking about construction in 2028 and I'm talking fall of 2028. As you circle around. So, I mean, that's where I get back to kind of non decision is also. I mean it doesn't commit you but it also means that you're pushing the construction window out [35:05] Speaker D (unidentified): quite a bit just because of how that cycles through and we've identified the decision point [35:10] Town Manager (Tom Hall): on November 4th because by then we hope to know about the final grant and that's just happens to [35:15] Speaker D (unidentified): be your final meeting in this council so given where we are there is no situation where we could start construction this season, it sounds like, and that the earliest would be a year from now. Yes. [35:32] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Is it possible to do the restoration if that's the choice? [35:37] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): Restoration, we possibly could do it in the spring if we were in a rush to kind of get design and construction. So you still need some permitting and construction done. However, it doesn't really change probably the user. Are I mean it would still have the road closed so possibly you could do that towards the spring [35:57] Speaker D (unidentified): but I don't know if it would matter the restoration timing may not be as important because [36:01] Chair (Councilor Fellows): the road is closing I was going to say just for the benefit of it anyone who may be trying to follow along when you say restoration in this context we're talking about removal the restoration is of the beaver of the of your people yes thank you for that clarification [36:15] Speaker E (unidentified): Example so removal and closure yes yeah that would be closing that end of the road right [36:23] Speaker F (unidentified): Angela two questions if we don't make a decision by November 4th and it gets pushed into 28 29 do you have any sense of what that does to the cost when you're looking at bids obviously [36:41] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): Obviously, it does not go down but as far as like percentage wise I don't know in this economy if I could really guesstimate that it's we are seeing kind of some of the construction activity dropping off and I don't know if I can predict [37:00] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Worst case it wouldn't be unreasonable to anticipate a 10% increase over that kind of 2 years out from now. [37:06] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah. I mean, that's significant. So the other question I have, Tom, I think this came up when we were discussing this over the public safety building when we had the meeting. And someone asked the question, someone brought it up again recently around TIF monies being able to be used for this. I think that could be possible. Yeah, [37:28] Town Manager (Tom Hall): There's a big category of allowed uses in the environmental area, so yes. Currently, essentially all the existing tip monies are spoken for in the current budget, but I think that's absolutely an option the council could consider. Okay, thanks. [37:50] Speaker G (unidentified): That's not a bad idea, Michelle, but I think kind of what's on my mind, statement kind of question, is you had said that this road falls number 41 on our list of roads of like priority and vulnerability, and so I think I think at some point we have to be a little bit more realistic about our priorities and how we're spending our money, because if we don't get the grant, you know, we're now saying okay, we want to spend over three million dollars on this road. I don't know if there are other more high traveled roads that are higher on the list that, I mean, you already identified pain, which I'm Googling and it sounds like we are 100% responsible for the AHRQ. And so I think I'm more like if we don't get this resilient grant, considering the new timeline, I would go for the resilient grant in a way. I just, I really am hoping the council as a whole, we kind of consider really what the future looks like. And that's a scenario where we if we do lose a road that is high travel or maybe direct access for a group of residents that we can't wait for a grant, we can't, you know, we have we have to do it now. Yeah, I think my anxiety is coming out right now, like, but it's true, like, that's, I mean, I guess I'm an anxious person. That is really my concern right now, is just really like if we don't get this grant, I'm concerned that we really need to like buckle down and really look at what our priorities are in the town and what could be coming any time down the road of, you know, the next storm we might lose access to a part of town that we have to fix immediately. I mean, obviously the minimal culvert replacement just seems like a waste, like a bad use of money from my perspective. Yeah, I don't know if I specifically have any other questions besides, I guess I don't know, you know, you had said pain road is on your last. [39:54] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): Are there other hot more high traveled roads that you feel like we might be facing coming down the road. Well, so in February, I had a slide showing are the top 30 is what we really looked at. That we tried not to prioritize within it, but we kind of grouped, here's your top 30 in Starborough. Seemed like something even that is kind of daunting, because we could put, you know, hundreds of roads on there to start with. With that though, what I did in February was, we were talking about going for the replacement Grant that is not eligible on stated roads. So to your point, it kind of then, I was able to take that list and show you if you fade off the ones that aren't eligible for the grant, it kind Of reduces that list quite a bit. And so to your point, the higher traffic traveled roads are really the state aid roads that not are not eligible for the dot culvert grant money. But that's to your point, I guess, if we do not get the grant, then it's more probably a decision of would where we're spending local dollars on choosing kind of the priority. I think council would have to have that kind of discussion. Yeah, just consideration, just a [41:15] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Quick overview of those kind of highly traveled roads that aren't eligible. I'll just kind of mention real quick, and they'll be probably obvious, Pine Point Road, East Grant Avenue, know on the High Point side, Black Point Road, Pain Road, Route One, Route Nine, and Sport Road. So those are the ones that are in our top 30 that are not eligible. [41:37] Speaker G (unidentified): They get that right. Yeah, that would sound pretty impactful if they were down. [41:42] Speaker D (unidentified): Can I, can I share my thoughts on what I think would be a good approach, or what I just want to do? [41:50] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Before you do that, just as kind of a point of order, just so everyone knows, we may not be familiar with this process. In a workshop, we don't take any formal votes. There may or may not be a general consensus that emerges from this, but I would encourage, as Karen already has to, and you're about to, John, to kind of, in addition to whatever questions you may have, kind of some indication of where you are on this continuum. And I would, I would say that in addition to, you know, the way you friend to Karen. As to, you know, whether or not we get the grant, the resilient grant. We may also be in a position on the fourth where we still haven't heard. So that's another, I think that's another thing that we have to factor into our thinking. [42:35] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, so in my mind I'm gonna be an optimist and I'm gonna assume we're gonna get the grant. If we get the grant, then I think we go forward with, yeah, the resilient culvert, I think that's easy. If we don't get the grant, I actually am okay with the minimal culvert, and the reason why I would do that, and again, some of it is I know we can't really predict how long it will last, but if it does last 10 to 20 years, if we go with the 20, that's about 50,000 a year that it's a useful life for that 20 years, versus the four million for the resilient one would be about 53, 5300. So again, just in terms of useful life, from a financial perspective, they're pretty equivalent based on their useful life, so I would be comfortable with that. I also think it's because of what you said, Karen, if we're going to spend four million dollars, I'd rather spend it on other infrastructure that's a higher priority, and then I'm also concerned about spending four, a million dollars at the same time we're issuing school bonds, yeah, and having the communication, yeah, the radio, and to your point, like, there's probably going to be some other emergencies that we might have to respond to, and they always come up, they always happen, so if we can't get federal support to do the right thing, which I think is ultimately the resilient culvert, I'm comfortable moving forward with the minimal one as soon as we can. I love the idea of using TIF funds, and again, it's based on the timeline, it seems like even though we authorized the CIP to do it for bonding, we could also in the 28 budget cycle, given the timing, allocate some of those TIF funds, and knowing next year we might get even more value out of that because of what's happening at the downtown for the downs. I think we've gotten to the point where we're struggling to figure out how to use those tip funds, and so hopefully this will give, this is a good reason to have it, right, it's good to say okay, we have this revenue source, and if we can really apply it, then I think that could be a 28 budget decision to talk about, like, real funding. So again, I think because of the fact that it's pretty high up on the list, because I think there's an urgency to try and do something, if we don't get federal support, I would personally prefer to go the minimal path, and again, I would also encourage staff though as the work moves forward for pain road and as we go for grants or whatever for the other culvert, not to lose sight that if there's a way to kind of still lump this in to say if we don't make this grant but we need fixes down the road, like how do we continue to try and Make sure we're getting federal funding to offset that because I hate the idea of wasting the money and then trying to fix it later. But if it's federal dollars to do that, I would feel better than, you know, using four million dollars of taxpayer or our taxpayer dollars. Yeah, it's still our money, but it's it's it's like easier. It's like less on local taxpayers to kind of directly bear that burden. So that's kind of where I'm at. [45:51] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): It's not an easy solution, but I guess one other I guess point that you guys should have also knowledge of is that for the pain road culvert, which is literally, you know, just upstream of this, just on the other side of Flaherty store, is a state-aid road, which means that will be a resilient culvert. So we have to replace that a resilient culvert, which will then have a sort of obstruction or dam below it. So it, that in between that and what dot whatever they end up doing in route one, I guess that plays more into is it really going to last 10 years. I think if you have a large culvert on either side of it and this is this narrow narrower culvert, do we have a [46:39] Speaker D (unidentified): timeline for either of those. Like I think that's the piece where right no in theory that I mean [46:45] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): I mean, in theory, you guys have provided design for the Payne Road culvert. So we would like to move forward with that. And obviously Payne Road does flood out, which is obviously pretty impactful and that will continue. So it's hard to put kind of timelines on that, but as we get into doing the design, we'll have more modeling. We'll be able to kind of maybe a conversation around that, but I just wanted to point that out is that we don't have a choice on the stated road that will [47:20] Speaker G (unidentified): be a resilient culvert the pain road we'd have to do it. Is that project affected any way if we close scott o'hill row and open it up or if we put a minimal in if we put a resilient like does it make pain road less expensive in any of those scenarios [47:41] Caitlin Blodgett (public commenter, Portland): I [47:45] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): think, the design really is including kind of the,, in the flow from upstream. And then you get into the title. So that's where you get kind of nuanced. I think it probably would be designed for kind of those scenarios because we don't know if, Scotto Hill gets washed out or if you're saying if it's in the restoration and where it's open, it wouldn't be a factor. It would be free flowing. So that would be obviously ideal for the pain road culvert. If the minimal, as I mentioned, would be an obstruction. So it would be obstruction for those flows coming towards the marsh, but also the title coming back. It's kind of in both directions if you're interested I heard you correctly you were [48:35] Speaker G (unidentified): saying it would be best for the clean wood culvert if it's not a hill did not have a culvert and it's open to have that open flow we're kind of like having two levels right but [48:45] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): I would say removal and restoration of beaver brook in that area the goal would be your resilient culvert does same hydraulically and kind of you can it's modeled kind of the similarly that the water is flowing as if there isn't a culvert there. I mean, obviously you can't do that perfectly, but that is the goal for the resilient culvert is as if there isn't a culvert there. [49:11] Speaker G (unidentified): So those are kind of the goal in that respect. Short term, that might have a negative effect on the work or just the fact that we put a new culvert in for pain, or would that affect the culvert that we have there now and make that speed up? Oh, you mean failing of pain road? Yeah, resilient one in with that effect, the old pain road over, and then suddenly we're like, Oh, we just cracked the pain road as we put our resilient one in, and now we've got to fix pain road tomorrow. I know these are very detailed, but it's a decision I'm leaning towards if we don't get the grant closing and I know that's not a popular decision, but I am very concerned about what's coming down the road. [49:56] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): I gotcha. So I guess I don't see in this issue if we put a resilient culvert in Scotto Hill Road and we are planning for the Payne Road culvert because then it's a plan we're being proactive and they're kind of working in tandem in series. So I guess I don't have any issues with that. We're going to be having to address Payne Road sooner. I think regardless we're addressing, [50:24] Speaker D (unidentified): think we have to address pain room first I just had a question that might be helpful to you as [50:31] Town Manager (Tom Hall): well forgive my ignorance but the minimal culvert that you the picture you showed what I've heard described is a concrete structure that is of like two chambers if you will so does when we refer to a minimal culvert option is it speaking to a certain size necessarily or is it more the physical construction how it's built so I guess my question is could you upsize this so as to not it be a constraint if a resilient is upstream of it [51:06] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): It would, I guess I'm not quite sure the question, but the minimum here that we're looking at is it's basically kind of full school way of kind of designing a culvert, and you're talking about like the bank full width, you're talking about the width of that, the opening. Now right now you have the series of culverts, you're going to the to the banks, and you're kind of opening that up, and that's really the minimum. What we talk about at Resilient is not having a baffle in the middle, having an open bottom, it actually functions kind of like the culvert's not there, so the width may not be [51:44] Town Manager (Tom Hall): different, but without the baffle, without with a live bottom, it functions differently than [51:49] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): this engineered solution, right? And so as you think about it, if you take out that baffle in the middle, the structural integrity of that box becomes different, which means you have more steel and you have to span it, and so that's a more expensive, that's why the Resilient gets to be more complicated and more expensive. Thank you. Thanks. No more questions for you. [52:21] Speaker F (unidentified): A couple of things. One, Karen, I think you make excellent points, and I think you as well, John, I think they're all great points. When I was thinking about this morning, I was kind of looking at the town, I looked at the end of Winnexec Road which floods across quite often as well, and there's only one way in and out of there, so that's a little scary unless we have a kayak. And when I started thinking about whether it was Sawyer, whether it's Goddle Hill, whether it's you, one extent get all these, I think what would help me is for us to get into a room and kind of just graph out and look at, you know, risk rewards. So these are our top 10 high risk, you know, these are how many people travel through that, these are, this would be the impact if one extent flooded, people can't get out at all, so there's no, there's no way to get out except by boat. And I agree with Karen, it's none of those are popular. When we didn't approve the 4.2 million for the improvements down at Pine Point, I voted no on that, but it was more i was taking a look at everything that's coming at us between a radio you know system and looking at the schools and looking at scottle hill and i just think that we can't do everything and on this one i think it does come down to what does our funding stream look like and then making a decision from there but also if the funding stream doesn't come i really need to have a better strategic sense of like what are the top 10 what's the impact i know down at higgins like you know they flood too, so I'm just, I don't feel like I know enough to make a full town decision on all of these capital spends ends when it comes to roads and infrastructure right now. And I think I would like to have a better grounding in that. [54:11] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): So it sounds like maybe revisiting, cause we did go through that with the vulnerability assessment and there's other factors that play to your point. There's some roads that have higher volumes, but there's also some that may have less volumes, but are critical to your one way and everyone way out. And so there was actually a scoring mechanism to get there, and that's how we got to hear a 30 of the most vulnerable. And so that's what I'm looking at right now and so yeah, we'd be happy to kind of walk through that again with the Council. And obviously now, with new counselors coming into I think that might be good. [54:51] Speaker D (unidentified): The high needs around that, I just think of the vulnerability assessment transportation timeline, transportation assessment, like we have real needs that we need to address and I don't think we would be talking about this road in the near term had it not had its failure. And so that's where I go back to, if we're gonna keep it open, to me the most fiscally prudent thing, knowing all these other investments are in need, would be to defer this. I honestly personally don't use the road very often, so if future councils decide to close the road, I could as a individual probably live with that, but I do worry about more what's going to be coming as well in terms of growth west and people needing to be able to come in and if we shut off a thoroughfare like this, it's really going to impact people in West Scarborough and all the traffic there. And so I do think the road has to, personally I do think we need the road to operate, like that's where I conclude, like, well, I could live with it shut down. Personally, I think we need as a town for the road to be available and operated, but I personally, but personally, if I was an individual taxpayer living in, you know, Pine Point or other places that rarely use this road. Again, I just don't think this is where we need to be spending $4 million. I think we should spend something. 4 million feels like too much, given what I know exists in our CIP in terms of all these other really important projects that need to get done. [56:36] Speaker G (unidentified): You said that report did all those calculations, so after calculating access traffic counts, this road still came in at 41. Yes, I think at some point we're just going to have to say, you know, where's the line, and I think that was the experts did all the crunching and the numbers for us, so I think it's do we want to spend almost 4 million on number 41 when there are 40 in front of it and God knows what that adds up to and when that comes. And so I will look at that list again if that was part of that presentation with you. [57:11] Angela (Public Works/Engineering staff): New preventives. Bill? [57:13] Speaker I (unidentified): Yeah, I agree with much of what John said and favor the resilient covert, but it all comes down to the money. If we do not get the funding for it to support the work that I would look at for a different solution. Right, thanks. Yeah, there have [57:36] Chair (Councilor Fellows): been a lot of good points from everyone, and I'm still a little bit torn myself, honestly. I think it feels like it's it's pretty much unanimous, and I think much of the public input that we've gotten suggests that there's pretty strong support for the resilient culvert solution, and that on the council that's, you know, contingent, at least partly contingent on funding. Obviously, that would certainly be my preference as well. I think I, you know, again, I'm I'm I struggle with it, but I think I at the end of the day, you know, if you take a snapshot right now, I'm probably a little closer to where John is on leaning toward wanting to, if we do not get that Grant for the resilient culvert, I would generally lean more toward doing the so-called kind of shorter term fix, and part of it for me, and you know, Councilor Doherty's already been kind of paraphrased once tonight, at least his ears are probably ringing, but you know, I think I think about the point he's made on occasion that, you know, if there's if There's nothing else that the town and the council should be focused on. It's keeping roads open and keeping them paved, and I totally understand and share the concerns around vulnerability and the fact that over time this is going to be, this is going to be inundated more and more frequently. But I just really struggle right now, sitting here right now, and that looking at sort of a short to medium longish term, that the notion of abandoning a road that people currently use and, you know, we obviously had some tough conversations around Sawyer Street as well I think the point about the travel from West North and West Scarborough is a is a good one so I knew that 's that's where i am i do think to the extent that we consider sort of quote-unquote self-funding solution that we should we should explore the use of tiff revenue as john said that you know it's still it's still our money but it's it's less of an impact on taxpayers so that's where i am right now and i certainly hope that we get some good news between now and November 4th, and it's been mentioned a couple times, but it's worth emphasizing for everyone that it is going to be a new council. I mean, this is the way it always works. We're going to have at least two members after, you know, starting in mid-November, so this council can, this council can deliberate and make recommendations and work on setting something in motion, but we can't guarantee what will happen beyond that. [1:00:32] Speaker F (unidentified): I'm optimistic we'll get it as Jill and John's going-away gift. Someone's going to say thank you for your service here at $4 million. [1:00:40] Chair (Councilor Fellows): I do appreciate John staying optimistic right to the end. Anything else? Is there any more direction that staff needs from us at this point? [1:00:57] Town Manager (Tom Hall): No, I mean, I would just say that, you know, if removal and restoration of the, of the stream was the choice, that would be important to hear. I haven't heard that come up at all, so that's, that's, that's important for us to hear. I would fully expect to hear sometime in the month of November. We'll endeavor and try to report back to you by your meeting on the fourth with this council. If not, we have another opportunity on the 18th. Again, if you go back one slide, we just wanted to make sure that we were all Understanding and having expectations of what the consequence of when you make a decision is, and I appreciate you need information to make that decision. So at the very soonest, if it's a culvert replacement of some sort, it's going to be this time next year that we're up and running, and maybe even later in that window. And I can [1:01:49] Chair (Councilor Fellows): definitely appreciate for members of the public and maybe some on the council that it has been frustrating at times, and it feels like this was an emergency where we're still sitting here a year and a half later and nothing has happened really on site. But I do, I think, I do think it's worth highlighting the work that has been done, including the design, you know, all the due diligence and all the design work that's been done. And I appreciate the what staff has done to sort of navigate all these timing constraints and these try to thread the needle with these timing windows and help, helping us understand it. So definitely all right, thank you very much. We will adjourn this workshop. If there is any public comment on this, I would encourage anyone who wants to speak on that to do so during general public comment when we start our general meeting at seven o'clock. Thank you, thank you. Good evening everyone, and welcome to the Scarborough Town Council meeting for Wednesday, September 30th, 2026. Would you please rise for the pledge of allegiance? I [1:15:35] Town Manager (Tom Hall): pledge allegiance to the body of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank [1:15:49] Chair (Councilor Fellows): you. The clerk please call the role. Or Tony, Melissa Shoe, here. Council Dunavan, here. Council Anderson, [1:15:56] Carol Gustafson (66 Scuttle Hill Road): yeah, here. Next time [1:16:05] Chair (Councilor Fellows): on our agenda is general public comment. This is for anything that's not on our agenda. We did just have a workshop on options for Scotto Hill Road, so if anyone is left over from that and has anything they want to say, this would be an opportunity to do that. I will know again, this is for items that are not on our active agenda. We do have two business items related to ice, so just want to mention that just to quickly recap the review the ground rules. Three minutes or less, when the light turns from green to red, that means your time is up, and please wrap it up. Please state your name and address, direct your comments to the chair, and please be civil. Thank you. Hello [1:16:52] Rebecca Hatt (112 Maple Avenue): Mr. Chair, my name is Rebecca Hatt. I'm on 112 Maple Avenue, and I'm here tonight to talk to you about Maine's heritage industries, in particular clamming in Maine and in Scarborough. The Clam Conservation Committee is on the brink of essentially saying that you can no longer clam full-time in Scarborough, and they're looking to do that without going to the Ordinance Committee or to the Town Council or any elected body. My understanding of the law is that the state law does not control in this. It is the town's ordinance that allows them to do that. I believe under the guise of a conservation closure. However, this closure that's proposed would be for January and February, the full months, and the entire river. So it's not closing a particular area that's vulnerable or closing for the breeding season or anything like that, and it has the effect of taking away nearly 20 percent of the time that you're allowed to be in your occupation with one month's notice during a time when employment in Maine is very scarce and does not pay well. It's hard to find a job for two months in the winter, and I think that's particularly challenging to do without any public vote from an elected body. So I would ask that you change the ordinance and also that you pay attention to this heritage industry. We talk a lot about farming and conservation of farming, but lobstering and clamming and the fisheries are just as much a part of the character of this town, and I would love to see that continue. I think, you know, the committee that is in place for shellfish conservation is mostly folks who do it part-time or in the summer only, and I understand the appeal of having more clams during that season, particularly if you're only digging those seasons, but to take away full-time employment with no notice when people's mortgages don't stop coming and the average home price in this town is, I think, eight hundred thousand dollars. I mean, that's just an insane burden to not even go to an elected person ever. I don't think that it really meets the intention of the conservation ordinance as it was originally designed. And I would ask that you consider if that ordinance should be shifted to place limitations on what can be considered a conservation closure or on what can be done without going to an elected body. [1:19:31] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Thank you. Thank you. Hi, [1:19:44] Molly LeCompte (Bunker Hill Terrace): I'm Molly LeCompte. I'm a lifelong Scarborough resident living on Bunker Hill Terrace. I am just letting you know that the Scarborough Democratic Town Committee met with representatives from Senator Susan Collin and Angus King and also Congresswoman Shelley Pingree's office in response to the citizen statement signed by over 800 community members, 700 of which from Scarborough after just two events. The petition followed the July killing of Johan Sebastian and Biddeford and raised concerns that the federal immigration enforcement activity connected to Scarborough Ice Facility is making Maine communities less safe, less transparent, and less secure. The discussion was candid and collaborative. Scarborough Dems recognized steps already taken by members of Maine's congressional delegation while making it clear that statements and unanswered requests were not enough. Our committee asked the delegation to deliver measurable results, communicating regularly with the public, and use every available oversight, legislative, and budgetary tool to protect due process and community safety. All three delegation offices represented at the meeting committed to continue communication and updates on actions involving Scarborough ice facility. This work is not over. We must continue to raise our voice and come together, press for answers, timeline, and results until these concerns are meaningfully addressed and real change is achieved. [1:21:32] John Raby (Forest State Drive): Good evening. My name is John Raby. I live at Forest State Drive. I actually want to begin with a question. At this point, is there any operational relationship between the local police and ice? [1:21:46] Chair (Councilor Fellows): We can't get into a back and forth during public comment period. All right, do you communicate with because two agencies communicate at all? You are free to put questions out and the council can work with staff as needed to provide responses, but we're con this is not how this is set up. It's [1:22:07] John Raby (Forest State Drive): not meant to be. All right, now here's my second question. I see on the agenda that you're going to be reading an ordinance regarding municipal policy policies connected with ice. What do you intend to say in that ordinance just so we have an idea of what's [1:22:25] Chair (Councilor Fellows): coming up? Please stay tuned for when we get to that on the agenda. Thank you. Good [1:22:40] Danny Shaw (Shaw Brothers Construction): Evening, my name is Danny Shaw, and I'm co-owner of Shaw Brothers Construction in Gorham. Them, and I'd like to thank the chair and then the board for listening to me tonight. In April of 25, we turned in a bid for the Eastern Trail, and our bid was 587 thousand dollars lower than any other bid you had. Six bidders, I think. The job went really well. We worked good with the town. It seemed to be a success. We finished the job 15 months faster than we needed to, and we'd like to get paid for our contract. We were supposed to take to our direction from the town's resident engineer Pat Roma when Pat came when our subcontractor, Scott Construction, which is part of the reason that we were low, Scott Construction only bid to us. We do a lot of work together. They're a great company. They're a small company. Pat Roma, they said, Pat, where do we do the 200 square feet of pointing on these railroad abutments? He said, well, I want to do the whole thing. And they said, well, that's like 2 000 square feet. They measured it up, and he said, wow, that's more money than I can do. I got to go to the town to get permission. The time was of the essence. There was a staging and everything was up. It took him a week. He got back to us and said, go ahead and do it. So they did it. Came time to get paid, and the town said they shouldn't have told you that. Well, they work for you, and these people have been over a year. They're over 183 000. They've hired a lawyer. They've Paid over 20 000. they've got the interest on the money and there's no dispute with us in the town it's between you and your subs i think the design engineer and the resident engineer you guys have problems with that shouldn't be our problem and you know a contract should be as good as a handshake and a handshake should be as good as your word and we're coming directly to the council because we think your word is better than that and greg and chantal scott are here tonight and they'd like to they're the ones That are owed the money, and they'd like to say a few things. Thank you very much. Thank you. Yeah. [1:25:38] Greg Scott (Scott Construction): Good evening, Town Council. My name is Greg Scott. I'm the owner of Scott Construction. My wife Chantal is here tonight. In addition to the two of us, we got two sons and a daughter that are in the business, along with probably 15 other employees. We're based out of Portland. We had a subcontract with Shaw Brothers to perform the bridge and structural work on the Eastern Trail project. And I'm here tonight because we're owed almost $184,000 for work that we performed on that Eastern Trail project. It was the repointing work, as Danny was saying, on the bridge over the Nonsuch River. There are two existing railroad abutments there. As part of that, we needed to repoint those. That the quantity was undetermined in the contract. We provided a competitive unit price at bid time to do the work. As a matter of fact, we had, out of the six bidders, we had the lowest unit price, so we know our price was competitive. Back in July of 2025, as Daniel was saying, we met with the town's representative, the resident engineer, to determine how much of the abutments they wanted repointed. It appeared to us through that meeting that the entire abutments needed to be repointed. So we knew that was a more quantity that was in the contract and ultimately more cost, because it was a unit price item. So he said he needed to get approval from the town. A week went by and we met again, and we were instructed to repoint 100 of those abutments. We are still owed for that work. The work has been accepted. The work is satisfactory. We've completed the contract at this point. So we are still owed that money. We've been through all the avenues in the contract to try to collect it, but to no avail, fail. I would also like to request, I sent a letter to the to the council, that letter be included in the meeting minutes of this meeting. Thank you. Thank you. Hi. [1:28:25] Chantal Scott: I'm Chantal Scott. I'm married to Greg, who owns Scott Construction. I guess all I really want to say is the original contract for was around $210,000. $184,000 is still owed. And it's not like Scott Construction is going to get $184,000. Scott Construction has paid his employees to do the work, to pay for the supplies, the materials, for travel, for his men who go to work every day at 6 in the morning to do this work. The money has been spent. The profit margin that Scott construction makes is very small when you're a small construction company. And when you have a hundred and eighty three thousand dollars that has not come in at the end of the year, what do you do? You give your employees less bonus, you don't pay your kids as much. It's a small company. They did the work, the contract was as it was. It's it's pretty much universal in the industry that you pay for the square footage of the whole wall, not just the little what's in between them, the joints. And the town claims that they only need to pay for the joints. That's not how it's done in the industry. Greg's done the job many times with other companies and it's bid the same way. You pay for the whole wall, not just the little joints. The money is owed, it's already been spent. The money is owed to just pay back Greg what he spent to do the work, 183 000 of a 210 000 contract [1:30:20] Speaker E (unidentified): Thank you, thank you. Hey. [1:30:28] Carol Gustafson (66 Scuttle Hill Road): There, Carol Gustafson at 66 Scotto Hill Road. I think I'm the only Sped Ohill attendees still around. Just a couple of quick points that are actually somewhat to the side of the issue that was addressed in the workshop. In the current fiscal 2027 budget, we did notice a line item of I think believe it's 300 000 for traffic and speed mitigation. And so I guess obviously again we can't have a dialogue here, but my request or recommendation would be, will the residents of Scotto Hill Road and Abutters actually have some input into those mitigation measures? We're not aware of anything happening right now, but there are definitely some ideas that a lot of us have. It continues to be a road that is very heavily traveled, perhaps not as much as when it was fully open because there is a cut through on to Rod Road. So again, requesting and recommending that there be input from those who live there. The second would be there were two stop signs that were installed in fiscal 2026. Those are and I've reported this in my last public comment a couple of whatever three or four months ago, it is widely ignored, is very dangerous. And it's not necessarily just people traveling from another town to West Scarborough. These are residents. So I'm not going to point fingers and say it's only those people. it's honestly people who even live on the road I've seen near misses it's it's a three-way stop and it's really become just a one-way stop because the new stop signs are just completely ignored including I did witness a town vehicle blow right through and take that right turn everyone just assumes it's optional so I just would request some kind of enforcement there have been additional signs place that say stop ahead I just don't understand how people ignore them it's all it's different ages It's different it's contractors it's just individuals it's everyone. So it strongly requests that there be some sort of look into that because something really bad is going to happen and it's just it would break my heart. We live right there at that at that intersection and I walk my dog frequently. I see it all the time. I guess the final quick comment in my few more moments is I really appreciate the dialogue that happened tonight on the decision about the Scotto Hill Road culvert. I had raised. The point about the 41 on the list of however many and that why is this one jumping to the very top. I also appreciate that the council is very looking at this from a fiscal responsibility perspective. If this sizable grant of almost four million dollars is not awarded even though the money is technically in the budget should it necessarily be spent in this way. So I was not honestly hearing that before although that point my husband and I had made the point and others had made the point I. Appreciated that it was that there was actually a dialogue about that this time. So thank you thank you. [1:33:40] Denise Hamilton (Rod Road): Denise Hamilton to Rod Road. I re-sent my email that I sent over the weekend and regarding Scotto Hill that it doesn't appear that it went out into la land somewhere. I'm speaking ahead of the town manager's report not knowing what he's going to say and I know he knows what I'm going to raise. I have a question regarding the requested estimate for a portion of Holmes Road tbd. Since public comment is before what the town manager will say could he please elaborate on what portion of Holmes Road is. Being evaluated and what type of work that estimate will cover. I hope we're not simply looking at putting another layer of asphalt over the existing road. Anyone who regularly travels Holmes Road can see the ruts, potholes, and uneven pavement. With the amount of heavy truck traffic on this road, along with the hundreds of thousands of vehicles traveling this corridor throughout the year, I believe we need to look at what is necessary to properly address the condition of the road rather than apply another temporary fix. That should include determining whether sections need to be ground and removed, whether the underlying road base needs reinforcement, and what type of pavement structure is necessary to withstand the traffic Holmes Road is carrying today and will continue to carry in the future. I also think LRAP funding should be part of this discussion. Scarborough received more than $560,000 in local road assistance program funding in November of 25 and is scheduled to receive a little more than $539,000 this November. Since Holmes Road is now within the Scarborough's urban compact area, I would like to know whether some of these funds would be used toward a substantial improvement to Holmes Road. This has become an increasingly important transportation corridor carrying traffic from western and northern Scarborough as well as surrounding communities into the Downs area, in addition to significant commercial and heavy truck traffic. So again, could the town manager please clarify what requested estimate for a portion of Holmes Road means, what section is being considered, whether we're talking about resurfacing or more substantial reconstruction, and whether LAR, LRAP funding is being considered if we're going to invest taxpayer dollars in homes road i would like to see it repaired in a way designed to handle the traffic it is actually carrying rather than spending money on another short-term fix thank you thank you good [1:36:21] Steve Zamorowski (Teresa Massey Lane / Parks & Conservation Land Board chair): evening, Steve Zamorowski, Teresa Massey Lane. Thank you for the workshop on Squatter Hill Road. I understand that we've done a vulnerability assessment to some other studies out there, but I'd like to urge the council in the engineering group to look at things that have changed in that part of town, in that area of our state, since the those studies. Look what's going on in Gorham, look what's happening with our FedEx facility. Yes, my understanding is that the trucks can't necessarily move down in that Direction they have to take a right toward the pike, but people that work there are going to be traveling those roads. You look at if we get an Amazon facility in Gorham, you look at there, I've been reading articles about hundreds of hundreds of homes being built in Gorham. There's going to be a lot of traffic coming southeast or south or east from Gorham in other areas. Please look at the future, what we need. If you look at aerial map or the area I live in, that section of town, southwest Scarborough. Scarlet Hill Road looks like a thoroughfare. You look at all the main roads that come and kind of show up on the aerial. You know my typical route into town over here is Broad Turn to Homes to Beach Ridge to Scotter Hill to Haggis, and that sounds circuitous, but that's actually a really direct route. And I think a lot of people will need to use that route in the future, especially if we look at closing Route One for construction. How are people gonna get around the marsh, closing Payne Road for that culvert work? How many people gonna get through that part of town? I don't think we can do without, with fewer roads. We all need, we need, we all, I think we understand we need more capacity, not less. So I would support the culvert, we, I think we need to find money for a resilient color culvert, but if we get 10, 20 years out of a lesser culvert, maybe that's okay to. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone [1:38:35] Chair (Councilor Fellows): else for general public comment? Jim [1:38:41] Pritchard (Maple): Pritchard, Maple. I wasn't going to speak, but I've attended a number of workshops lately, and the council takes up most of the time in their business. The chairperson always states you can always raise your concerns during public comment. There's a difference if you allow the folks to participate in the workshop. You would improve your communication skills with those. I know I've been one that attended and walked away saying you really don't care what I have to say, your minds are made up. I would suggest the council really look at the rules, ordinances, whatever YOU HAVE TO DO TO MAKE IMPROVEMENTS WHEN THERE ARE WORKSHOPS. PEOPLE ATTEND FOR A REASON. THEY MUST HAVE QUESTIONS AND THEY'RE INTERESTED. AND BY SAYING GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT, THEY RAISE THEIR CONCERN AND SO BE TOLD WE DON'T DO BACK AND FORTH. Where at the workshop you could have a back and poor, thus improving the communication with the public. So I suggest that somebody look at the rules, procedures, or whatever. I realize you can't do it the same night as a council meeting because you have business to do, but one of the off weeks during the month you could have a workshop similar to what we had tonight with Scott O'Hill. Still, town makes their presentation, public comes up, raise their concerns, and get answers at the same time. The town has come a long way improving communications throughout the town. I think this would be another step forward toward improving the communication between the elected officials and the taxpayers. [1:40:43] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Please, no applause. It's a blanket thing. [1:40:47] Speaker T (unidentified): Hello. [1:40:53] Rebecca Hatt (112 Maple Avenue): Jessica Sargent, Beech Ridge Road. And so I live at Beech Ridge and I used to use Scotto Hill Road all of the time. So it's affected me in my daily life when I can't use that route anymore. So I think what I would like to know is where that fits within the total vulnerability assessment and the costs that are coming up. I personally would like to have that option. But I think that the public safety and the hazards of the likeliness of what's going to happen in our future kind of outweigh my convenience. And when I say that, I mean it's not 10 years of materials, it's hoping that a big storm doesn't happen in the next 10 to 20 years. So we could easily wash out a minimum culvert quickly and then we spent 1.25 million dollars for a very temporary solution. So I'm curious, if it's 41 out of that list of streets, what are the real risks to safety in our community and that should be our priority? Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else for general public [1:42:10] Chair (Councilor Fellows): comment? We have anyone online, right? Thank you. Moving on to item number five, which is minutes, the September 16th, 2026 town council meeting. Motion? Any discussion? All in favor? That's unanimous. Thank you. Item number seven, items to be signed, treasurer's warrants. I signed those for the meeting and that takes us to, and we did not have any adjustments to the agenda, which was item number six. The item seven was treasurer's warrants, which again I signed, and that takes us to item number eight, which is the [1:42:48] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Town Manager's report. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'll try to move firstly through this list and try to pick up and respond to some of the questions heard from the podium just moments ago. Data center moratorium. I just want to kind of keep everyone on track. You are all, I think, very well on track to have this wrapped up before the expiration of the moratorium. Next step after your first reading last month will be Planning Board on October 19th and a quick turnaround to be back before you and final reading on October 21st. With respect to IFW, this is a discussion the Council's had for decades, frankly, but more recently over the last year or so. The Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife has requested to some changes to our local ordinances. We've had a series of meetings with them and most recently have submitted some language for their consideration. Our general approach is to, rather than amend the ordinance, is to impose additional restrictions on ourselves through the beach management agreement, and that's a general concept and approach that we've discussed with them and conceptually they seemed aligned with. Of course, details matter, and so I'm anxious to get some feedback on the language we've proposed. Essentially we're looking to have zero tolerance during that really critical period from April 1st through May 15th. That right now is not addressed in our ordinance, so I'll be interested to hear that feedback. I'll certainly share that with Council and the public. I want to update you on the Portland West project. This is the successor process, if you will, to the Gorham Connector discussion some years back. The difference this time is DOT is leading the conversation. It's really approaching it from a more of a fundamental planning approach. And they really entered a kind of interesting, exciting phase of their process at this point and have proposed a bunch of conceptual solutions, some of which, many of which may not be work or be viable but it's i think a healthy exercise to kind of explore the range of options and to that end they're very anxious in getting feedback so they i know they've had a series of meetings one was in gorm about two weeks ago i think there was something in the order of almost 150 people that attended and It was set up in such a way that it was very conversational. Folks had to go to stations and provide direct comment and feedback. I think that process is ongoing. I mentioned at your last meeting they've got a very well-developed website that has all this information in kind of a what they call it a story map approach, which is surprisingly easy to follow given the just the sheer volume of information. So I know Counselor Anderson encouraged you all, I think he provided that link, and please do if you have time and interest, take a look at that and get engaged. We'd all like to avoid the way the last process happened and ended, frankly. So the problems in North Scarborough continue to plague us and will continue to, as we heard from the podium. There's a lot of development in that general area of our region, which will put further pressure from a safety and capacity point of view, you. So we need to find solutions soon. I'm really pleased to mention the Metro Pilot Project is, there's been a soft launch. You might have seen the blue vans traversing town, and they're open and available for use. Many of us have taken a ride just to test the system, and I'm pleased that they're doing it kind of the way they are with the soft launch. Allows them and their drivers to get familiar, they've got to work out bugs, but we're ready at the end of the week here to really kind of set this loose. And so there'll be a kickoff event this Friday, October 2nd, at 9 00 a.m. here at our public right in the parking lot out front here. I'm also pleased to mention based on feedback the council's received and staff we will be providing service to Kalerville and to Piper Shores. Piper Shores came up, you know, Kalerville I think speaks for itself with 15 very active women that live there that often have transportation challenges, so very pleased to be able to provide this to them. Piper Shores is really intriguing in that they have over 300 people that live there. Transportation is provided as part of, but I think this will add on to their opportunities. Most importantly, they have 270 employees and a big challenge as many of their employees, particularly housekeeping and food service, CNAs, transportation is a huge issue. So we're hopeful that 's gonna be a big hit and well used. We're also gonna approach them to see as an employer, they can subsidize for their employees. So see if we can get some partnership for them as a major employer. lawyer. With respect to elections, we're on the doorstep of the absentee period that starts October 5th in these chambers. Given the expected volume of early voting, we do anticipate taking over the entirety of Chamber A and B for the full month of October, and that will allow staff to set up additional voting booths, kind of spread out and not have to pull back to the back of the room and allow meetings in the evening. So as a consequence, all meetings that would normally be scheduled in this meeting in this room day or night will be relocated to public safety building and I'm pleased that we've done some updates to the audio visual capabilities there and so I think we'll be able to capture a very good quality both audio and video so it should be fairly seamless for you it really will only inconvenience you one time on October 21st also with respect to election we're getting a number of questions really around election security and those kind of fall in two areas I would say one is the security of our election drop box right out here the vestibule in front town hall that's something that was really came forward during the COVID and some of the challenges of social distancing and really with the rise of absentee voting it makes perfect sense to allow folks to be able to drop their ballots at their convenience in a secure location we've very consciously chosen that location it's underneath a security camera that is trained exactly on it during the absentee period i know the town clerk and her staff empty that box at least four times a day and then during the heavy periods of absentee are often in over the weekend to make sure that it's it's swept out as well so we have the utmost confidence in the security of that the other area of concern we hear is really around election interference and some of this is driven by national media and some social media perhaps no one knows whether that will actually occur and so we've done what we can to plan from our perspective for anyone that's been to our voting place on election day we have officers in uniform this year we'll have three there'll always be one outside and one inside that will really be there for visibility but also for the assistance of election staff. At this point, we're waiting for further guidance from the Secretary of State's office if there's any particular interference that they're concerned with and guidance around that. So I think we're doing everything we can to prepare. And again, we do expect it to be a pretty heavy turnout given hotly contested races up and down the ballot, including local. A paving update and Denise, I did put that on as a teaser and I'm pleased to mention that we do have some news so I can provide some detail. So before I get there, Pine Point neighborhood as you may recall was passed over a year ago to allow main water to come in and replace the water lines which they've done over the course of the summer. The our contractors actually mobilized this week and is starting to some of the initial prep work. All of those streets will be paved over a five-day period or so between October 7th and 13th and we've been in good communications with that neighborhood and I think they're all anxiously awaiting it frankly. We're also doing a section of actually Municipal Drive just to our left here, it's a heavily traveled section of road. That section will be done overnight on October 4th and so they've assured us they would be cleared out of here by 6 a.m for school traffic to be to be coming. And then two other areas that we really need to hold together to get through the winter, Holmes Road being one of them and there's a section of Guam Road, I don't have the actual meets and downs but there are sections of Gorham Road on the other side of the turnpike that are some of the wearing services unraveling and really in risk of not holding together through the winter. So we'll be paving that stretch and for Holmes Road essentially from Hendrickson Drive or Road it's it's it's it's past Cloverleaf if that's helpful so it's beyond that to Two Rod Road is the area that we're focusing on that's really based on a pretty simple assessment of conditions i don't think you need to be a an engineer to appreciate that 's the area of attention to the To the speaker's point, with the interest of time and budget, we will be simply doing a shim coat. It will be passable. We fully appreciate that 's not the solution, but I think for safety and durability, we need to do that as a bare minimum, and we'll be doing that. That work is scheduled, I don't have the exact date, but as soon as we do, we'll publicize it through all of our communication channels. Upcoming workshops, climate action plan, at long last will be before this council at your meeting October 21st. And a couple last minute things just came in today. You might have heard in the news there's a lot of conversation around a wide load making its making its way through the middle part of our state and unfortunately through our town. This is a series of maneuvers, actually nine in total. So what you're hearing about is the first of nine, and this is moving very heavy loads and incredibly long loads to the extent that 220 feet in length and 20 feet width. And just for your appreciation, a typical road in Scarborough is 20 feet, you know, paved surface side to side, so this will be quite a challenge. The good news for us is this will be done in the wee hours of the morning. And so it's a slow, circuitous route. This current maneuver started yesterday and will be affecting us over the evening hours on Monday, October 5th. So they're on their way and we'll keep you advised. Again, there's eight more to follow over there. they're going from the paper mill and jay all the way to the south portland waterfront they'll be loaded on ships and i believe they're going to three different paper mills around the country also cmp has notified us there'll be some outages in particular streets in town residents affected will be communicated directly by cmp they're doing some poll transfers that will require a couple of hours of shutdown and lastly i just want to speak to the speed three of the speakers at the podium this evening, Scott Construction and Shock Construction you heard from this evening. This is a matter that's active litigation, so it's certainly not appropriate for me to talk about any of the particulars. But what I can say is that, and I think you heard some of them from them, and that's perfectly fine, you know, we have been through mediation. Unfortunately that was not successful. We're very actively in settlement discussions and I would say as soon as tomorrow I expect we will have settled this, you know. It's unfortunate Maine is a small state, we know each other, we need to work with each other, relationships are really important, and I assure you we'd not have taken this position if we didn't think there was, you know, items worth discussing. And so I apologize for this burdening the Council, but I think we're very close to settlement and hopefully I'll advise that shortly. If we do have a settlement agreement, that would come to you for a review and consideration and approval. With that, I'm available for questions. [1:55:42] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Any questions for Tom? Karen? [1:55:46] Speaker G (unidentified): Tom, so you have mentioned a couple of times the zero tolerance language that the town is proposing for the beach management agreement, and I'm curious if there's discussion on how that is going to be, I guess, enforced. If there's like a new role that will be introduced to be able to be present to enforce that, or kind of just what that thinking is. Well, I think as you're aware, we [1:56:06] Town Manager (Tom Hall): do not have any additional resources in this budget, so we'll be working with existing staff, animal control officer predominantly, and that will be a challenge as we look for a new one. Quite honestly, we're not going to be there, be able to be there and on the beach, all beaches at the same time, certainly, nor can we be on any beach from sunup sundown. So I think we'll have to be very thoughtful and strategic, and when we replace personnel, I think we have additional police resources we can bring to bear. Our anticipation is that largely the users during this time of year, late winter, early spring, are local, so to speak, if not Scarborough, very close by, and we expect, should there be fines and penalties assessed, that word should spread quickly. I think there's potential for volunteers to support as well, but is it really zero tolerance? You need someone that has enforcement authority, not education authority. So we appreciate that it's a tall order, and we'll be interested to see what Ivan W says. [1:57:12] Speaker T (unidentified): Thank you. Anyone [1:57:16] Chair (Councilor Fellows): else? Okay, thank you. Thank you, Tom. That takes us to standing and special committee reports and liaison reports. Michelle, would you like to start? Sure, just an update on [1:57:31] Speaker F (unidentified): some dates for counselor conversations for fourth quarter, just for people that are interested in attending, and we hope a lot of people attend again. There are five dates, which will also, Allison will be publishing in the newsletter tomorrow, town newsletter. It's October 5th at Eight Corners, October 8th at Blue Point, October 15th at Pleasant Hill School, October 19th at the North Scarrow Fire Station, and the 24th, which is a Saturday, at the Public Safety Building. So that is what's up next for the communication committee and engagement. [1:58:15] Speaker D (unidentified): Thanks. Thank you, John. I don't have anything to update, but just to build on what Michelle said, hearing what Jim shared at the podium, that the conversation, conversations with counselors are great opportunity, that if you want to talk to counselors, want to share feedback, information, things like that, 's a perfect venue. It's very informal. And so for those tonight, if you have questions or want to continue the conversation about Scotto Hill, that's a great place to go. If you want to have more of that back and forth, great. No. Committee. [1:58:46] Speaker G (unidentified): Reporters? Yeah, yes, thank you. I'll just, we just met, so I don't have a lot of updates, but I did want to note that the Conservation Commission is continuing to review the low-impact development ordinance, which is coming down dictated by the state. I do believe we're having a workshop on it, not us, but the town is, that right, Tom? Am I wrong? I think I don't know, that's. [1:59:09] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Scheduled, but I know that they're looking that to do that, so I think there's one coming up the. [1:59:13] Speaker G (unidentified): Conservation Commission had mentioned, but it's for the public more, but I just kind of put it on your radar because while this is coming down from the state, it is also involved things like setbacks and stuff like that. So it's just kind of like FYI, even though this might be required, we're going to be getting, I think maybe a little bit of feedback about it. And I just want to appreciate the Conservation Commission because this is a lot of work that they've been working on for a long time that will be coming before us soon, October 13th. So there is a, yeah, I thought so, there's a workshop October 13th for the general public regarding this low impact development and we'll get more info before then. Great, well, thanks. [1:59:51] Chair (Councilor Fellows): I don't have a lot to report. The Long Ridge Planning Committee meets next a week from Friday on the 9th. I'll be taking part in a Maine Municipal Association Legislative Policy Committee meeting tomorrow, sort of getting into the homestretch of identifying the legislative priorities for the next state legislative session. As I've mentioned before, there continues to be a recurring theme around trying to push back against what are perceived as sort of unfunded mandates for municipalities and encouraging the state to kind of step back and pause a little bit on housing development related mandates, so look forward to reporting out on that as that goes. [2:00:36] Speaker F (unidentified): forward michelle cory i think we've talked a lot about unfunded mandates and i'm just wondering what 's the tone sort of across the state or other municipalities also kind of frustrated in that arena and is there a tolerance from the state and sort of taking that feedback and maybe filtering that into the decision making that they're making at their level [2:01:00] Chair (Councilor Fellows): I would say I've really been struck so far by how that sentiment has kind of cut across a lot of different types of communities, both greater Portland and more rural areas. And I think it, even though it's a, you know, it's a non-partisan group of people, I think it's pretty clear being in the room that it cuts across party lines in many cases. I think there's a sense in a lot of communities that, you know, they're just sort of trying to do their best to provide services, and they're not necessarily opposed to welcoming new residents and supporting housing where appropriate, but that they're, they want there to be a little bit more of a recognition of some of the impact of some of the well-intentioned things that have come down. And my sense is that there also is, again, on the theme, you know, keeping with the optimism theme, that there's hope that with this, you know, there's going to be a new governor coming in and new legislators coming in, that there's a heightened level of awareness around wanting to try to work a little bit more kind of collaboratively and have better lines of communication with local government. So, I mean, obviously the devil's in the details. [2:02:13] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, I think one thing I just want to share, Tom referred to the state candidates night last night. I was pleased to hear from multiple people running that if there is a regional option sales tax, they would support it. And I know that's gonna be a key success factor for that moving forward is getting state legislatures willing to sponsor it. So it was just the first time I've heard them all talk positively about it. And so hopefully that's a good signal that if that does continue to move forward, that hopefully Scarborough delegation will step up to potentially sponsor, depending on who's elected, obviously. But, you know, just promising that it at least came up a lot and they all get it and we're generally supportive of it. [2:02:58] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Great. Yeah. And I think that aligns with what I think I reported a couple of meetings ago, a few meetings ago about the sentiment within MMA, which sort of surprised me that there seemed to be a lot of support. It I don't think it's going to be something that is officially part of their platform or legislative priorities, and that I think they might allow others to carry that forward, but would be open to it. And again, it's another item where the devil's in the details. We know there are questions around equity and administration and other things, but I think it's encouraging that it looks like it's something that will be there'll be real discussion on. Right, okay, anyone else related to the report? Great. Thank you. Item number 10, resolutions, proclamations, none at this time. That takes us to public hearings. First is item 11.1, order number 26-082, 7 p.m. public hearing and second reading on the proposed amendments to chapter 1301, town of Scarborough general assistance ordinance. Who's gonna, anybody gonna tee this up? Yeah. [2:04:11] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Please to, I know we talked about it last time, every year the state will advise us what the maximums are for the various areas for general assistance, and this is simply doing the annual update. The general assistance program is really promulgated through a state law. We are agents of the state in that regard, and so quite frankly, we don't have a decision other than to approve these. There is certainly a reimbursement from the state at a 70 level at this point. [2:04:41] Chair (Councilor Fellows): All right, thank you, and Liam did a good job of kind of walking us through that last time, a better job you did, yeah. With that, I will open the public hearing on this item. If anyone would like to come forward to speak on this, seeing none, I will close the public hearing and we will turn to Council discussion. Do we have motion? Second. Any discussion? Call the vote then. All in favor? That's unanimous, thank you. Moving on to item 11.2, order number 26-083, 7 p.m. public hearing in action on the new request. For a massage therapist license from Alicia McSmith Sellers working at Oasis Wellness Center located at 433 U.S. Route 1, and for a massage establishment license, Saltwood Inc doing business as Saltwood Wellness located at 2 Stewart Drive, unit 102. [2:05:39] Town staff (clerk/manager presenting agenda items): These are both new applicants for the town. As new applicants, they're required to go in front of the town council for approval. They are within compliance with all departments. [2:05:48] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Thank you that I will open the public hearing on this item. If anyone would like to speak on this, all right, seeing none, I've closed the public hearing. Do we have a motion? Any discussion? All in favor? That's unanimous, thank you. There's no old business at this time, so moving on to the new business. Item number 13.1, order number 26-084, first reading and schedule a second reading on the request to expend in an amount not to exceed $380,000 from the land bond fund to assist the Scarborough Land Trust in purchasing 65 acres located at 8 Blueberry Lane, also known as Blueberry Preserve, identified by the Scarborough tax assessors, map r003 lot 011 as recommended by the parks and conservation land board and authorize the town manager to execute any and all documents as are necessary to protect the town's interests [2:06:51] Steve Zamorowski (Teresa Massey Lane / Parks & Conservation Land Board chair): Good evening Steve Zamorowski, chair of the parks and conservation land board. Really excited tonight to present Blueberry Lane. It's a great piece of property. We're really excited with the partnership with the land trust here. In your packet, hopefully you got to read it. I don't want to repeat all the great details, but I did want to give you a little update. As you all know, we did update our quantitative analysis when we go and we evaluate these parcels. We updated that in conjunction or following the new open space plan. And so after we did that, the scoring changed because the criteria was updated and we added some criteria. So we went back to old parcels and we did rescoring just to give us a benchmark of where we stood. And we took some of the best, the highest scoring properties in the past, and we came up with an average. We took five properties, we came up with an average of 675 points under the new system. So we rescore them under the new system. So just to give you a rest and reference 675 was the average, the best, the highest ranked property was 675. For your reference, Blueberry Preserve, the one we're talking about today, was 658. So it's a very highly ranked property. We don't usually talk a lot about the scoring because it's really a tool we use to do an assessment, a qualitative assessment, but we do follow a pretty rigid framework and we do score these properties. It's a way for us to really go into the details of water conservation, both drinking water and our waterways. We talked about habitat this property has great habitat to it 's over an aquifer drinking water aquifer it has a great little critters in it both in the water and in the land some species of interest in endangered species and the land trust will provide access for passive recreation hiking walking hunting as well so this is a great property it does further our goal of 30 by 30. You know, I was thinking it's only three years, 30 by 30 is not a long time, and we need the last time I looked, maybe Kristen knows, about a thousand more acres, something like that, 800 or a thousand. That's only three years, that's not a long time, and we're usually chipping these off at 50 at a time, so it's it's quite a lot of work we still have to do. But this is a great property, as I said, it scores high, it meets our requirements, it's in our focus area along the river. This is the Stroud Water River. The stream goes into the Straw Row, although it's along the Straw River, we don't think about a lot. It's north of the city, goes back into Portland, into the Casco Bay in Portland, right by the venue, the concert venue at Thompson Point. But anyway, if you have any questions, I could answer any questions, but [2:10:05] Chair (Councilor Fellows): that's kind of a summary of the property. Thank you, and I will note the materials were definitely, yeah, definitely well done, and I hope anyone who's interested in this is taking the opportunity to look through those. With that, I will open this up for public comment if anyone would like to speak on this. All right, seeing none, do we have a motion? Any council questions or [2:10:33] Speaker G (unidentified): discussion? Karen. Sure, I am liaison to the Parks and Conservation Land Board, so I just kind of want to acknowledge the kind of detailed, in-depth work that goes, because you know, this is resident taxpayer money, and it's not taken lightly, and so you know, they spent the time to update the application. I will note that you know, we have environmental experts on the committee that bring a lot of value to discussions, and people who've been on that committee for a very long time, so I really appreciate all the time and effort that they put into this, and not only you know, is the part where is the Scarborough Land Trust our partner, but I mean, you know, the Parks and Conservation Land Board is our partner when it comes to this goal, so again, huge chunk of land. And here, great up in northern Scarborough, on the border of Gorham. So this is really exciting. So thank you guys. Thank you. [2:11:23] Speaker D (unidentified): Anyone else, John? Yeah, you know, I think we're just very lucky to have the committee and the experts to do a lot of heavy lifting to assess these with very rare, very robust criteria. I know there's been some feedback about, you know, how quickly we're spending the land bond, which, as Steve pointed out, how maybe we're not spending it enough because we still have a thousand acres or so that we need to hit to get to our 30 by 30 goal. And I'm just proud at how urgently, how there is a sense of urgency within the town and with that committee to, you know, be open and evaluate and get these properties in as quickly as we can. The longer we wait, the more expensive the properties get. The longer we wait, the sooner a developer could grab it and do something else with it that maybe we wouldn't want them to do. The longer we wait, the longer it takes to have trails and passive recreation and all those things that are also important to our community. And so I do think, you know, we are moving quickly, and it's at a pace that I'm very comfortable with, and I think is also done in a very responsible way. This bond money, though, can be used for other things, and like, that is where I do hope. To see other types of projects come forward, not just necessarily for conservation. So I think we used land bond money in the past to build the Higgins Beach parking lot. And we keep talking about the challenge of parking. And so that's something, and I'd love to see more active recreation uses of the land bond. But again, very pleased with the progress. I think I could predict maybe in the next five years we might need another land bond. So. Great, thank you. Anyone else? [2:13:08] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Just to add to the some of the recent questions about the process and council feeling comfortable when these matters come to you, as has been eloquently stated. I think the internal process we have through the land board. I think is really good and should give you a high degree of confidence. I also want to add, though, with particularly land trusts cover land trust as the applicant. I've come to have a level of comfort with the due diligence and process that they follow. They are commissioning and appraisals on properties, and that should give us all a level of confidence. They're also leveraging other funding partners who have their own level of interest and due diligence. So we're part of a much larger puzzle, and if there's any concern, I want to just evaluate that. I think I can't think of a more thorough process than we have, frankly. [2:13:59] Chair (Councilor Fellows): But thank you, yeah, I definitely would echo that, and I appreciate all the work that the, that the group has done. It's really been a workhorse group of people, and with some real expertise. And I think one thing that's worth highlighting, which in this comes up in other, on other issues as well, is that the council doesn't necessarily see, and the general public doesn't necessarily see, the things that never come to us, the work that's done behind the scenes talking with prospective sellers, evaluating parcels, and there are potential opportunities that don't come to fruition, or maybe they have, they just haven't come to fruition yet, and sometimes it's kind of a slow burn. So I think it's worth, it's worth highlighting that too, that in addition to what we actually see and end up voting on, that there's a lot of other work that goes on, and I'm very confident that it's been a very, you know, highly rigorous process, and I think if we end up at a point where we in the next year or two where we've spent that money and it's a question of whether we put it up for, whether there's another vote for a new land bond, that'd be a good problem to have, and put it back on the taxpayers to decide whether that's worth reinvesting in. So with that, yeah, definitely support this. Any other comments or any questions? I will call the vote on first reading. All in favor, that's unanimous. Thank you. Takes us to item number 13.2, order number 26-085, first reading and scheduled public hearing and second reading to establish a new ordinance titled municipal policies regarding federal immigration enforcement. Just some quick background on this, I think many here have been following this, but just to quickly recap, the Scarborough Police Department has had a standard operating procedure in place for a number of years pertaining to limitations on cooperation and coordination with immigration enforcement following vocal community concern with federal immigration authorities and actions, and the passage of LD 1971, which is the state law that was recently passed, constituents have requested the town council consider clarifying and limiting the ability for non-law enforcement town employees and resources to aid or assist immigration authorities with immigration enforcement. So this would in part align and sort of codify town policies focused on law enforcement, but it would expand it to non-law enforcement municipal employees. Ways before we open this up for public comment, I do want to give counselor Anderson an opportunity. Sorry not to put you on the spot, but since you were really sort of forced behind drafting this ordinance that's in front of us, if there's anything that you would like to kind of tee [2:17:02] Speaker D (unidentified): up on that. Yeah, I think I think just the one thing is that this ordinance, we really should give credit to Rockland and City Councilor Kaitlyn Callahan, because it was her efforts working with the ACLU that drafted their ordinance, which really was the backdrop for what I produced. And so again, I think it's very much about the use of resources. You know, we've gotten a lot of feedback from people about what is the town's role as it relates to immigration, that we shouldn't be involved in federal immigration. I think this kind of memorializes that to an extent by clarifying the role our municipal employees, both police and non-police, should be doing as it relates to supporting federal immigration enforcement. So again, this really is working off of a really great ordinance that was endorsed by the ACLU as a best practice for other municipalities to leverage if they wanted to go down a path like this, to clarify the role between municipal and police and non-police employees. [2:18:08] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Great, thank you. Before we turn to further council discussion, I would do wanna give the opportunity for public comment. Appreciate everyone's patience and understanding in waiting to get to this point in the meeting to have that opportunity. We still can't sort of do back and forth conversation, but rest assured that if there are questions or concerns, we will take note of those and we'll take those to heart, and we'll try to incorporate those in the course of our deliberations and between now and second reading, and there will be an opportunity for additional public comment at the public hearing next time. So just to review ground rules, if anyone does wanna come up, please state your name and address, please keep your comments to three minutes or less, direct your comments to the chair. And I'll ask that everyone refrain from any applause or other verbal reactions. And that's, that's not about me hurting my feelings or any of us up here. It's really about just trying to keep things, keep things efficient and civil. And sometimes, if we get into situations where there's applause back and forth, that it can kind of charge the environment a little bit. So I hope everyone understands that. But I do want to give the opportunity for public comment here, so if anyone would like to do so, please come on. Hello, [2:19:33] Jennifer Jorkberg (Community Coalition to Remove ICE): everyone. I'm Jennifer Jordberg from Scarborough. Thank you all for taking this on, and I appreciate that. But tonight, I want to first tell you that I'm speaking on behalf of the Community Coalition to Remove Ice. Yes, we have a name. Many of these people you see wearing t-shirts or buttons, those of us who've been working and have been in front of you multiple times, we now have decided that we have a name so you can differentiate us from other groups. So tonight I'm speaking on behalf of Community Coalition to Remove Ice, and I'm here to tell you that we support the establishment of a municipal ordinance that clarifies the relationship between our local and law enforcement agencies and the federal immigration authorities. And we support extending those same standards, restrictions, and guidelines to non-law enforcement municipal employees. Regarding law enforcement, we want our officers to engage their time, attention, and people power in providing and providing information and assisting local people, not federal immigration authorities. If they are diverting any of their resources toward assisting federal immigration authorities, they're taking resources away from our community. Our tax dollars fund all municipal employee jobs. Our tax dollars should not be funneled to the federal government in assistance or in any other form. Diverting public safety attention, time, and dollars puts Scarborough residents at greater risk. Public safety is also affected if immigrants believe they can't trust our law enforcement officers for fear of being outed to ICE. They'll not report assaults, burglaries, crimes occurring against them, leaving perpetrators without consequences, and that is bad for all of us. I think we can all agree with that. Applying these same standards to all municipal employees makes sense. We don't want our immigrant Neighbors to be afraid to interact with local government, or to be afraid to send their kids to school their tax dollars pay for those services too. Our municipal employees should be engaged in work that benefits the town, its residents, not the federal government. Also, if either a police officer or other municipal employee plays a role in helping ICE to detain people based solely on ICE's request without a judicial warrant, they expose our town to civil rights lawsuits and financial liability. So long and short of it is, assisting ICE diverts local personnel,, equipment, databases to federal resources, and we all know that the feds are much better funded than we are. [2:22:58] Christopher Smex (Drake Lane): Christopher Smex, Drake Lane. I have a protocol question. Timing is great here. We just, as this meeting was being, was on the docket, the Guardian newspaper published a series of two very long and thoughtful articles about ice and its changing methodology and I think that's relevant to this conversation and I did make a summary of that for each of the members of the council. I don't know whether I can afterwards hand it to you or what, but you might want to be able to have a chance to read it. I'm not going to read the whole thing to you, but sure welcome to hand that out Okay thank you. What it really is getting at is something we I think a lot of us have felt, that the ISIS procedures have changed a lot since January of this year, but it isn't that they've stopped working. It isn't that they've gone away. In my personal opinion, they just got smart and they realized that the way they were doing things in Minneapolis was counterproductive. And so they've taken a very soft approach, but the number of number of detentions has gone way up this year. We don't see as much. Much and so I think it's a reason to I'm the timing here is great I'm glad this Council is looking at this ordinance at this time. I want to make it clear I do not favor open borders at all. I think that the immigration reform that was proposed before the 2024 election had a lot of promise. I would like to have seen it tried. I think it could have worked but it did didn't make it. I am also a very strong supporter of due process, and will just remind you that the Constitution says that no person Shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law. Person, not citizen. And I feel very strongly about that. That. And I do believe that the federal administration is depriving people, undocumented immigrants, green card holders, people who are applying for asylum, naturalized citizens, and native born citizens are being deprived of due process at times. And I think that's terrible. I'm doing what I can to get the state and federal lawmakers to be the checks and balances that the constitution says they're supposed to be. But Tip O'Neill famously said that all politics is local, partly because local things have a much bigger impact and more direct impact on us than the things that are happening at the federal and state level. And I may not be able to have much impact on the federal government's immigration policy, but on the local level, I can try to prevent our town's government from aiding and abetting in the lawless ways, days, specifically the lack of due process with which the administration is implementing their immigration policy. So I do support this proposed ordinance. [2:26:13] Caitlin Blodgett (public commenter, Portland): Hi there. My name is Caitlin Blodgett. I am from Portland, Maine, so I'm just visiting. It's the second time I've come to speak with you and I wanted to thank your town council for your humanity. I remember last time I looked at you and every single person looked at me in the eye and i really appreciate that thank you very much i just came to say one thing i made a sign last night and i just wanted to read it says biddeford maine july 13th 2026 ice shot an innocent man dead under our watch dear god please save our people thank you so much [2:27:03] Christopher Smex (Drake Lane): Thanks for your service. Thank you. First [2:27:15] John Raby (Forest State Drive): of all, I want to thank you all for bringing up this topic in the first place. It's important and I'm sure you all realize that. Now I can't help but notice that the first two words on this agenda item are first reading. Are we going to hear the words of this draft tonight? Because I would be loath to judge your approach to this issue until I can hear and see exactly word for word what this draft says and what you aim to do with it. So is that draft going to be publicly available at some point? It is. When all materials [2:28:02] Town Manager (Tom Hall): on for action are available, in this case at least the Friday before, so they've been available since [2:28:07] John Raby (Forest State Drive): Since last Friday at the, okay, so we can stop by and pick up a draft, they're online, however you like to receive them, yes, okay, very good. That's one point I wanted to clarify because the underlying principle here, and a lot of people have spoken to it, is that silence in the face of what ICE is doing in this town implies consent, and if we stumble into implied consent, we embarrass ourselves, themselves, but I dread to see us do that. Thank you. Anyone [2:28:40] Chair (Councilor Fellows): else for public comment on this item? [2:28:49] Eric Nathanson (Scarborough resident): Hello, my name is Eric Nathanson, I'm a Scarborough resident, I'm in support of the ordinance, and I would just like to point out to the town council that during so-called catch of the day earlier this winter, we saw, according to reporting in the Press Herald and other outlets, Portland and South Portland police coordinating with ICE during their off-duty time, providing information that they learned while they were on duty, in violation of instructions from the mayors and police chiefs of those towns. And so I would like the town council in drafting this ordinance to consider how they make sure it is a thorough, complete coverage of the intention of the ordinance, which is to keep town staff, police, and non-law enforcement from coordinating with and wasting town resources on supporting the federal government. And then my second point that I would just like to remind everyone here tonight and listening about is that Immigrations and Custom Enforcement is actually a very new agency, it's younger than I am, and we've seen it in the 20-ish years of its existence just rapidly increase its funding and the sort of purview it takes on for itself. And so refusing to cooperate with ICE and doing things at the state and local level, as well as hopefully eventually at the federal level, to pull back that agency's self-imposed authority would actually be a return to normalcy, would be a return to how we've done things for most of our history in this country. So I applaud the town council for starting that ball rolling. Thank you. Thank you. Hi, [2:30:47] Marvin Gates (Black Point Road): good evening, Marvin Gates, Black Point Road. Chairman Fellows, I had a few points but I've condensed them, and so I think I have one point. And that is in the draft's section 2C, town employee is defined as, quote, any employee, officer, official, or agent of the town of Scarborough acting in their official capacity, end quote. As a member of your Planning Board, I asked my attorney whether I fit that definition, and I also asked him about a specific issue I had with the draft that centered around the idea of the exposure I might find as a town employee in your draft Section 5. It's true through all the sections, but that was my interest, and my attorney wrote, quote, I think you can assume that the answer is yes, it does include the volunteers and the various boards and committees as written, as drafted, and that Section 5, at least, arguably, would govern such members to the extent that they're acting in their official capacity. Official capacity, I'm not an attorney, as everybody can see and tell, but I have done enough thinking and research about that. that 's a you know recently resolved by the Supreme Court legal definition and it's one I sort of want to avoid falling into as a volunteer for the town what is and what isn't official capacity and chairman Fellows when I served with you on our long-range planning committee several years ago as an example I was interviewed not in my official capacity for a television evening news story and the next day I received a call from the then chair of long-range very good guy and was told that my appearance on that news program was not appropriate. We settled all of that, but my one thought is that the draft sort of institutionalizes what I was told as being inappropriate. I'm going to stop there, I see the red light, and my concern is, you know, I don't want to have to call my attorney and have those fees stack up every time I come across something that I think, you know, am I being official or not official as I walk through the day in and out of town, and I think it can be misconstrued, and as such my little joke at the end of this point was you know I want to try to avoid those expenses and my question is there some sort of government version of directors and officers insurance that I need to consider and to really sort of leave with a point will the town provide that insurance to its committee members thank you very much thank you anyone [2:34:55] Chair (Councilor Fellows): else? Hi. [2:35:07] Speaker T (unidentified): Well I'm here at most meetings. I like sitting next to Norm, but and I just want to be sure that everybody knows that we are so lucky to have you all sitting there and making all these decisions and considering this town and all of us who live here. And I think this is a prime example. You have listened to the to us about ice and you have come up with some great solutions that you're trying to do. And I just think that you need to have a great applause. Also I want to make sure that John has real accolades because he has worked so hard. So thank you all and thank you John and I think that we're going to get some headway here and I think this item plus the next item are very encouraging and so thank you thank [2:36:06] Chair (Councilor Fellows): you thank you thank you thank you for not clapping for John. Anyone else do we have I want to make sure don't rush it. Anyone online okay great thanks as always for the comments and the input. We'll turn back to the council. Do we have a motion so moved second right Council [2:36:38] Speaker D (unidentified): discussion any comments John. Yeah I just want to start with this was probably one of the easiest ordinances to put together and really what made it so easy is our public safety department and the fact that really they were already behaving this way that's in the ordinance that was even before LD 1971 came out. It was probably five years ago when some residents were asking questions about their policy and I remember when I asked Tom and engaged the police chief I was very pleased to see that really what we have here is very similar to how they were already behaving and chief home quest especially he's just we are very lucky as a community to have him as our police chief. You know it makes me sad sometimes when people that are frustrated with ice some sometimes the police get pulled into it and i can say unequivocally scarborough police under Chief Holmquist and the leadership team he has is the best police department in the state or in the country. And so I'm just very proud of our public safety team and how they've been operating even before things got really bad locally starting in January and some of the more recent events. Again, I think this is a good step forward in memorializing that particular policy into an official ordinance, and I think expanding it to other municipal staff really just helps keep it clean and clear. And it also protects them as well from being put in a difficult situation by having very clear guidance on how their time and resources are to be used in these immigration situations. I also think what happened recently that was in the Portland Press Herald, and you've heard about with one of the Scarborough residents who was detained by ice, who was held by them for a month. That was a Cna at the main veterans home who you know there are people there who need care, and unfortunately it made a difficult situation for employers. Employers and my understanding is he was released and still trying to understand why he was detained and the due process was never clear. So knowing that in situations like that our police and our staff will be kept away from that as was mentioned like the liability that could mean for our town if we were to be involved in a lawsuit due to due process that's something I very much want to avoid. So again I'm I'm very happy with moving this forward I'm you know think it does reflect this council's Commitment to the community and listening as was mentioned you know I think what's so important is when people do show up and when people do organize and I really appreciate how the group who's here tonight has been and persistent, present, respectful. And I think, you know, that's the way democracy works. And so I'm really thankful for all of you here tonight who helped to prompt us to do this and super thankful to the council as well for, you know, as much as Nina gave me credit, like I can't accept that because it really is a team sport and the things that we're doing together, I think, reflect, as one of the speakers spoke, the humanity and the thoughtfulness of this body. It's very disheartening. All the things that happen nationally are in the news and social media where you see a lot of people not coming together. And I'm just very pleased. I think we do have a very diverse group of people. I wish Scott were here tonight because I felt like most people would expect Scott just based on his background to, you know, maybe have a different perspective but that man has a heart of gold and I think what really for me this issue is about it's really about morals and humanity how we treat people with human dignity. And so I think that's something that to me transcends politics it transcends issues and so anything we can do that just brings that humanity into our town by doing an ordinance [2:40:59] Speaker E (unidentified): Like this, I think is worth it. All right, thank you. Anyone else? Yeah, you know, I just, there, I feel [2:41:09] Speaker G (unidentified): like there's a consensus within our community and probably our country and kind of just on how ICE is operating these days. And so, you know, I just want our local residents, not from Scarborough but from anywhere, just to, I hope, recognize that we are working hard trying to find ways in avenues, news, that we do have ways to kind of change and react to the changes that they've made. And it's not easy as we think, we as we try to look for ways to try to react and manage it. And so I appreciate while we are a team, it usually takes one counselor to do a lot of the work when it comes to certain things, and it was John. So I appreciate John working hard on this, because it's not an easy subject when, again, when you break it, break it down to the local level, what can we actually do? This is something that we can do. So like, this is great that we're doing this. So thanks. [2:41:58] Speaker F (unidentified): Thank you, Michelle. Yeah, I agree with all that, and I think it comes down to, I was thinking about this long and hard when we had our special meeting in July, and I was, I was away on vacation but called in from LA, and thought about it. And my father was a police officer for two or three years before he was in the military for almost 30 years. I come from a law enforcement family, and I really thought about, you know, how would he feel about what's going on? He passed away a few years ago, and he would he'd be horrified. And John's met my father and some other folks, and it, my parents used to say often, it's not the what, it's the hell. And when I take a look at what's going on, I am, I think ICE was originated with George W. Bush after 9/11, and for years and years it existed, but it was quiet. I mean, you know, they were doing their work, and I think that a lot of people, like the gentleman said, you know, supports, doesn't support open borders, and many of us don't, but we respect humanity and moral compass and just the fair and humane treatment of people, and I totally support what we're doing, and I think that it does come down to, it's not the what, it's the how sometimes. And I also think that having an ordinance, I kept thinking about it, protecting our people, and you know, part of having black and white rules and boundaries is for the people that are out there on the street 24/7 dealing with just unimaginable situations all the time, that we've sort of given them permission to work within, you know The boundaries of what we're, we're gonna support them on, and what we can expect from them, and they can expect from us. So I think what John said, protect, when I looked at this ordinance, it's really about protecting the people in our community, but also about protecting our own officers and what they're up against. So I think it's an excellent process. I think it's an actual excellent document, and I fully [2:44:05] Speaker E (unidentified): support it. Thank you. Bill? [2:44:09] Speaker I (unidentified): I join the widespread public frustration and outrage over ICE's criminal behavior, and I say that as a lawyer. It is criminal behavior. I'm glad to see our Town Council leadership actively advance this action, because sometimes we feel like there's only limited things we can do, but this and the next item are things that we are trying to do to demonstrate we know what's going on, and we support those of you who have spoken out about these outrages. Thank you. Thank you. [2:44:56] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Just to start my comments, just as sort of a, you know, a point of order, or maybe just a frame of reference for folks who aren't familiar with this process, and every once in a while I think we get reminded that some of the terminology and jargon that we use may sound a little bit odd to people who are not at all of our meetings. So when we say first reading, it means it's really the first time that an item is in front of the council for consideration, means that ideally we've, we've, we've read the ordinance ahead of time, and we've studied it, and this is where we're going to hear public comment and then deliberate on it, and it's, it's kind of the first stage, first step toward potential approval, and then the next step for this that passes would be a public hearing and second reading on October 21st, which would be when we would have a final, like, binding vote on it. So no, we will not be reading, literally reading the ordinance tonight. I do plan to read the draft letter for the next items, that's a little more, a little more feasible, but just to sort of clear up any confusion on that, I definitely echo a lot of the sentiments that have already been expressed. I did silently applaud John for taking the lead on drafting this, and he noted that there was some very helpful precedent, which was, which was good. We also, I think it's worth noting, and we did have a, some comments from the podium about, you know, potential legal implications, which to me, I'm not sure that they're necessarily specific to this draft ordinance but maybe broader questions about the role of someone who's on a town board or committee but that said i think it is worth noting that we did have outside council review this and so it reflects that review and I'm confident that it that it falls within the lines in terms of what 's appropriate and what can what can reasonably be implemented and enforced I also want to echo what John Michelle said about the benefit to municipal employees and removing any potential ambiguity There making sort of you to the sign so tap the sign so to speak and say that's the policy, and I think I think that goes a long way. And I'll also I'll also add my appreciation for our police chief and our public safety professionals, and that did you know this would have been a very different probably would have been a very different process and different conversation if we didn't have a police department that was already following this standing operating procedure, and they deal with a lot of difficult situations all the time, and we don't wanna make their jobs any harder than they already are. But I agree with my council colleagues that this feels like based on our own moral compasses and what we're hearing from many in our community, this feels like a very appropriate step. And I'm grateful that we have the opportunity as local elected officials to work in a you know nonpartisan way to pragmatically talk about these things and take reasonable steps that are within our authority to address some of these concerns to the extent that we can. Are there any other Council comments before we take the vote on first reading? All right, call the vote then. All in favor, that's unanimous, thank you. So the next item is somewhat related, is item number 13.3, order number 26-086, act to authorize the town council chair to send a letter on behalf of the town council to the department of homeland security requesting a tour for the purpose of gathering information regarding activities at the ice facility located at 40 Manson Libby Road. So again, this is this is sort of consistent with what I think has been consensus of the council, and I think is reasonably responsive to many of the public comments that we've received about wanting to have more visibility, more transparency around what's happening there. We understand that it's private property. We understand that it's leased by a federal agency. There are lines that we can't and shouldn't cross. And I think we all understand and respect those boundaries, but this really this letter is consistent with the idea that there the town has a town leadership has a reasonable standing to have some visibility on what's happening and to have some level of open communication around what's happening in the facility. So I will read the draft letter. It's addressed to the resident in charge, United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement, 40 Manson Libby Road in Scarborough. To whom it may concern, I write on behalf of the town council of the town of Scarborough, Maine. The United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement operates from 40 Manson Libby Road, Scarborough, in space leased by the General Services Administration from Maine Realty Advisors. Citizens of Scarborough have asked the council many questions about the use of the 40 Manson Libby Road space. Questions have increased since the shooting of Johann Sebastian Duran Guerrero. The citizens of Scarborough and the Town Council expect that immigration enforcement is lawful, performed in compliance with court orders, and conducted consistently with the values of safety, transparency, accountability, and respect for all people. On behalf of our community, the Town Council seeks to learn more about the use of the Scarborough facility. In addition, the federal immigration enforcement presence in our community makes it imperative that our governments have open and coordinated communication. We asked to work with the relevant federal agencies to review the use of 40 Manson Libby Road as a federal immigration processing facility. We specifically request that ICE provide a town delegation with a tour of the ICE facility located at 40 Manson Libby Road, Scarborough. The delegation would report back to the council as a whole. Given the community interest in these matters, we would appreciate a response to this request in two weeks time. Please contact me with any questions. Regards, Corey our fellows, council chair, and with the CC to Scarborough Council and the U.S. attorney Andrew B Benson in Portland. So with that I would open this item up for public comment with all the same ground rules if anyone would like to speak on this. Good. [2:51:53] Tom Nolan (Scarborough): Evening Tom Nolan Scarborough. I would just like to say thank you to the council and all the council members. You've all had a hand in this, and yes, especially you John. But as you say, it's a team sport, so thanks to all of you. I believe up to now you're doing what you can do, and that's all we can ask. But it's not over, so we're going to keep our foot on the gas, and we know you will too. So thank you so much. Thank you Eric. [2:52:40] Eric Nathanson (Scarborough resident): Nathanson Scarborough resident. My concern with the approach outlined in this letter is that, you know, the facility can sort of clean up clean up their act, as it were, for the day, be on their best behavior, and then in the future be able to say, well, look, you sent a delegation, they walked around, you know, they didn't find anything inappropriate or, you know, anything to complain about, and that this might actually sort of backfire from the intention. And so I wonder if the town council would be able to consider and pursue longer term ongoing options for ensuring that ICE is behaving within the terms of their lease and within the terms of town ordinances at that facility, and that when conducting any sort of immigration enforcement action in the town of Scarborough, they're doing so with the utmost respect and care for the detainees and following of all appropriate ordinances and laws. So I love the, in summary, I love the idea behind the letter, but I'm concerned about its efficacy and that it might actually end up backfiring from its intended purpose. Thank you. [2:53:54] Town Manager (Tom Hall): Just if I could just make a point in why the letter was drafted. Why was, and I'm not necessarily addressing you, but this is a point that the council had some education on and deliberation around. When it comes to matters of code enforcement, the council really is restricted by law, cannot direct the code enforcement officer. They are a recognized figure in statute and need to act independently. And in fact, if the council does intercede in such matters, it can really invalidate any of that court enforcement action. So it's really important that they act independently. And additionally, and more to the point perhaps, is that, you know, suspicion or rumor or innuendo is not enough. There it's almost Akin to a probable cause standard, there needs to be a complaint that has some level of credibility. We simply can't present ourselves knocking the door and gain entry. And so understand the comments from the podium, but this is really the extent of the council's abilities in this endeavor, and seems like a reasonable place to start. Thanks Tom. I'm [2:55:09] John Raby (Forest State Drive): speaking for myself right now and nobody else. First of all, I like the letter you just read. I thank you for it. But I have a hunch on two counts. Count number one, my bet right now is that if you get into the facility, it's not going to happen until election day. And the other point I want to make, and this is just a hunch, it's a bet on my part, is before they let you in, they're going to sanitize it. So be careful as you go forward. Thanks for the letter. Thank you. Anyone [2:55:46] Greg Scott (Scott Construction): else? Hi. [2:55:54] Jennifer Jorkberg (Community Coalition to Remove ICE): Jennifer Jorkberg Scarborough tonight. I am again speaking on behalf of the community coalition to remove ICE. In reviewing the letter that you intend to send to Homeland Security, we agree that the federal immigration enforcement presence in Scarborough makes it imperative that our town council and the federal manager of that facility have open, coordinated communication. You asked to work with the federal agencies to review the use of 40 Manson Libby Road, and you asked for a tour. That's all good stuff, appropriate requests. But respectfully, we're asking you to perhaps, and perhaps you intend to, do a bit more. When the Scarborough Democratic Town Committee met with representatives of our federal congressional members on September 28th, we know they asked that the operations at Manson Libby Road be suspended until it can be verified that each and every agent employed there is not as unqualified and as negligently unqualified as David Brouillette was. was. He's the agent that we believe killed Johann Sebastian Deron Guerrero. We know Brulette was not vetted to the standards that our own municipal law enforcement agency would demand. We know he was unqualified and he got substandard training. We know ICE has a record of shooting and killing unarmed citizens and asylum seekers in broad daylight. And listen, we also know that as long as a landlord and tenant, if they are in compliance with all applicable laws and ordinances, we should have nothing to protest. But the thing is, we don't actually know if ICE is in compliance with applicable laws and ordinances, because they offer no transparency and they're without any oversight and accountability, yet they're generously funded by our tax dollars. No other law enforcement agency operates this way. ICE behaves in a way that threatens public safety. They're operating outside of our constitutional norms. If we don't call the Manson Libby Road facility and its agents into question, we're failing in our duties as Scarborough citizens and as human beings. So we appreciate you working to engage with them. We also recognize you have limited power. Power we absolutely do, but we just want to make you aware that we will, as Tom so eloquently said, we'll keep our foot on the gas, and in the meantime we will request that you also continue to do everything within your power as elected officials to rein them in, because it's not an exaggeration to say it's a life or death matter. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone [2:59:02] Chair (Councilor Fellows): else? Right, anyone online? No? Great, thank you for those comments. Turning to the council, do we have a motion? So moved. Second. Any discussion? John? [2:59:18] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, so for me, and just for transparency, I used to work for the General Services Administration. That's where I started my career, worked there for 10 years. And so what makes me so disappointed about the situation with the federal government right now is the lack of transparency. And you know, I, through my career, always remember at the GSA us talking about how a good government is a transparent government. That was like a theme everywhere and everything we did, and I'm just very disappointed that theme has disappeared. You know, transparency for government is so important in everything we do to build trust, and it's the way that our democracy can operate and so I view this more as local government to federal government trying to start a conversation, unfortunately at a time where, you know, the, as much as we were optimists earlier on this particular issue, I'm going to be probably more realist and say I don't expect us to get a response, unfortunately, and I hate that's how I feel, because that's not how I felt when I was a civil servant and worked for the federal government, and that's not why I ran to be in a seat as part of our local government. It was really to be as transparent as we can be to our constituents, to make sure they know what's going on. So even though I'm a little pessimistic, I'm going to be hopeful that hopefully the DHS will take our request seriously and allow that first conversation to start. Maybe we can be an example of what good transparent, good transparent government actually looks like. And you know, I totally hear the public in terms of, you know, if and when something were to happen, it would probably be coordinated a good time. And you know, but I don't, I don't think the intent is to go and like find an issue and call them out. I think the intent is again to start that transparency that is absolutely critical for anything to get done and to build trust back in our government. And so that's why I support this, and again, I do think, I would encourage everybody who's, who's not satisfied with this approach to call your state reps and encourage them to do a tour. You know, we can't do a surprise audit, but they can and they haven't, not all of them. And so I would encourage people to ask your U.S. delegation to also step up and do more. They have more power than we do. We are exerting the power that we have. For me it feels unfulfilling at times because I wish we could do more, but we have to work within the bounds that we have because we're not above of the rule of law. And as much as this particular agency is, has no disregard, no regard for the rule of law, I, you know, don't want to, you know, do things that I feel like are outside of our bounds. I want to respect the rule of law, respect what we can do, and you know, open that door with them and hopefully get a little bit more transparency for our community to know what is seen, what is happening in that facility, some of the basic questions that we've been getting that really should be very simple for us to get answers to, not just at the local government level, but any resident should be able to ask these questions and get those answers without, you know, getting the Heisman. And so I'm, I'm hopeful that, you know, this will be positive. Maybe I'm just pessimistic on [3:03:00] Speaker E (unidentified): this one, but I hope that I'm wrong. Thank you, Michelle. Yeah, a couple of things we had an [3:03:10] Speaker F (unidentified): Executive session a few weeks ago and Tom brought in an outside attorney and I think that we were you know kind of pie in the sky and I think if I if I look at you know sort of how we approach it I think the funnel is like this and I think that we kept asking a multitude of questions and the attorney kept you know you know kind of bringing the funnel in and I want to give a lot of credit to build on event because in that conversation Bill spent his career as a municipal attorney and asked a lot of incisive questions and really I think pushed the envelope in that meeting and pushed the outside attorney and I left that meeting feeling like you know we have to be realistic and we pushed hard and I think for me when I left I had kind of a reality check of where what is our scope and you know we're not going to use you know a hundred hours of outside attorneys trying to push a boulder uphill that frankly we have no control over and just if I look at where we came out on the ordinance if I looked at where we came out on the on the letter that Corey articulated a few minutes ago, I feel like that's a really pragmatic kind of strategic first step. I'm a little optimistic. I think they're afraid of us, John, so I think they're going to respond to the letter. But I think we will keep our foot on the gas, but I think realistically. And I don't really want people to have an unrealistic expectation. I thought we could do more. And then when you look into it I mean I think we have to know what the rules of our game are and I feel like we're we're in that space right now and I think we'll see what happens and then decide as a group where do we go from there but I appreciate Tom bringing in the attorney I appreciate Bill asking a lot of tough questions and I think that it brought us back to a point of I think a little more reality on what we personally could do to push this right thank [3:05:19] Speaker I (unidentified): you Bill I didn't know where 40 Manson Libby Road was located in Scarborough just never driven past the ice facility so I decided last week that I would just drive by take a just to see it. Big surprise. There was a group, fairly sizable group of protesters out front. And they told me that they're at the ICE facility every day, all day. And it was just it really I went, wow, that's people who are committed. And they said that they're there to report findings of what they see, and they're well informed. So I thought that was a big surprise for me. And I think we might be in touch with them to have them keep us informed. I fully expect that ICE will blow us off. But this is not the end. And I expect we will persevere on this. I'm not sure what the plan is, because as a lawyer I know that our authority is limited, but we're mad, it's wrong, and it's happening in our town, and I expect we will persevere till we receive some justice. Thanks, Bill. Okay. [3:07:05] Speaker G (unidentified): Like the last agenda item, I think here we are, you know, trying to find ways to work with ICE within our community. We're very limited. Michelle said in our role as a town council, and I think also as our town manager pointed out, you know, we also just can't, you know, if we take ICE out of it, we just can't go to any facility in Scarborough and be like, I think you're doing something wrong, let us in, because you know, if you kind of put it on, if that was, you know, we have to be kind of mindful and not, you know, target and things like that. And so I do feel like this is a good first step of like, you know, here we are, local government. Your federal government, you know, I also want to note that US Representative Pingree sent a letter as well, which was kind of the same sense of just, you know, you guys, we're both governments, you know, they're local, we're federal, we're all one of the same, we need to build and work with each other. So I think they feel the same way we do, and we're all struggling with the situation and what we have control over. Yeah, I'm a little pessimistic about a response as well, but you know, you don't know, and so. I'm hopeful that maybe this will be a turning for us. Okay, thanks. Yeah, I to quote Bill's. [3:08:19] Chair (Councilor Fellows): highly technical legal term I think it is likely that we'll be blown off but I do think there's there's there's inherent value and kind of in you know on this theme as has been mentioned a couple of times sort of government to government reaching out being on record trying you know expressing our concerns and trying to establish in a you know an adult conversation about what's happening in a respectful way i appreciate john you're sharing your background with gsa and i just i do find it 's a Little bit of a sidebar, but I really do find that what's happened with many of our federal agencies under this administration just really sad, I truly sad, I have as someone who worked in DC for a few years in government adjacent capacities and those people who worked at the Justice Department and USAID and places like that and these are agencies Housing Urban Development agencies that have really been gutted weaponized and in some cases are operating in direct in direct opposition to what they're really established for and I think what's happening here is clearly part of that. I know we all try to be careful about kind of pining or editorializing about issues that are beyond our control and getting into national politics, but I think it's hard to avoid here, it's kind of the elephant in the room and this is part of what we're trying to deal with. I will say there's value in I believe there's value in putting this out there and sort of again kind of being on record as wanting to be engaged and have some transparency and really kind of planting a flag and I'll also note that we are a few weeks away from the midterm elections and it's possible that the landscape could change and that you know what even if we even if we don't get a direct an immediate response things could shift and we've you know we've made this overture and we certainly can follow up as appropriate so with that up there are no other comments I will call the vote for first reading actually it's not first reading I should note this is a single action item so this does pass it'll be signed following the meeting and it will be set so with that all in favor that's unanimous thank you and now for something completely different although it does relate to democracy. Item number 13.4, order number 26-087, act on the request to set the date and time for the regular municipal elections and referendum election for Tuesday, November 3rd, 2026 at the Scarborough High School Alumni Gym. Sign the warrant, appoint the warden and warden clerk, set the hours for voter registration and act on appointments of election clerks pursuant to chapter 200, article eight. Nominations and elections title 20 title 21-a section 503 and authorize the town clerk to make any additional appointments as necessary per the town charter the town council [3:11:48] Town staff (clerk/manager presenting agenda items): Sets the date and time for municipal elections this November. Election is for referendum election, three-year seats in the town council, three-year seats in sanitary district, and one seat with the term to fill for Board of Education to expire in 2028. [3:12:07] Chair (Councilor Fellows): Thank you. I'm guessing this is not an item that's going to have public comment, but I'll put it out there anyway. I think everybody wants us to have an election. Great. Do we have a motion? So moved. Second. Any discussion? John? [3:12:23] Speaker D (unidentified): Yeah, I'm not going to support this because I'm not on the ballot. I just don't think you guys should be voting in all seriousness, you know, going back to the previous conversation, it was voting that got us into the situation we're in, and it's voting that can get us out of this situation. That is what gives me hope about our country and our democracy, is the fact that, you know, every year, every two years, there's opportunities for us to reshape, you know, the direction of our local community, of our state, of our nation. And so I just hope people show up and vote early. Voting starts on Monday so [3:13:07] Chair (Councilor Fellows): please vote. Thank you. Anyone else? I do want to, on this topic, I thank Tom for including in his report tonight the sort of updates on election security and the some of the election related logistics. It really takes a lot of effort, and we all know there's, you know, it feels like with every election feels like the biggest one ever, and it feels like every, you know, with every cycle now there's more and more concern about security. So appreciate everything that the staff and the volunteers are doing and will be doing over the next [3:13:47] Speaker F (unidentified): few weeks. So sure, just a little election humor. My father used to say that if I ever missed a vote that he was going to cut me out of the will, and I'm an only child, so he felt very seriously, you know, didn't try to influence my vote actually, but he said if you don't vote you can't complain, and it's a privilege, and it was just like drilled in my head, and I just want to put that out to everybody out there too. I just think there's nothing more important as an American than showing up at the ballot election day and casting that vote, whatever it is. So Scarborough also, I think Tom has, do we have the record in the state for like the highest percentage of voter [3:14:32] Town Manager (Tom Hall): turnout? Usually, I don't know if it's the absolute, but we are consistently in the very rarefied era [3:14:37] Speaker E (unidentified): So you should be proud. Yeah, I think we want to win this year. [3:14:41] Speaker I (unidentified): Yeah, it's fine. Thanks, Bill. And I appreciated the comments about the Scarborough Police Department having people at the pools. I'm so proud of our police department. They are, we get their reports, so we know what they're doing and how helpful they are to our community. Community, and I want people to know the police officers that they will see at the polls will be Scarborough Police Department officers, and they are good people. Thank you. Good. Okay. [3:15:19] Chair (Councilor Fellows): With that, I will call the vote. All in favor. That's unanimous. Thank you. We have no non-action items, and that takes us to council member comments. Just [3:15:31] Speaker F (unidentified): two quick things. I want to re-repeat Tom's comment about Kaylor Vale, and I think one of the best moments I've had my first on the council was when the 100 year old member of Kaylorville called in and pleaded with us to please add another, I don't know, half a mile to the transit route because they have 15 women there who many don't drive and have to get to appointments, and if you think your voice doesn't matter, that 100-year-old woman calling in and talking to us absolutely made a difference, and I applaud Tom for making that happen, but it literally was one of the best moments of the year. The second thing I want to just highlight is you may remember about a month or two ago, the Scarborough Council approved a wood bank, and I just wanted to let you know that the wood bank is up and going, and they had their first work day two weeks ago. My husband was out there with his chainsaw for I don't know how long and had a really good time. They have another work day this Saturday. I talked to Stephanie from Project Grace. We've already had two residents, two households that have been recipients of wood, and we're anticipating a lot of demand with just the cost of everything but certainly heating fuel, and the other thing I just want to put out there as something that's coming up, Jeremy Grondin, who was one of the four members of the steering committee that came and talked to the council about getting this approved and support from the town and from Project Grace, he is going to be sponsoring along with Project Grace And volunteers a warm-up Scarborough fundraiser at Village Center, which is his business on the corner at Oak Hill, and it's on set on Saturday, November 14th, from 10 to 2, and we're just going to have a lot of activities going on and opportunities for people to donate and raffles with all the money going to Project Grace fuel assistance and to the new forum Scarborough Wood Bank. So would love to see people there, and also just I just think this is such a fantastic addition [3:17:49] Speaker E (unidentified): to our community. When is that event? November 14th. November 14th, yes. Sounds great. Yeah. [3:18:01] Speaker F (unidentified): I wonder if my husband I said that he said it wasn't exactly a party. I think it's bad for two days, but it's a Saturday, and there actually is a website if you go on to www.scarboroughwoodbank.org. There's information on there, and Project Grace also has information on their website about any activity of volunteering and supporting the Wood Bank, but they would love, I think they'd love some younger volunteers, peers. Thank [3:18:39] Chair (Councilor Fellows): you. Thank you. Anyone else? I've got a two or three things I'll, I'll mention quickly. First, I want to speak briefly to comments from the podium during general public comment around public participation, and John spoke to this a little bit during committee updates in connection with the conversations with counselors, and it's too bad Mr. Pritchard isn't still here. Maybe I'll follow up with him offline, but I think we all understand that they're just kind of inherent structural challenges with the way that we operate at times. The workshops are really intended to be an opportunity for the council and staff to really get educated, ask questions, have some deliberation, and kind of set the stage for what happens next procedurally. Early, we, you know, we usually don't have time for public comment during that, and I think it's always a fine line, you know, I the, not to, you know, make it sound like I'm giving a sob story, but, you know, we all, we all do put in a lot of time, and we've, we also have opportunities for conversations with counselors, and so I think it's always, you know, we try to, we try to carve out as much time as we can, and we're, I think we're all always open to hearing from people offline as well, but we know it can be Kind of frustrating when it feels like kind of a one-way one-way thing, so I did want to acknowledge that. As and then as Tom mentioned, our next meeting will be on October 21st, so we've got two off weeks before the next meeting, and that meeting will be at public safety because voting will be happening, early voting will be happening here. And then quick plug for the marsh cleanup, the fall marsh cleanup, which will be this Saturday. The people usually gather at the Scarborough Marsh Audubon Center, so maybe do that and then go cut some wood. What time is that Saturday? Starts around nine, that's when people usually gather. Yeah, so [Speaker E (unidentified): So that's it.] Motion to adjourn? So moved. Second. All in favor? Good night.