Bangor council rejects Ohio Street arterial change, advances central kitchen

[1:25] Susan Hawes: Good evening, welcome to the regular scheduled meeting of the Bangor City Council. Unfortunately, it's not regularly scheduled. This is Wednesday, so don't all think you have the rest of the week. We are making up for Monday. So we start all of our meetings with the pledge of allegiance, and I would ask Adam Baker, where are you? Would you lead us to [1:57] Public commenter (Rory): the republic for which it stands [1:59] Michael Beck: one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. [2:10] Ann Krieg: Okay. [2:14] Susan Hawes: This is a portion of the meeting set aside for general public comment directly related to city business, and we are asking that you do keep it to the business of the city, and this is for matters that do not appear on this evening's agenda. If there is an item on the agenda that you wish to speak on, there will be time that you can be recognized at the time of that item. We have adopted as a council a public policy that we will adhere to. Statements during public comment should respect the dignity and seriousness of the proceeding, and individuals will be restricted to speaking once. Okay. Obscene, truly threatening, or overly repetitive comments will be deemed out of order and will be interrupted and removed. Topics that are considered out of order also include matters that are in litigation, individual employees or employee groups, discussing matters for which complaint or grievance procedures are in place, personal disputes between the speaker and another resident not germane to city business, support for or opposition to any candidate for political office, and personal complaints pertaining to individual city employees. There's a time limit of three minutes per speaker, and the total time allowed for general public comment regarding city business will be limited to no more than one hour. The public comment period is for city council members to listen and not to respond or debate with persons. If you don't live in Bangor or own property in Bangor, please allow those who do to have the opportunity to speak first. If you'd like to offer comment on any directly related to city business not appearing on the regular agenda, you may approach the podium. Individuals who have appropriately pre-registered to give public comment via remote means will be given the opportunity to participate remotely. Alternatively, councillors may be reached via email at councillors at Bangor, maine.gov. A link to the adopted public comment policy can be found on the city's website. Public comment policy. Okay. Is there anyone wishing to speak? Please approach the podium. I will ask that you give your name and where you reside, please. [5:09] Pamela Prue-Curry: Enter. There we go, Pamela Prue-Curry, Executive Director of the Maine Multicultural Center. And I'm actually here tonight representing Kimberly Boucher, who was unable to attend but wanted me to read this statement. So Kimberly Boucher says, I'm a resident of Bangor. I'm also Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Maine Multicultural Center, an organization that supports refugees, asylum seekers, and voluntary migrants as they arrive to help them get settled and become integrated members of our community, strengthening our workforce force as drivers of economic growth and create a diverse culture mosaic that we all benefit from. I'm also a former Peace Corps volunteer. Over the course of my career, I've been welcomed as a stranger in foreign lands. I've had caring neighbors who helped me to integrate into another community that patiently supported me as I clumsily adapted to a new culture and struggled to communicate in a new language. In countries in West and East Africa, I've I've been welcomed by caring community members who took the time to find understanding through language barriers, who fed me, who walked together with me as I found my way. I feel it's my duty to be of service to others in that way as well. Aside from our indigenous community, our ancestors were all strangers here on this land at some point, and that should give us some empathy as we look at this current immigration situation. I'm looking to the council today to do anything that you can to ensure that immigrants, people of color, and indigenous people who are currently being treated by the immoral, unethical, and unconstitutional racial profiling by this increased presence of immigration and customs enforcement in our state can feel some measure of safety. This launch of Operation Catch of the Day in Maine is not a targeted mission to arrest individuals who have committed any crimes, the worst of the worst. As this federal administration contests, this is a harmful trawling operation using a big net to ensnare anyone who is non-white and happens to be in the wrong place, which is anywhere ICE is at the wrong time. We know what is happening in Minneapolis, St. Paul, and other cities and towns in Minnesota. The eye of Sauron has landed in Maine now, and we need to act now to protect our neighbors. Tomorrow the state is hearing the public comments for LD 2106, law that would protect Maine's kids, parents, teachers, health care workers, and all of us by denying ICE access to schools, health care facilities, daycare, and libraries without a valid judicial warrant. I would encourage everyone who is listening, as well as our counselors and city staff, to speak out in favor of this bill. No one should be fearful of going to school, going to a doctor, or accessing a book at the library. Bangor can move forward now to enact similar ordinances locally or even go further than that. People should be able to go to work and not fear being detained, not just be able to drop off their kids at school or daycare. They should be able to show up for required immigration hearings to provide required paperwork for legal immigration processes that establish and maintain this status without fear. They should be able to go to the grocery store, run errands, pick up prescriptions without constantly being on the lookout for unmarked vehicles and mask agents. Thank you very much. Thank you. [8:32] Hillary Simmons: Hillary Simmons, resident of Bangor. Thank you, Mayor and the members of City Council. I am speaking today regarding a presentation made to the Equity Committee on January 27, 2026 by Jaden Wilson concerning a proposed resolution to declare Bangor as transgender sanctuary. I want to begin by acknowledging that issues involving equity, safety, and inclusion are important and deserve thoughtful and respectful discussion. Because of that, it is especially important that information presented in support of such proposals is accurate and that the fall of sorry proper process is followed. During the presentation to the equity committee, it stated that 800 people had signed a petition in support of this resolution. However, to date, only 188 signatures have been received. Those signatures include individuals from outside the city of Bangor, from other states and even other countries, as well as minors. As a result, we do not have a clear or reliable indication of what the residents of Bangor actually want. If the city council is going to consider a resolution of this significance, it is crucial that the voices of Bangor citizens are clearly identified and verified. Discussions of this multitude should be based on accurate data, local input and a transparent process. I also have concerns regarding procedures. Simply, I am questioning how Councillor Back has the authority to speak with the city manager about this proposed resolution without a vote being taken by the equity committee. If it matters, if matters are being advanced outside of committee action and without a recorded vote that raises concerns about transparency and adherence to established processes. At the same time, I believe the city must remain focused on its most pressing priorities. Bangor needs to continue bringing businesses into the city and strengthening economic development. We also have a responsibility to prioritize the needs of our elderly residents, our veterans and individuals with disabilities, many of whom depend on the city for essential services and support. These are fundamental responsibilities of local government and they are directly impacting the daily lives of Bangor residents. residents. I am not suggesting that important conversation be avoided. I am asking that they be handled accurately, transparently and in a way that reflects both proper process and the clearly and clearly demonstrates the needs and voices of the Bangor community. [11:11] Michael Beck: Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. If I could just a clarification. I never said I would speak with the city manager. I recommended that the committee speaks with the city manager. Andrew. Thank you. [11:23] Public commenter (Rory): Please. I'm Rory, born and raised in Bangor. I do want to be respectful of everything that you just said about what we're speaking about, but I do feel like what I'm saying, it will be relevant. And I'm not a public speaker, so. Madam Chair, members of the council, I want to address a claim we keep hearing in this room, that cutting off hateful speech are acts of violence by dangerous violent left and progressives, and that the First Amendment somehow guarantees unlimited access to this microphone. It does not. The First Amendment protects people from government punishment for their beliefs. It does not entitle anyone to commandeer a public meeting, ignore rules of order, or use civic space to advocate harm against their neighbors. Rights are not a magic shield against consequences they were never meant to be. Public comment exists so residents can participate in governance, not to intimidate, threaten,, or deliberately inflame. That behavior doesn't make someone a martyr. It makes their argument laughable. This council is not silencing anyone by enforcing time limits or rules of conduct. It is doing its job. Those rules exist so everyone can be heard, especially the people who are most often talked about and rarely listened to. If someone's world or freedom of speech does not mean freedom from accountability, and I want you to listen to that, it does not mean freedom of accountability. Civility is not censorship and protecting vulnerable communities is not oppression. If someone's worldview collapses the moment they're told to follow basic rules, if it can only survive by provoking, posturing, and throwing tantrums, this is not evidence of tyranny. It is evidence that the ideology itself cannot coexist with democracy. I urge this council to continue enforcing its policies without apology and to remember who public institutions are meant to serve the whole community not just the loudest voice not just the most hateful one and not those who make cruel who mistake cruelty for courage this forum is not your personal amphitheater for your dangerous and harmful idiocy and evil rhetoric thanks thank you [13:42] Adam Baker: Adam Baker Bangor resident I'm here for the purpose of asking the city council in the city of bangor to take a stronger stance on ice with recent events i believe it's paramount that the council take immediate action in protecting the residents and city citizens of bangor one way of action is saying that the city of bangor will not enter a 287g agreement with ice i'm aware of past council's decisions and turning down a recommendation of the racial equity inclusion human rights committee had proposed last spring i urge you and the council to please see the harm in doing nothing once again. People are scared to go outside and exist at the risk of being snatched by masked thugs of the state, never to be seen again. I do not want the city of Bangor to have a senseless tragedy like what happened with Keith Porter Jr., Rene Good, Alex Brady, and all people we don't know about. I ask you to have Bangor leading the charge against this cruelty. Give safety to your constituents, that you will protect them. Bangor is a welcoming city for all. Let us protect it for all. Thank you. [15:11] Scott Party: I'm ready now. Good evening members of the council. My name is Scott Party and I'm a citizen of Bangor and I'm passing around tonight, I've passed around a fact sheet for a proposed budget freeze and tax relief. I know it's early to start talking about the budget but the time has come that we need to start now to avoid any tax increase on the citizens of Bangor. I stand here today not just as a taxpayer but as a voice for thousands of Bangor residents who are currently living on the edge of a financial precipice. I'm here to deliver a simple urgent plea. Stop any property tax hikes. When you sit, when you sit in this chamber you are charged with the welfare of the entire city. That doesn't just mean the high-profile develop, developers or the municipal departments. It means the senior citizens in Fairmount who is choosing between heating oil and groceries. It means the young family in Little City wondering if their first home was a mistake. And it means the middle-class workers who are the backbone of this economy but are seeing their wages swallowed by the rising cost of living. Some are saying that there will be no choice but I see the just in case accounts. I see the undesignated fund balance and the overlay surpluses. Taxpayer money sitting in reserves while the taxpayers themselves are drowning. Using these funds isn't physically irresponsible, it is exactly what a rainy day fund is for. And for many in Bangor it is pouring. Increasing taxes isn't just a line item, it isn't, it excuse me, it is a displacement policy. Every mill rate or any increase in taxes pushes another family toward the exit. We ask you to freeze the budget. Look at the 850,000 existing in savings and reserves before you look at our checkbooks. Work with us to keep Bangor affordable for everyone, not just those who can afford the luxury of a tax hike. And you know, I was thinking on the way, somebody asked me what, which direction I lead, you know, lean towards public Republican or Democrat, and I said I'm an independent, and I was looking at each and every one of you and I voted for each and every one of you, so you work for me, and you work for the all the citizens of Bangor, and I'm really proud of what you do. It's it's a thankless job, I know it is, and you get a lot of grief, and you know you're here, you hear a lot of stuff that you don't need to hear, and it's very difficult to get your job done when you're when you're dealing with all the all the other stuff that goes on, but the most important thing that you can do is make sure that all your citizens, all your citizens are taken care of. Thank you. My [18:08] Richard Chaucer: name is Richard Chaucer. I'm not representing the Bangor area being recovery. I'm representing the as a coalition. We have funds coming out there being disported. We have the opiate fund money. We have the homeless community money. I'm praying to God that when we disperse this homeless money that we have proper committee set up, and we have proper accountability. What I mean by accountability, that we have the resources in place, resources in place, when a person comes off the street or comes out of incarceration, or if a person comes out of homelessness, that we have the resources in place. What I mean by resources, we have a counselor, a counselor that's on the job, not just for mental health or behavioral, a counselor for whole health, a counselor that helps them with their financial needs and helps them with re reigniting back into society, back in the neighborhoods. I was I was assaulted today, cleaning, I was cleaning the parking lot of the Bangor area high school, the old Bangor downtown by the library. I was scraping a lot, and an unhoused individual came up to me, looked for a cigarette button. I said, no, sir, we don't do that. He goes, no. I said, no, we have children here. We have kids here, and we have seniors here. No, you can't do this. Those days are over. And he assaulted me. A police officer came and asked if I wanted to press charges. I said, no, don't press charges. Do something else about it. That needs to stop. And that all stimulates from that bathroom shelter we have across the street. We've kept no notice on it. We see two and three people going there at the same time, just using. We never ever see females going there or a female or a person who's like they're supposed to use it. That's what I'm also talking about, using this money like we're supposed to have. Have the proper counseling services, proper people that are educated. We want the medical model and the peer support model. Merge them together. There's not just one solution, and like I'm going to repeat again, I used to work at an organization by the Salvation Army. We started a program in the early 90s called PASS, Pick Up, Assess, Shelter, and Serve. We have the highest national per capita success rate than any program in the country, and we have a lot of private investors and people. You might want to look at it on the Internet. I gave it to Counselor Beck. Have a good day. [20:39] Laura Stowe: My name is Laura Stowe and my husband and I live in the Fairmount neighborhood here in Bangor. There was a brief conversation between Councilor Spallone and City Forester Ben Aruta last week at the Infrastructure Committee meeting that has prompted me to come in and see you today. I wanted to tell you what happened to my husband and I. We followed all of the right steps to have a tree looked at by Public Clickworks on August 22nd. I filled out a service request through the ClickFix platform on the City of Bangor website and included some photos of a tree that was overhanging our house. It was on city property that had a dead crown, had dead limbs at the top. Eleven weeks later, after that tree had been condemned by the city of Bangor for removal, a big limb from that tree fell on our house and damaged it. It damaged our new vinyl front porch that we had waited eight years to put on, and it damaged the seamless gutters that we had recently put on as well. I received a letter from the Maine Municipal Association, from Peter Tanis, Risk Management services saying that the city of Bangor because of the 1977 tort claims act we the city does not have any responsibility for the damage to our home and my husband and I are going to be out at least $1,000 if not more once the gutter damage has been assessed once the ice and snow have melted so I know that last week it was stated that there they try to get those trees that are marked for removal down Within 30 days and 11 weeks was too long in our case. I just needed to let you know what happened. Thank [22:31] Hillary Simmons: you everybody. [22:34] Susan Hawes: Else okay, seeing none, we'll move to the remote. Mr. Lance, are you there? Mr. [23:08] Public commenter (remote speaker): Lance, does my, yeah, can you hear me? Yes, go ahead. Okay, all right, thank you. Do I have three minutes? Three minutes, yes. Okay, last week, same public comment period, or two weeks ago, I registered properly and spoke remotely. My comments began at 25 22 on the video, at 27 24, two minutes into my speech, I was silenced. Even though I was calm, within time, and non-disruptive, I was cut off before I could make my complete criticism of a counselor's public record, which is my constitutionally protected right. The city's new public comment rules do not authorize censorship based on viewpoint. Labels such as out of order, dignity, or seriousness cannot be used to silence germain criticism of elected officials, including the gentleman who throws pens at people in the audience. Courts look to what triggered the cutoff. Here the trigger was the identity of the official being criticized, and that's when you cut me off. It was not my conduct, so that's your conduct versus content, and you're going to lose this one. I do have a demand in with your city now, and I have not received a response. You might want to look at that. Is a federal civil rights demand letter, that is something to be taken seriously. That matters because this public comment period is a limited public forum. In such a forum, the city may impose reasonable time, place, and manner, but it may not engage in viewpoint discrimination. That's settled. While look it up, Rosenberg versus University of Virginia. You got to get used to these terms. You really got to brush up on the first amendment. It's important to protect that for your citizens, all of them, the ones who love the chubby lesbians in your audience that read ai, and regular people who like white guys who fight for european rights. Supreme court has also been clear that offensive, unpopular political speech is protected. It's metall versus tam. Also you can't stop anybody and say that there was some kind of violent thing unless it's really realistic, has to be imminent. That's Brandenburg versus Ohio. Hecklers veto. When your crowd yells and you need to create order, you need to calm your crowd, not the speaker. The speakers on voice is protected. Anything he says, whether it's harsh or profane, also is covered. That's Mattel versus Sam Cohen versus, California McIntyre versus Ohio says anonymous political speech is allowed. So your signup period to speak is actually on shaky constitutional ground. You may want to look at that. You can't do that because it does chill freedom of speech. Look at the raised eyebrow from the gentleman throws pens and people he disagrees with. Well done gentlemen. Hey buddy, you know how to control yourself today? It looks like you're control yourself. Good job buddy. Try not to throw a pen at anybody in your audience you disagree with. We have another speaker who on actually there was manslaughter over protected speech, you know. So somebody said something they didn't like and a council member being deceased. Madam Chair, point of order. [26:02] Daniel Carson: Go ahead. The Crown, I'd like silence for the speaker. [26:08] Susan Hawes: Yes, please. If you're in the audience, hold your comments while we have people speaking. It is disruptive. Go ahead, Mr. Lance. [26:19] Public commenter (remote speaker): I would like my time, please. Tell me how much time I have left. I would like a credit for whatever it cost me there. Do I have 30 seconds? [26:31] Susan Hawes: 10 seconds, Mr. Lance. [26:33] Public commenter (remote speaker): You cut my whole thing. I'm allowed to say that your fat lesbians and homosexual guys in your crowd don't get to determine what free speech is. Neither do you boomer, and neither do you punk for throwing a pen, and that is my right to tell you that, and you guys better follow up on that demand letter. I'm taking that time, okay. [26:54] Susan Hawes: Mr. Ward can [27:01] Public commenter: you hear me? Vaguely, yes, but I heard you. Thank you guys for respecting free speech tonight. I have a little speech here to read and here it goes. Ladies in general, the Bangor City Council, good evening. I stand here before you today as a proud resident of this great city, urging us to take a firm stand in support of ICE, Immigration and Customs Enforcement, the brave men and women who protect our borders and our way of life. In a time when chaos threatens to overturn our communities, ICE is the shield we need against those who conspire to tear our nation apart. Let's not mince words. The radical leftists who protect against, who protest against ICE, often find themselves on the wrong side of the law. We've seen them get arrested time and time again, their tantrums leading to their own downfall, and yes, hilariously, sometimes they've even met fatal ends and confrontations they provoked. How ironic the very activists screaming about injustice end up as a cautionary tale. But enough mockery, this is serious. Banger must crack down on left-wing violence before it escalates. These agitators aren't peaceful protesters, they're instigators promoting attacks on our ICE heroes. We need stricter ordinances, more patrols, and zero tolerance for their riots and threats. Our city should be led by example, showing Maine and America that we won't battle anarchy. Moreover, I encourage every patriotistic who's here to stay vigilant, document, and save information on those leftists openly calling for violence against ICE. Share it responsibly with the authorities. It's our civic duty to expose the dangers lurking in our midst. Leave reviews on businesses that stand with illegals over American citizens, and keep calling the ICE tip line to report ICE sightings. I think right now with the cold we have plenty of ice to report on. At its core, this is about saving America, the heritage, our values, and the future we built. Our ancestors forged this through grit and sacrifice. We owe it to them and to our children to preserve it, and let's rally together, Bangor. Support ICE, crush left, and secure our existence. We must secure the existence of our people and a future for white children. Thank you. [28:59] Susan Hawes: Thank you, Mr. Hassler. Yes. [29:09] Public commenter: Good evening. Am I coming through all right? Yes, go ahead. Okay, great. Good evening, city council and fellow true Americans of Bangor. Listen closely, because what is happening here is no accident. It is deliberate and contrived. It is part of a larger design to destroy our people, our heritage, and our future. You have allowed someone who served prison time for taking a human life to sit in a position of authority over us, deciding the fate of our city, while you viciously silence the legitimate protests of the men and women whose ancestors built this nation with their blood and sweat. The deeper disease is your complicity in the systemic flooding of Maine with third-world immigrants. That is why I would like the council to take a much harsher stance on the immigration topic, and I would like them to stand with ICE. Many of these third-worlders are criminals, parasites, and destroyers. Crime rises in Bangor. Assaults, thefts, drugs, disorder, while the rest of the state sees declines. You resist full cooperation with federal authorities. You entertain measures that hamstring local enforcement. You stand by as the alien tide rises, bringing gangs, violence, and decay into our neighborhoods. This is not incompetence. This is treason against your own kind. And when the true heirs of America's founding stock, the white descendants of the pioneers, the builders, the warriors, dare to speak out against the genocide by replacement, what do you do? You gag them. You cut speakers off without cause. This is exactly – this is no different than pouring sand on the throat of the speakers here in America. It's – you're silencing your murdering liberty by gagging it to death. This is not the application of rules. This is suppression. This is a contemptuous disregard for Robert's Rules of Order. A blatant thought, a blatant flouting of open government principles, all to protect your unfit counselor and shield the alien invasion from criticism. Our race built everything worthwhile here. We created the prosperity, the order of the civilization. Now we're being erased deliberately by policies you endorse or fail to impose or fail to oppose. The muting of white voices is the mechanism. The importation of non-white criminals is the weapon. The time for polite pretense is over. We demand a public examination of any council members criminal history. No evasions, just the facts for the white public to judge. Immediate total cooperation with immigration enforcement. Work with ICE to deport every criminal alien. Tear down every sanctuary barrier and put our white community first. Immediate restoration of free speech. No more arbitrary muting. No selective censorship of white advocates full adherence to robert's rules of order for every speaker or face open meeting law challenges and voter wrath white people of bangor it is about this is about whether our race survives as a people with a future the enemies of our kind count on our apathy they are wrong awaken organize and resist the hour is late but not too late to this council remove the unfit enforce the laws that protect us restore our voice our history will record you as collaborators and the destruction of your own people. The future belongs to those who fight for it. Thank you. Thank you. Okay, we're [32:22] Susan Hawes: going to move on to madam [32:27] Lisa Goodwin: Clerk, the consent agenda please. Minister, Vancouver City Council regular meeting of January 12th, 2026. Infrastructure Committee meetings of November 17th, 2025 and December 15th, 2025. 2526-067, order appointing nominees to various boards, commissions and committees. 26-068, order awarding a contract to Carpenter Associates to provide project management services for Bangor International Airport. 26-069, order authorizing the city manager to apply for a one time grant from Adept Educational Institute in the amount of $5,000 for the purpose of promoting gambling prevention messages to parents and youth. 26-070, order authorizing the city managers to submit the watershed based plan from the Jet Punjab Walkstream dated March 2025 to the Main Department of Environmental Protection for acceptance. 26-071, order accepting the 2025 annual report from the Commission on Cultural Development. 26-072, order authorizing the city manager to execute a parking lease with Panquist for 15 parking spaces along Curb Street. [33:48] Susan Hawes: I have a motion. I move passage of consent agenda. Second. The consent agenda has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? Objection? Seeing none, the consent agenda will have passage. [34:07] Lisa Goodwin: Referrals to committee and first reading. Madam Clerk. 26-073, ordinance amending the code of the City of Bangor by changing the restrictions on short-term rentals in tiny home parks and manufactured home parks, first reading and referral to Planning Board on February 3rd, 2026. 26-074, resolve authorizing 450,000 from the stormwater unassigned funds account for construction of a stormwater trunk line for the Sanford Brook drainage area, first reading meeting. [34:43] Joseph Leonard: Is there a motion? I move these items be referred. [34:49] Susan Hawes: Second. It's been moved and seconded that these items be referred. Madam Chair, will there be comment or can there be comment? [34:58] Michael Beck: Yeah. I just want to make a comment regarding ordinance 26073, the short-term rental ordinance. I'm going to be in favor of moving it forward. However, one of the questions I hope staff can address during its referral before the Planning Board is regarding enforcement. From what I understand there, we have 37 currently registered and another 27 that are not registered but suspected. And I guess my concern is we've got a situation where the folks who went through the proper procedures and got the proper registration, everything, and paid the fees are being punished or, you know, while the ones that didn't register are more or less getting Rewarded with no enforcement, so I would like to hear more about how we're going to handle enforcement going forward before we widen the net, so to speak. Just want to make sure we get a handle on enforcement. [35:57] Joseph Leonard: Council owner, I actually just wanted to commend staff for the authorization of that we're referring to for the stormwater unassigned from our unassigned fund balance. It was a very creative approach, a very unique opportunity, and I just want to commend staff for the work of putting that forward. It was very much appreciated. Thank you. [36:25] Susan Hawes: Any other comments? If not, it has been moved and seconded to send this to referral. Is there any objection? Seeing none, the items will be referred. Unfinished business, Madam Clerk. [36:41] Lisa Goodwin: 26-050 order authorizing the city manager to negotiate with Sheridan Construction for construction manager services for the Bangor Central Kitchen project. [36:50] Susan Faloon: At 50 Cleveland Street, Council of Falloon, thank you Madam Clerk, Madam Chair. Point of clarification, I believe we still have outstanding questions on this item, and I'm just wondering if we should move this forward entirely. [37:11] Susan Hawes: Is that your desire to lay it over? Yes, so yes, so I move. [37:20] Susan Faloon: I move that we postpone voting on 26-050 because we do have outstanding. [37:29] Susan Hawes: Questions from some counselors, are you asking to postpone to the next meeting or a date certain? [37:34] Susan Faloon: The next regular council meeting, which is about two weeks, February 9th, yes please. [37:44] Susan Hawes: Okay, I'll second that. It has been moved and seconded that item 26-050 be postponed to the February 9th city council meeting. Council Leonard. [38:01] Joseph Leonard: I understand the questions that some counters may still have on this. I'm going to vote no on postponing. We have had a lot of time to have our questions answered, and I feel like now this is causing us to drag our feet on part of the planning process of seeing the fuller picture of this project. And I want to go ahead and get started with that so that we can have much better pointed questions at this project, because right now a lot of the questions that we have are referring questions to incomplete answers that we're not going to get unless we actually go forward with the actual planning of this project. So I'm going to vote no on postponing this. Wait, Council Fish, it was my. [38:59] Carolyn Fish: My understanding is, well, we had a lengthy Q&A at committee the other evening, and again, a lot of questions were asked that could not be answered because this resolve will allow further investigation in order to answer those questions. So this move is to basically give permission for additional information to be obtained. contained it's definitely not a decision that we're we're making to start building tomorrow but it's an initial and important decision in order to accumulate the information we need to better answer the questions we need to decide if we're going to move on that's my understanding [39:43] Wayne Mallar: okay Council Miller having already spent in excess of I believe what we were told a half a million dollars on this project it seems like economic development should have answers to the questions posed you know I don't like spending half a million dollars for nothing and if we don't have the answers now we're probably not going to have them I will be voting in favor of postponing I'm [40:17] Susan Hawes: sorry in favor of postponing okay how's our Dean of the half [40:26] Susan Deane: Half million that was spent, I believe, would be just thrown right out the window if we don't go forward with this order to figure out exactly where we're going and so the questions can be answered. I don't recall the exact amount, but I think it's a very small amount to add on to what we already spent in order to move forward so that we can answer the questions that we've all been asking. So I will not be in favor of postponing. Okay. Anybody else? [40:58] Susan Hawes: Okay, it has been doubted. Yes, Councilwoman. [41:01] Susan Faloon: I just wanted to make sure that we got as many questions answered as possible. I am happy to proceed with this project because I am very much in favor of it. So I just wanted to make that point. [41:14] Ann Krieg: Well, it was on me. [41:24] Susan Hawes: We have. Do you have a comment? yeah there is on the motion to postpone is this on the motion to postpone or on the item itself [41:42] Susan Deane: okay no i don't think that there should be public comment unless they're talking about the motion [41:47] Susan Hawes: to postpone okay the only comment will be on this motion to postpone so it was moved in second but it was doubted so we would need to have a roll call vote yes okay madam clerk roll call vote [42:04] Lisa Goodwin: please councillor beck no councillor carson no councillor dean no councillor falloon yes councillor fish no councillor leonard no councillor maller yes councillor hawes no two yes six no the [42:37] Susan Hawes: order to postpone does not have passage [42:49] Susan Deane: point of order talking to me now yes do we then go with the original [42:56] Susan Hawes: Yes, order we go back to the original order. Now we can have public. So we are now back to the original order 26050 and we will take comment here. Yeah, she's going to go ahead. No, she has to read the order again. It hasn't been read. She just okay. Point [43:24] Susan Faloon: of clarification, do I move, do I make a move on this and then read it either way? Okay, all right, okay, thank you. I move passage of item 26-050 authorizing the city manager to negotiate with Sheridan Construction for construction manager services for the Bangor Central Kitchen project at 50 Cleveland Street. This order will authorize the city manager and or her designee to negotiate a contract for construction manager services for the Bangor Central Kitchen project with Sheridan Construction to oversee the full execution of the project, including demolition, site work, and new building construction in accordance with the approved design and all federal and local requirements. This project will involve the demolition of the existing 18,167 square foot structure at 50 Cleveland Street,, formerly the Officers Club on the former Dow Air Force Base, and the construction of a new prefabricated building of approximately 18,000 square feet, designed to house a commercial kitchen incubator serving the greater Bangor region. The central kitchen will support shared use food production space, entrepreneurship, education and community events. It represents a key public investment in local food infrastructure and small business development. The city received seven proposals to the RFP, and after careful review of experience, capacity, and overall fit, staff's recommendation is to enter into negotiations with Sheridan Construction. Sheridan Construction has an outstanding reputation and proven track record as specialists of prefabricated metal buildings. This item was reviewed and recommended, actually, recommended for approval at the Business and Economic Development Committee meeting on December 15th, 2025. It was subsequently postponed. [45:27] Susan Deane: Chair, I would just point out that the motion hasn't been seconded. Not yet. [45:31] Susan Hawes: Second. I'm waiting. They're working on it. Okay. Item 26-050 has been moved and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Come on the project [45:55] Hillary Simmons: raised concerns that have not yet been fully addressed in a way that builds public trust. First, cost and sustainability. We've heard projections, but projections are just guarantees. What happens if construction costs rise, operating expenses exceed expectations, or grant funding disappears? Too often, projects begin with outside side money and end with local taxpayers carrying the burden year after year. Before moving forward, the public deserves a clear, realistic breakdown of long-term operating costs and who will be responsible for covering them. Second, transparency and oversight. Who will manage this facility? Who will be spending? Who will spending be monitored? What safeguards are in place to prevent costs, overruns or mission creeps? Bangor residents expect the same level of accountability from this project that we demand from every other city department. Third, impact on existing services. Bangor already has organizations providing food services effectively. We need to ask whether this project compliments those efforts or risks duplicating services, increasing bureaucracy and diverting limited resources away from programs that are already working. Finally, priorities. At a time when residents are dealing with rising taxes, housing costs, and basic infrastructure needs, the City must be cautious about taking on new long-term financial commitments. Good intentions do not override fiscal responsibility. This Council's job is not just to approve projects that sound good, but to ensure they are practical, sustainable, and fair to the people paying for them. I urge the council to slow this process down, demand clearer answers, ensure full transparency and put taxpayers' projects at the center of the protection at the center of this decision. Thank you. [47:55] Scott Party: my name is Scott Party and I'm a citizen of Bangor. I don't know if I have to say that again, but I did. I don't have any written comment about this, but I do really think that at this time when we're looking at how possible, according to an article that was read, losing up to two hundred thousand dollars a year, I don't know if the articles actual or accurate or what, but for the first five years is a tremendous amount of money to lose over five years and in this current crisis we're in with taxpayers being affected by everything that goes on I really would hope that you will not vote in favor of this project if we've already spent money we've already spent money let's cut our losses before they get worse thank you what [48:47] Susan Deane: Helps the [48:52] Susan Hawes: item has been moved and seconded. Is there any further discussion? Council [49:00] Michael Beck: Beck, this may be a question for staff. I believe this was clarified in the business economic development committee already, but the question I'd asked then was, you know, taxpayer dollars involved versus is this coming out of the enterprise fund? I just want to get clarification on that. Director [49:20] Susan Hawes: Krieg is on her way. [49:27] Ann Krieg: Good evening, Ann Krieg, director of community economic development. Yes, that's correct. This, the funds for operations as well as the construction are coming out of the enterprise fund. It's called the ED fund, economic development. [49:48] Wayne Mallar: Councilman, and before you leave, where does the money come from that goes into the economic development fund, and what would it be used for if you were not building a central kitchen? The city [50:04] Ann Krieg: As you know, the city has other properties that are leased and managed by my department. And so the funds that come from those leases as well as the management of those properties comes out of that enterprise fund. So there's a recent bond that had been paid off for a different project. And so when the previous city manager was creating the budget for this last year out of that enterprise fund, that was sort of replacing what we were spending in that bond would be spent on the bond for this project. Would [50:49] Wayne Mallar: it be fair to say, would it be fair to say if we didn't do this project that some of that money could be used to reduce the tax burden on the public? I'm not well versed on how, if [51:03] Ann Krieg: the legality of transferring funds out of an enterprise fund into the general fund, but we can find that out for you. Thank you. Any [51:14] Susan Hawes: other questions for Director Creek? Council Dean, thank [51:17] Susan Deane: you. I believe that at our last meeting the discussion of the 200,000 loss over five years is, was an old data that was being used, and that by authorizing this order for a construction manager we would perhaps have new data as to whether it might be profit or loss. Is that correct? That's [51:37] Ann Krieg: correct. We're updating the operations and management plan that was done in, I mean, that was done in 2022, so it's not that old, but it's, you know, the market changes all the time, so, we are working with a consultant to update all of that data for you. Thank you. As part of this, [52:04] Susan Hawes: any other questions? [52:09] Hillary Simmons: Does it give the availability to go back into the infrastructure in the city of Bangor to fix the sewer or water that we need to have fixed opposed to building a central kitchen that UMaine has one? My understanding is the why is building one. Why are we duplicating services when we have so much infrastructure within the city of Bangor that needs to be worked on? Yeah. [52:45] Ann Krieg: Again the enterprise fund is a fund that's specific for a specific purpose in this case for the properties that the city owns. I don't know if you can just transfer money out of that into the general fund but we'll find that out for you. Okay thank you we [53:08] Richard Chaucer: use that money to fix the jail. Our jail is crumbling. We have we can't use it to fix the jail. We're using band-aid. We're wasting money. Please fix that jail. Thank you. Okay so yes [53:26] Daniel Carson: roll call vote i mean whenever it's time [53:29] Susan Hawes: Yeah. Is there any further discussion? We're gonna do a roll call. Madam Clerk? [53:36] Lisa Goodwin: Councilor Beck? Yes. Councilor Carson? Yes. Councilor Deane? Yes. Councilor Faloon? Yes. Councilor Fish? Yes. Councilor Leonard? Yes. Councilor Malheur? [53:49] Wayne Mallar: No. Councilor Haas? No. [53:53] Lisa Goodwin: no six yes two no same thing okay [54:02] Jeffrey Forney: the [54:05] Susan Hawes: item 26-050 does have passage next [54:15] Lisa Goodwin: item 26-058 ordinance amending the land development code section 165-13 definitions to remove ohio street and state street from the minor arterial street definition and add ohio street to the major arterial definition. Councillor Carson. Thank you Madam Clerk. This ordinance [54:35] Daniel Carson: will amend the land development code section 165-13 definitions to remove Ohio Street from the minor arterial street definition and add Ohio Street to the major arterial definition. The land development code currently defines certain streets as either major or minor arterial streets. The criteria for major arterials are that they are highways of regional significance with an at with average annual daily traffic in excess of 10 000 vehicles and containing more than two lanes in at least some sections ohio state street and state street are included as minor arterials even though they meet some or all of the criteria of major arterials state street appears to be erroneously included as a minor arterial since it is also listed as a major arterial not being listed as a major Arterial impacts the land uses that can be developed on Ohio Street. Since quite a few uses are limited to major arterials, these land uses typically make sense on Ohio but are currently prohibited from being there. These discrepancies present a barrier for future development and don't align with the city's comprehensive plan. This amendment would remove Ohio Street and State Street from the minor arterial category and add Ohio Street to the major arterial category. Planning Board meeting on January 6 2026 this item was reviewed and recommended ought not to pass by a vote of four in favor and three against at the planning board meeting on january 6th 2026 madam chair i move council ordinance 26058 second okay [56:11] Susan Hawes: Okay. 26-058 has been moved and seconded. Is there any discussion? [56:20] Carolyn Fish: Councilor Fish. Am I confused or did we discuss this that we did not want to pass this as written because we didn't want to include Ohio Street? [56:36] Susan Hawes: We did discuss that. Councilor Carson. Yes. [56:42] Daniel Carson: In addition to the Planning Board, recommendation of the Business and Economic, Business and Economic Development Committee [56:51] Susan Hawes: meeting was ought not to pass. I understand there may be some residents here that would like to speak on this item. Now would be the time. Thank [57:18] Jeffrey Forney: you. Jeffrey Forney. I'm a resident of Bangor and I live on Ohio Street. I did submit public comment, written comment on January 5, 2026. I won't go over all the details of that, but I just did want to highlight some of the basic points that I think are dispositive of the issue. The handout that I gave you is an extract, page one of 2022 Comprehensive Plan, page 31, which shows Ohio Street among other streets and, more importantly, the growth boundary, and you can see as I've highlighted on the map, Ohio Street cuts through the middle of that map, and a good portion of Ohio Street under the current Comprehensive Plan is outside the growth boundary. That is pertinent to this issue before the board today, but generally I have two main issues with this proposal which I think are flawed. First, which should be dispositive of the issue, Ohio Street currently as a matter of fact does not meet the definition of major arterial. As Council Person Carson pointed out, there are two conditions that are necessary to meet that definition. Is a traffic volume requirement and there's a more than two lane requirement. If you flip to the second page which Is Exhibit B from my January 5th submission. It's a count book extract from the Department of Transportation's most recent traffic volume study, and it lists the annual average daily traffic volume, most pertinently for Ohio Street. And if you'll see the numbers listed on the right, all of those numbers, even for the most trafficked part of Ohio Street at Griffin Road, are below the 10,000 count threshold to meet that definition of major arterial. And you can also see that some of the least traffic portions, 1,770 at Davis Road, or well below that 10,000 volume. The last page, if you'll turn to that, was Exhibit B to my submission, which shows that at least at Davis Road, traffic volume counts have gone down significantly since the last Department of Transportation traffic volume study that was done. That issue alone actually should simply is should make it very easy for the council to simply vote down this recommendation, because as a matter of fact, Ohio Street just does not meet one of those necessary conditions. It also doesn't meet the second condition, which is more than two lanes. And I believe there is a response in the public comments from staff. Miss Colette on December 29 responded to Jenny Coleman. Anyway, I appreciate if the council would vote to reject this proposal. Thank you. [1:00:55] Wayne Mallar: Good evening, my name is Joe Pratt. I'm a resident of Bangor. The recommendation from the Planning Board and from the Business and Economic Development Committee is that this change ought not pass. During the public comment portion of the Planning Board meeting, no one spoke to support this change. Every speaker rose to oppose it. And all the public input presented to the Planning Board, presented to the Business and Economic Development Committee, and presented to the City Council tonight, nobody has spoken in favor of this change. So why the opposition? We just heard that Ohio Street does not meet the definition of a major arterial street. It does not have daily traffic volume in excess of 10,000 vehicles. It also only has two lanes from downtown to the Glenburn line. There is only two travel lanes, so there again, it doesn't meet the definition of a major arterial street. Also in the December 18 letter to residents, there was a list of 11 uses that the letter described as not allowed on the entirety of Ohio Street. It went on to say that the proposed change would introduce new uses to Ohio Street. What new uses? Currently, there are more than 40 examples of existing uses that have been in place for years that are already on Ohio Street without being a major arterial street. What's more, there is already an existing process in place to approve future development and new uses. For years, the Planning Board and the City Council have followed this existing process, review and approval process, to approve many of these uses that are already on Ohio Street. Also, Union Street, Broadway, and Essex Street, all of which parallel Ohio Street, are all major arterial streets. There are miles of undeveloped land on those streets, and if there are traffic issues on those streets, then improvements on those streets ought to be made. We shouldn't change Ohio Street in order to make it a more attractive shortcut to traffic on those existing major arterial streets. Finally, the change would, in many people's view, destroy the little bit of residential feel that still exists on Ohio Street. Does the council wish to push out the existing residential uses to make room for more strip malls? We urge that you vote against this change. [1:04:10] Sadie Francis: Good evening. Good evening. Thanks for the opportunity to speak for hearing us out. My name is Sadie Francis, and I'm a resident of Ohio Street in Bangor. We, the residents of Ohio Street, have been grappling with this issue now for over a month since we received notice of this proposal around Christmas Eve. I ask that you bring resolution to this issue tonight by voting to reject the proposed ordinance. As discussed in length already, we've all contacted you all, Ohio Street does not meet the definition of a major or terror road as outlined in the code and contradicts the priorities outlined in the comprehensive plan. The issue should be as simple as that. It's not even close to meeting the definition and not to be dramatic, but what's the point of having a city code and comprehensive plan if they're just going to be ignored at times like this? In addition, no one seems to have asked for this, no potential development project seems to have been proposed, and there seems to be no petitions for redevelopment or expansion projects by current grandfathered legally non-compliant property owners. So what is this change for? Lastly, Ohio Street residents are in solidarity in our opposition to this, which will strip our narrow residential street, a good third of which is beyond the growth boundary, of the protections afforded by minor arterial. The planning board voted to reject the proposed ordinance, and I hope that you vote accordingly. Thank you once again for your consideration. [1:05:45] Wayne Mallar: Thank you. Good evening. My name is Paul Pasquin. I'm a Bangor resident, and I'm not gonna to repeat what you've already heard. I'm a 45-year homeowner, resident taxpayer in the city of Bangor. The first 30 years we lived in town pretty close to the downtown area. 15 years ago, when our children were grown and we were looking towards retirement, making plans, we decided to relocate to an area that was less densely populated, quiet, maybe where we could have a little land, and we ended up on outer Ohio Street that met all those definitions. Basically, that's what's in the comprehensive plan, and I can tell you that on the small road that we live on there are 11 homes. Six of them are occupied by people that are retired. I think it's important that the city have areas like that for people, that you have areas that can accommodate people maybe at different stages of life and with different lifestyles. I think this, oppose this proposal that's out here would jeopardize that for the area that I'm in, and I strongly oppose it. Thank you. Okay. [1:07:22] Susan Hawes: I'm [1:07:29] Tammy Boyle: Tammy Boyle, and I'm co-owner of my father's family farm on outer Ohio Street, and my sister and I both oppose this change. And I won't rehash what everybody else has already said, because we've done it once, we've done it twice, and now we're doing it for number four. So thank you for hearing us and have a great night. Thank you. [1:07:57] Susan Hawes: Okay. Seeing no one else approach, we did have a motion and a second on this there, Council Lander. [1:08:09] Joseph Leonard: So I am going to be voting no on this, and just like the speakers have said, I'm going to reiterate, I'm not going to rehash everything that they've said. The residents of Ohio Street have done phenomenal homework, and I do appreciate the research that has gone into that, and I don't mean to be a micro manager as well. I do feel bad that State Street, that the definition change of it's as an arterial is getting pushed to the right, unfortunately. And I, you know, I don't mean, we will probably avoid this in the future if we separate streets. And I know Plain House Circuit Collette is here. If you want to speak on that, you totally can. But it's all right if you don't need to. [1:09:09] Laura Stowe: Turning on. OK, just real briefly. We just thought it made sense to combine them both because they both related to the same thing, changing major street definitions. But if you want to separate them out, you know, we can bring back another order later just to focus on State Street generally. We don't have things change in process because we have to re-notify, so we will just have to come back with a whole new order so. [1:09:32] Carolyn Fish: Roger, thank you so much, Council Fish. I also would like to see in the future maybe State Street come back. I think it's a completely different scenario, and I also will be voting no on this Ohio Street. To me, I think I mentioned the other night, being in real estate's always been and always thought of as a residential street, and I just, I'm, I'm gonna vote no for this. [1:10:04] Susan Faloon: Any other comments? Council Flu, I'm going to vote no too, and I appreciate that so many people showed up not just tonight but during our business and economic development committee meeting, because I think that we didn't realize how much this was going to impact so many people. And like, I know for me personally, I want to make a decision based on what's going to do the greater good, and I think in this case voting no is going to do the greater good, because it's going to negatively impact more people. Than it's going to positively impact, in my opinion. So I think that's just a perfect example of why it's really good to show up and voice your concerns about things. Thank you. Any. [1:10:58] Susan Hawes: Other comments? Seeing none, this is an ordinance, we'll do a roll. [1:11:02] Lisa Goodwin: call vote madam clerk councillor Beck no that's what Carson no that's Ladeen no that's left loom now that's a little fish no councillor Leonard no that's the mailer no council haas no zero yes eight no ordinance [1:11:24] Susan Hawes: 26 S 0 5 8 has passage in the know. That's a little backwards. How would you like that stated? The vote failed. Well, I kind of liked 26-058 ordinance has failed. There we go. [1:11:51] Lisa Goodwin: New business, Madam Clerk. Public hearing, application for special amusement license renewal of Bangor Lodge number 244 BPO Elks doing business as Bangor Lodge number 244 BPO Elks, 108 Odlin Road. Councilor Beck. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Madam Chair, I move we open the. [1:12:10] Michael Beck: Public hearing for application for a special amusement license renewal of Bangor Lodge number 244 BPO Elks doing business as Bangor Lodge number 244 BPO Elks, 108 Odlin Road. Second. [1:12:23] Susan Hawes: Second. It has been moved and seconded. The public hearing will be open. [1:12:35] Michael Beck: Madam Chair, see no one approach. I move we close the public hearing. Second. The. [Susan Hawes: Public hearing has.] closed madam chair i move passage of the application for a special amusement license renewal of bangor lodge to number 244 bpo elks doing business as bangor lodge number 244 bpo oelks 108 island road second it's [1:13:01] Susan Hawes: been moved and seconded the application for special amusement license renewal of bengal lodge 244 has passage and that brings us to the end of the agenda any staff comments closing comments boy how quiet they got how [1:13:44] Richard Chaucer: these funds are supposed to be disputed this from this first, sir. What is that? What [1:13:49] Susan Hawes: you're talking about? No, this is not the time for public comment. This is, okay, at the, you're off subject. At the end of, at the end of the meeting, we typically will ask our staff if there are any comments, closing comments, and then we adjourn after that. So you as well, Councillor Haas, if I might say a few words. You may. I just want to acknowledge the truly terrible plane crash that occurred at our airport on Sunday evening. We now know that there were six passengers and crew members on that flight who all tragically perished, and the city's sending our thoughts and support to the family, friends, and community members impacted by the death of their loved ones. We are also sending our support to our airport staff, fire department staff, police department staff, the National Guard, and all of the other first responders from the surrounding community who responded to that scene and were undoubtedly struggling with the weight of what happened on Sunday here at our airport. We appreciate them and we thank them for their service. Thank you for that, City Manager. No other staff comments? Okay, we'll start down here. Council Carson. I just want to echo the [1:15:21] Daniel Carson: City Manager's remarks and lift up Director Saavedra and the airport staff, as well as the police, fire, EMS, Army National Guard, and folks who responded very quickly to that, and my thoughts are with those who lost their lives and their families. Good night, Bangor. Thank [1:15:40] Michael Beck: you, Council Beck. I echo all those sentiments. In fact, the matter, this is a tragedy that's never befallen the Bangor International Airport, and a lot of people got thrust into something that, you know, I don't know how I would handle it. You know, the fact that, you know, within a minute of the tragedy, you know, we had first responders rushing headlong into this, into a situation that it would take me a lifetime to forget. Hero's work has been done, and I just really want to lift up everybody who is involved in responding to this, and also to Director Saavedra. For these past few days, as the world has been waiting for news, he has been the face of Bangor and spoken wonderfully throughout this and provide as much information as he could, but really represented the city well. And I am grateful both to the director and to everyone who has been struggling with this. I see you and I appreciate you. And please, you know, take advantage of all the resources available with counseling, that you name it, that is offered to you, because you're important and we love you. And we care about you. And again, I'm very grateful to all of you. [1:16:57] Susan Deane: Council Dean, I'm sure we will all be echoing the same sentiments, and thank you for everything you've you've said tonight. My heart goes out to all of the family members. This is a horrible tragedy, and I feel for everyone involved, including those in Bangor that had to also deal with the aftermath. But I do feel for the families of these individuals, and I hope they know that we truly care about them and we're doing the best we can to help in every way. On a happier note, I do want to give a shout out to the Bangor High speech and debate teams. On Saturday they won the first place in both speech and debate, so they are state champions, and I think we should be very proud of our young people, and I hope that we continue in this vein and continue with our excellent education in Bangor. And with that I will say good night Bangor. Very nice, Council Lender, I [1:17:55] Joseph Leonard: do also want to echo the comments regarding Director Savadra and our amazing staff who responded to the horrible tragedy that befell those six lives on the runway. And we're probably not going to get any meaningful answers for a year, two years out. And that's unfortunate, but I'm very proud of our staff for being heroic and admirable during these tragic times. times and I was debating whether talking about this as well, just because it's it does affect Bangor, but it is more so a national topic. But after some of our Nazi speakers decide to bring this up, I feel like I have no choice but to bring this up. I have had multiple Bangor citizens come to me who are either they are here legally with their green cards. One of my friends is a Canadian who is a professor at the University of Maine who did not feel safe renewing his driver's license. I have multiple friends who have come to me worried about themselves, their loved ones, regarding the immigration customs enforcement, as that department continues to violate all of our constitutional rights. And I have a lot more to say on this subject because it's very near and dear to me, but things are getting crazy. Things are getting out of control. We're in a constitutional crisis at the national level, and I do want us as a council to again consider an ordinance regarding ICE. But I 'm going to suggest one that actually has teeth this time. These people are an enemy to the American people, and it's not a very good look when you have Nazis advocating for you. I'm gonna stop before I get more angry, but [1:20:34] Carolyn Fish: have a good night everyone. That's a fish. Well, I'm gonna keep my political opinions at bay, and because my thoughts and heart are with the families and those that are at the airport and have been at the airport, our team that I'm incredibly proud of and that I have not been able to stop thinking about. You know, Jose has been the face of Bangor, and I've been very proud. I can't imagine the stress that he and our other first responders are going through, and I want to give them all my attention and support that I can. And the families that lost their loved ones, I think that's where my attention is. And for the citizens of Bangor and Bangor as a whole, I'm very proud of how we've handled this. And I hope we never have to experience another tragedy like this again. On a positive note, I have greatly enjoyed noticing that daylight days are getting longer. With that, good night. [1:21:38] Wayne Mallar: Council Meller, thank you. I also agree with what's been said as far as the tragic accident at the local airport, but you know, we're strong and we'll get through it, and we have to think positively about what's going to happen in the future. And with that, good evening. Councilor, I also want [1:22:05] Susan Faloon: to express my gratitude to the emergency responders, the airport staff, the Army Guard, the National Guard, and my heartfelt sympathy to the families of their loved ones who perished in the plane crash. I also want to acknowledge a rally that took place Sunday here in Bangor in honor of Alex Preddy. It was to remember a life lost and to affirm that people matter more than politics or power. I just want to say that I am fully committed to supporting anti-ice efforts in the city of Bangor. You know, unless they truly are violent criminals, and of course that's different. What we're seeing nationally isn't normal. I don't think that we can pretend that this is happening somewhere else anymore, because it is happening in Maine. It's not acceptable. It's not who we should be. Fear-based enforcement cruelty disguised as policy, and the erosion of basic human dignity have absolutely no place in our community. What is happening in this country isn't okay, and I believe that Bangor can and must stand for compassion, accountability, and the rule of law. Have a good night, Bangor. Thank you. Okay. [1:23:26] Susan Hawes: Okay. Well, thank you all for attending and your attention. I think you've heard a lot. A lot of people spoke. So with that.