Cape Elizabeth Council Weighs Universal Property Tax Relief Plan

[0:20] Councilor Penny Jordan: Let's see how we do. There it is. [0:27] Speaker B (unidentified): All right. [0:28] Council Chair (presiding officer): Welcome to the Town Council Workshop Meeting on Monday, October 5th, 2026. At this time, we are going to have a discussion led by Councillor Jordan with regard to a possible universal property tax relief program. And we're going to be able to get her thinking behind this. And I like to set the stage a little bit. So this is her moment to talk to us about this possibility, give us her thinking behind it, and bring us right along. And then kind of just get a sense of is this something that we even want to pursue because this was a lot of work. And so to keep investing work, I think she would like to hear from the council. Please do go for it, look into this, bring it back to us, or no, we're not. So that's where we're at. I'm going to turn it over to Penny. Great, thank you. [1:35] Councilor Penny Jordan: Elizabeth, yes, really what I wanted to present here tonight is, I'm gonna look over there and look over there. Jonathan, why are you sitting over there? I'm just kidding. What I really wanted to do is explain kind of the concept that I'm putting forward about. This is really enhancing the existing senior tax relief program, so you can almost think of it as an expansion. And as Elizabeth stated, I'm, I'm really just tonight looking for feedback and directionally if we think this is where we would like to, like to go or continue to pursue, and what ideas and thoughts or concerns that you might have. And I did, you know, a lot of work looking across towns and looking at our existing program, and really what we address here is, as we know, there's an affordability issue not only in Cape Elizabeth but in towns across the state of Maine and across the country. So I think what many communities are dealing with is are the challenges, how do we help to not price our citizens out of their homes, and that's what I, continually think about. And so basically as I put this together, you can move the slide, basically as I put this together though, that's really what was in the forefront, front of my mind. And as I go through this, I can explain it more. But I wanted to line up first for people who don't really have the current senior tax relief program in front of them. This is what we have today, and it's 65 years or older. The property owner is 10 years or more at the application date, the people have to have the homestead exemption. And then at this point the cap from an income perspective is $70,000 or less and the exceeding the taxes exceeding 5% of the federal adjusted gross income. So, some of this is going to sound similar as we work through this, and also the current tax relief program includes renters at 18% of their annual income, annual rent, sorry, annual rent. And the other thing is that as we look at the benefit bands, that's something else that within the program that I'm presenting, we will be looking at. Just as some background, the current senior tax relief program is budgeted at $300,000. And at this point in 2026, there was $253,000 worth of benefits. Next page, sir. So here are the reasons why I really hope that we can continue to pursue this and really look at more of a universal program. And I call it universal because it touches all ages. The fact that age isn't the only consideration when we look at tax program, that we recognize that affordability and affordability around housing isn't just about age, it also could be disabilities or early retirees or any number of other things that I listed on this page. Long time home owners with modest incomes that their house is now valued at a rate that is more than really what they can afford. Now this plan does not exclude the seniors. Seniors are still included in this. And the key is it really shifts eligibility from age to a combination of income and housing assessed housing value. Next page. So how I started out is I started looking at what are some of the levers around taxes and what is it if we look at a number of income adjusted gross incomes and initially, I looked at it from $30,000 all the way up to $95,000. And looked at if you take a 5% tax as a percentage of the adjusted gross income, what is it that is the ideal tax? And then where's the tipping point? So, for example, if you have a person at a $30,000 adjusted gross income, really there, if you take 5%, that true affordability factor is $1,500. But if you look at what it actually was, or actually is, that their taxes at a, where is it? At 750,000 is closer to 13.33% of their income, adjusted gross income, so that's quite a wide. So, I started looking at how do we take and develop a program that really considers house value and income. And the other thing that I thought was key is that state programs need to have been accessed. So, for home owners, they would need to have access to homestead exemption. For renters and home owners, they would have had to access the property tax fairness credit. Not everybody who falls within this program would qualify for that, but they have to have applied for it. So that brings into that, okay, if this is your tax burden, in if your taxes are at $44,500, and then what you really can afford is $1,500, and you start taking, reducing that by applying state programs, then you get down to another figure that says here's what is left. And so what is it that we can as a town attempt to offset? And so throughout my whole model as I worked through this is that I used five percent, that's the same percentage we use today with our senior tax program. So Basically, I wanted to work to understand the impact of property taxes to various income brackets. I then looked at how the state programs could be applied, and then I worked to move away from age. After I put together this fancy model, I gave Jamie Garvin a call at GPCOG and he and Paul Johnson there helped create another set of pretty elaborate models. I'm not going to go into those models because then we will die from concept and start just dealing with numbers. So this is about buy-in to a concept and whether we want to continue to pursue what a program that does not consider age as a determining factor as entry into the program as well as assess median house value and see in the end what that may look like for the town. So, not to be redundant, but next page, the design components are about owner occupied primary residence 10 years or more. That's consistent with our senior tax relief program. No wage restriction, homestead exemption, which I already talked about, also having to apply for the property tax fairness credit. Household income, what I settled on and I'm putting forward is 75,000 as the adjusted gross income that we would work with. And all the modeling that we did was based on a home value, assessed home value of 750,000. It's somewhat close to our assessed median, but basically that's what I used for all of the modeling purposes. And then I tiered a fixed dollar to benefits, but that's something that this is the place where I think we can do some work to create, rather than just a fixed dollar amount that would be the benefit we could look at applying percentages or we could look at having a set budgeted dollar amount that we want to spread across the applicants any number of things. So there's a lot of different ways we could price the benefits, but I just use something simple out of the chute. And then, of course, the 5% property tax to income ratio. So on that next page, the proposed program for property owners would be, as I've stated, they'd have to have primary residence for 10 years or greater. Homestead exemption is required. They would have to apply for the property tax fairness credit. In some instances for seniors, they can get up to $2,000 for this program. For others, they can get upwards of $1,000, but they have to have qualified for the program. Capping at $75,000 of adjusted gross income, and the home value cap at Cape Elizabeth's median assessed home value. Then, as I stated, we could do fixed benefit through these income bands, or I can work with Paul again at GPCOG and come up with some other approaches to how the benefits would be calculated. But at a gross level, one of the things is less than $35,000 would be like $1,800, then $1,000 for the $35,000 to $55,000, and then you can see for $55,000 to $75,000, maybe $500. put $500. The current low end of benefit at the low end of the band is $750 for the senior tax relief program. But as I stated, this is concept at this point in time and the details can be worked out. Next page. Then we've got renter considerations. So then again,, no age restriction. The renter primary residence for 10 years or greater, that's an area we can kind of talk about, but I think we want consistency across homeowners and renters. Homestead exemption doesn't apply. The state really probably have to have applied for the property tax fairness credit. And the formula that I am proposing to determine the rent that kind of constitutes taxes. Is the same formula that is used in the property tax fairness credit. Again, it'd be $75,000. So you'd calculate 15% of your annualized rent would be considered your property taxes. and then you would do the same type of test where does it fall as a percentage of your adjusted grossing income and then we can look at what the benefit structure would be so then so then so then on the next page oh I was wondering how bright this would be on this. That's really nice. I like that. Cool. Okay. So as I stated, I developed this working with some people over at GPCOG. And when we developed the models, of course, we looked at these different types of data, whether it be public data or data that was census, and then we also looked at data from our existing programs. And so we looked across the demographic. The model that we developed at the low end, considering $75,000 adjusted gross income and the $750,000 house, at the low end was $298,000. And then, really from a planning perspective, we looked at it could be at $492,000 would be what the town would need to budget for this program. I will say that it could be upwards of 700,000 to 800,000. That's when I started going, do we want a cap? And so if we start looking at what that cap might look like, and we could model out different scenarios and see how that would work, or we could start playing relying on some other types of approaches to determine benefit amounts. So I think what this does, and from my perspective, is that it really focuses on helping people who really have a lot of pressure from a property tax perspective. And so if we look at what level of tax burden people might have, and we know that it's not just Cape Elizabeth that has this challenge, I think this is an easier policy to really defend as an approach because it considers income and home value, and we can create a benefit that is predictable from a town budget perspective. And I think it demonstrates that providing targeted relief to residents and homeowners whose current incomes are out of alignment with their property tax burden. That we're committed to doing that. And I think we as a town need to continue to look at ways to offset some of that burden. And we do know that the costs is what's really going to be a concern. And I know that we don't want to triple what it is, but we're at 300,000 now budgeted, could we add another 200,000 and that was what, five cents? I think that's what we came up with, something like that. Which we can model out and then I think the public perception is another one we really need to look at, and because, and I'm not speaking for everybody, but I know that there's often a concern out there that a town that's valued from a property perspective at the level that Cape Elizabeth is, that there aren't these challenges, and there are. One of the things that concerns me, and this is something that as we look at what the benefit structure is and what the qualifications are, putting together the administrative oversight and making it as straightforward and easy to manage as possible for our assessor. And that the fixed home value cap needs to change. So that's one of the things that Pat and Elizabeth and I talked about, that rather than always be at 750, that we would use as the median assessed value happens, that 's what would be kind of the trigger from a property value perspective. So that's it in a nutshell and so my question is thoughts, concerns, what are some places you think it could be tweaked and renters formula and benefits and I think that I believe in the law they have to be dealt with in the same way so I don't think we have much wiggle room there, but I just wanted to put that on there in case there was some discussion around that. In the law it does state you have to consider renters so that's something that we would have to do. Questions, concerns, comments, thoughts, does it make sense? [22:14] Speaker E (unidentified): Jonathan. So thank you Penny, this is a lot of work well done. But Caitlin just got here so can you start again? So you said that the law requires relief for renters that's the only thing that's kind of like and I understand and I'm not challenging the law but I'm just trying to wonder like how that would work because this is property [22:37] Councilor Penny Jordan: tax relief right? Yeah basically what they do is and we have it in our current ordinance They basically take the annual rent and consider 15% of that as equating to property tax. And so then you just work on it from there, then it's the same thing. You do the 5% of the adjusted gross income and it all flows the same way. [23:11] Speaker F (unidentified): Got it. Okay. A quick question to follow up, John. So, Penny, is the idea that the renter and the owner would both get property tax relief? [23:23] Councilor Penny Jordan: You know, I have thought about that. And so as I consider it, that is one of the questions that needs to be answered. But I think the way that the law is written, they're assuming that won't happen. But there is likelihood that you could get tax relief twice on the same [Speaker F (unidentified): property right oh] it's got to be the primary residence the property owner [23:54] Speaker F (unidentified): would have to live yeah but let's say the property owner has a duplex right he lives in or she lives in one side rents out the other is there relief for the overall house for the owner and then again for the renter yep [24:10] Speaker E (unidentified): Well, if the duplex was under $750,000. [24:15] Councilor Penny Jordan: Yeah, $750,000 it was. [24:18] Speaker F (unidentified): But if it's over, let's say it's $850,000, it doesn't qualify. [24:25] Councilor Penny Jordan: This is entirely out of house value. [24:28] Speaker F (unidentified): If it's anything over $750,000, it doesn't apply at all. Okay. [24:37] Council Chair (presiding officer): Which I will say was something that I was really happy to see, and I appreciate the broader approach. I think I learned that some 80, 83, it was an 80 number. 83, I think, was the number. Percent of our current qualifiers in town fall within that scope, which means that we have still some work to do, in my opinion. I think it should be more than just your income, Because if you're sitting on some pretty serious equity, I think you should avail yourself of your options. [Councilor Penny Jordan: It is 83%.] So right now, that's pretty good. But whatever we do and wherever we go, I appreciate and would like to pursue, at the very least, step one is updating the qualifications. [25:46] Speaker F (unidentified): I have a couple of thoughts, and Penny, thank you for this work, you and I have talked about this before. I'm glad we were able to increase our budget to $300,000. A couple of thoughts come up for me, one is obviously that for every penny or dollar of relief we provide we either reduce our budget in another line or it gets passed on to somebody else in town so I like the idea of extinguishing available rights for relief using the homestead exemption and the property tax right But there's another, and I know when this issue came up before, there were some comments by people that if people couldn't afford it, they should sell their home or get a reverse mortgage. And I don't think we should be expecting people to do that. I think that is unfair and inappropriate. But there is another state program that you did not list. And at some point, either tonight or another point, I'd like to talk about whether or not that access to that program should be included in our plan. And the second thing that comes up for me is I'm a little bit concerned that this proposal actually reduces the benefit that we are currently providing to seniors. And I guess you've modeled out the numbers, but you have a projection for you could cover everyone in this town for only an increase of $200,000? [27:42] Councilor Penny Jordan: No. Oh. It could go as high. That's where additional, looking at additional options for determining benefits, because it could go as high as 700,000, and we know that 's untenable. [28:04] Speaker F (unidentified): So 700,000 on top of the three or including the three? Including the three. So an additional 400? Yeah. Yeah, I mean, I'd like to pursue this. I have the concerns that I just, the concerns that I just. [28:24] Councilor Penny Jordan: In regard to the program that you're talking about that really, it's really getting a tax deferral. Yes. That's the one you're referring to. [28:35] Speaker F (unidentified): Yes, and any other remedy that might be available. I think there should be an exhaustion of all available remedies up to selling your house or getting a reverse mortgage. Mortgage, but I think all of the available remedies should be looked at for exhaustion before we rely on town tax funds too. [29:04] Councilor Penny Jordan: I just want to throw out some food for thought, that if you look at the tax deferral program, it's not that much different than a reverse mortgage. [29:17] Speaker F (unidentified): It's not that much different than what, Penny? [29:19] Councilor Penny Jordan: A reverse mortgage it's the same concept well there [29:26] Speaker F (unidentified): There are some similarities and some differences yeah I mean they both say that you're going to pay your taxes and so your heirs do not get this money right and I think that it's a fair question to talk about whether or not the town taxpayers should pay for that, or the heirs? I mean, I think that's a fair question. [29:53] Councilor Penny Jordan: I think it is a fair question, and I'll just throw out that at what point do we... I thought about the tax deferral program, and that's really saying that you're forcing people to do estate planning. Planning, and is that what a program such as this should do? So just a question. [30:21] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, I mean, something to talk about later. We don't wanna hash that out now, I don't think, but yeah, so that's what comes up for me. And you said that it's owner-occupied primary residence, so that would exclude any second homes? [30:36] Councilor Penny Jordan: It has to be your primary residence. That's where you get your homestead exemption. [30:41] Speaker F (unidentified): And where you pay your property, where you pay your income taxes if you have them. Come [30:52] Councilor Penny Jordan: On, you got more questions than that. [30:55] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, I mean, there are things that need to be developed and we need the answers for, but I'm also looking at the situation where somebody has a four unit home. And they live in one of them and rent out three, and that also raises the question, and how many tax relief checks does the town send out I [31:24] Councilor Penny Jordan: Think that's a good question [31:27] Speaker E (unidentified): And also on that point too, we probably want to clarify it's the primary residence, or it's the value of the entire dwelling or residence, because if you have a duplex, technically those might count as two different residences, or a four unit. So we'd want to probably clarify that if it is owner occupied, it's the entire value of the whole building, as opposed to if you have a building that is 750,000 but it's two units. Does that mean each unit's only valued at 350,000 or something like that? So I just want to, yeah. [32:07] Councilor Penny Jordan: My initial answer would be no, it would be the house. [32:12] Speaker E (unidentified): I do too, but I just... [32:15] Councilor Penny Jordan: But it's a good question, a good answer. [32:17] Council Chair (presiding officer): It would have to be clear. Andrew, [32:23] Councilor Penny Jordan: you had a question. Yeah, well, one, Penny, this is really great. Thanks for putting a serious amount of effort into this. I definitely agree that we should not waver on the age restriction. We should, we should get rid of the age restriction, absolutely. And I like what you've done with where you've increased the benefit for like the lower band and slightly decreased the benefit for the upper band. I would, I would though with the caveat, are you doing the modeling or are you going to get Jamie to do the modeling? What are you going to get GB COG to do the modeling for you or are you going to do it all by yourself? Oh, I work with them, I modeled, I might, I modeled out a whole bunch of stuff for us to all start with at GPCog, but I'll be working with them on that. Okay, because I didn't want to suddenly throw something horrible in your lap. I would be really curious to see a model based on an increase in our budget to 500,000 and I would be interested to see a model based on 700, not that I'm super interested in going that high, but I'd like to see it. Also I would be very curious to see a model based on, because you mentioned in here allocation of percent based on highest need, because Stephanie got me thinking about other odd mathematical possibilities you could have somebody that's in that lower than 35,000 band who has a, what, a really high priced property close to the 750,000 line and they'll get 1800, but another person is, you know, perhaps way up in the band towards 75 and has the exact same value property and they're only going to get 500. And I understand that they have a higher gross income, but maybe there's other mitigating factors for that person. So I, you know, just based on what I've seen when folks come to like the Jordan Trust and we get To look at everything and we say, well, actually, based on what we see you dealing with, we're going to make a decision based on that. So I don't, I don't know if we want to explore making it more complicated with percentages, but I'd be curious to see it. That's an interesting [34:51] Speaker F (unidentified): thing to think about, modeling out like that. Yeah, I do think number of people. I mean, if it's one person, 75,000, that's different than supporting four people on 75,000, right? So size of household. [35:08] Councilor Penny Jordan: What's that? Yeah, like if you've got a head of household that's only getting 75 and they have like three dependents, right, they're going to be under a bigger burden than a single person making 75 with no dependents, right? But then again, I don't know, like maybe they've got a, that's really bad mortgage. I don't know. That's great input. I love that. So yeah, I'd be curious [35:34] Speaker F (unidentified): to see what GP Cog could say about that. Yeah, and also the availability of other assets, I think, is also a factor that, you know, again, if we're talking about asking other people to pick up this tab, I think it's a fair question. [35:55] Councilor Penny Jordan: Yeah, I do really like the idea of just ditching the age restriction. Yeah, absolutely. I think we shouldn't waver on that. If after this, after our meeting and everything, and you go home and you're sipping your tea or beer. Coffee. Coffee. Just send me some other thoughts on criteria and consideration about the demographics within the household. I think that's really, good. You can say whatever you want. [36:35] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): As you consider the parameters that would make sense to evaluate for the benefit, just keep in mind this program right now flows through the town assessor and all they're verifying is, it a primary residence? Do they have the homestead exemption? And what is their adjusted gross income on one page of a tax filing? If you start adding all of this other stuff, it can become, and then you multiply it by, like right now we've got 211, I think was the recipients last year. There's 1,900 homes in Cape Elizabeth valued under $750,000. So if this starts, obviously the income restrictions would cut most of those people out from being eligible. However, if you're looking at three or four hundred people and all of a sudden we have to evaluate more criteria and ask for more document backup, it all of a sudden becomes its own job and its own role. So just keep that in mind. There are things that do make sense to add that would be nice to see, but by the time you figure out how you're gonna get that back up and actually verify it 's Gonna turn into a position. [37:44] Councilor Penny Jordan: I realize I'm throwing possibly unnecessary complexities into this, but I would be just curious to see the numbers. But yeah, I agree with you, Pat. If we do that, if we went forward with something like that, yeah, we would need another staff member. [38:01] Speaker F (unidentified): But I think if we're trying to be fair, that's what we have to do. Well, [38:09] Council Chair (presiding officer): I really appreciate you. Even before we had this conversation, you were already starting to think about the difficulty of administration. And so as we move forward, I think we will have to strike that balance. And I know that 's already on your mind. And so I'm way out there already thinking that I personally would like to pursue this further. And I'm hearing from the council thus far that it seems like people would like this to be pursued in concept as well, especially in a workshop and just hearing about it. Nobody's making any commitments. These aren't any votes. but it 's really interesting and what I do also want to talk about and I think it's I love you're like okay let's model out 507 I'm I'm I'm thinking okay we have 300 only 250 is being has been accessed this year or in that [39:22] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Neighborhood it was 250 one year and 290 out of the 300 the other year since [39:28] Council Chair (presiding officer): Okay, so that's more variable than I was hoping for because it felt, after hearing that, right, it felt like, okay, maybe we could make some step increments where not everybody is, you know, it's not being completely accessed, and so that is another, I mean, I think we need to think about strategies. I want to be sensitive to the fact that, yes, whatever we do is either going to be a reduction in projects or services, or it's going to be borne by taxpayers. So, you know, what's the strategy? And at first, I left Pat's office feeling excited, like, well, what if we went and did a step at just first year, we have new parameters and 50 extra $50,000, dollars where we're just we're building we're building capacity implement over time implement over time so that's a strategy I would also like to investigate yeah what I'm sorry [40:37] Speaker F (unidentified): What do you mean by incremental I mean if we start if we open it up with the parameters that Penny suggested and then a year from now go oh this is too expensive we have to cut back that's not going to go over well I mean how do we incrementally what I'm suggesting is that we [40:55] Council Chair (presiding officer): Do not just go to 200 beyond, so 500,000, right? I'm suggesting that I'm going to just say, based on last, this past year, where the entire amount, budgeted amount, was not utilized, I came out of the office going like that. Show just that one year shows that there's room to move, and that felt like, okay, the first year we have this new program, which is just an expansion, wiping out the age requirement, but adding, which I think is super important, the house valuation and any other criteria that gets agreed upon. But I feel like nobody's argued that someone in a $2 million house needs to qualify. I haven't heard that. So I feel like there's been an agreement around that. So we have these new requirements or qualification factors, and then we say, okay, in the first year, this is just speculation, right? In the first year, we're willing and able and feel comfortable to add $50,000. So now instead of $300,000, we're at $350,000. And we have that sliding scale where we're really putting money. We're not going to take anything away from those kind of minimum, those difficult people that are in the worst of circumstances. And then we look, and we can't tie any council to next year, right? Every council gets to decide their budget. And so what I would hope is that we review that and say, oh, okay, we need to see how many people accessed it. Did this do what we hoped we could do? I mean, we would continually review it. And then what would be really fantastic is that we work on this over the next two or three years. And if it is successful, we see this dovetailing of what I hope comes from the state level with the GPCOG work, where you have this local option sales tax, hopefully we're able to get an influx of money that is directly tied to that we have to use for property tax relief, and we have a program [43:37] Councilor Penny Jordan: ready and we can wrap it up. I think there's a lot of stuff that, a lot of things that need to happen at the state level in order for towns to be addressing the property tax pressures. And I would hope that, and I'm not telling people what to do, but we look at those bills that are going to be in front of the legislators this session, and we look at how do we get a constitutional change so that we can be able to tax second and third homes differently, and so those are some of the things that we need to really be looking at the state level, and every town is going to be dealing with the same thing. They want to help their citizens, but they also have to provide other services, fund schools, and all of the other things that keep a town operating. And so we should look at what are the bills that are going to help towns,, not just ours, towns across the state, be able to help give relief to their citizens. We have to. [45:03] Speaker F (unidentified): What comes up for me about what you just said, Elizabeth, is that if we say, okay, we're going to take these parameters, you know, no income, I mean, no age, but we're only going to have a $300,000 or $350,000 budget, if we want to sort of stick our toes in the water my fear is that it'll get so watered down that we're not really providing relief to anybody i mean if people are only getting like 150 checks no that doesn't really need to be modeled out before we would well i mean if you're gonna If you're trying to do this incrementally then i think the better way to do that would be to damp down on the age bring it from 65 five down to some lower age and then see how that works out, see how much money is used there and then increase the budget as you go down in age. But if you say anybody of any age and, I mean, I just, I want to provide real relief, not like a hundred bucks or something, you know what I'm saying? [46:25] Councilor Penny Jordan: In the law, this is what it states, and I know you and I talk about this all the time, and I'm not the lawyer, but I still, this is how I interpret it. So it says, a municipality may, operative word may, choose to restrict the program to persons who meet minimum age requirements, as long as the minimum is not less than 62. So we can't say we're going to restrict it to 40. We have to either open it up or use what we have today, which is 65 and above. [47:09] Speaker F (unidentified): Okay, so then I guess my feeling is that if we're going to do this we need to fund it. I still would like to see [47:18] Council Chair (presiding officer): modeling on what the predictions might be if we went stepwise. [47:25] Councilor Penny Jordan: All I was going to say is while we're talking about incrementing, another thing to consider is if you're going to increment anything is the cap for the adjusted gross income because inflation is just not a joke anymore. So perhaps that's what needs to be incremented instead of the actual total fund. I don't know, but that's another thing to consider. Okay, thank you. [47:49] Speaker E (unidentified): I definitely hear what Stephanie's saying about the concern of watering it down, but I kind of think that, and I would like to see sort of the modeling to see how it goes, but if you do put in the value of the house and took out the age, I think my hope would be that those would kind of balance each other out. I don't know that for sure, but I kind of have a feeling that might, yeah. [48:11] Councilor Penny Jordan: I wonder, Pat, if, and I can call Nick also, if we could get a, and you probably already have it, since the inception of the Senior Tax Relief Program, what has been the dollars expended from its inception to now? [48:35] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Just total value, yes, because that's been a report that's come to council every year. When we get into the demographics, that was where Nick had to do some additional, as far as home value versus age or versus number of recipients. No, I'm not looking for that. Just total value of the program, that would be in audited financials. [48:54] Councilor Penny Jordan: I'm looking for when it came out, what was participation, and then it went up, and then probably participation came down. Because you said at one point it was 290 or something like that. [49:09] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Yeah, we've only had two years since the program went from 100, I think, in funding to 300. Yeah. [49:16] Councilor Penny Jordan: Whatever that jump was. It got increased when Stephanie and the ordinance committee increased the benefits. Yeah. But it'd be nice to see trend. So it should be out there in one of our reports. [49:34] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Yeah, we can just pull total number of participants and total value. By year. Yep. [49:47] Speaker F (unidentified): Would accessing the Jordan Fund for this type of relief be consistent with the trust documents, [49:55] Councilor Penny Jordan: do you know? Would what? [50:03] Speaker B (unidentified): I think you then have to look at all the qualifying factors of what you qualify for the Jordan and trust would all of the people applying for this qualify for a Jordan [50:16] Speaker F (unidentified): trust right would they I don't know I mean that might be another source okay [50:23] Speaker B (unidentified): really are [50:28] Council Chair (presiding officer): there any other questions or comments at this time Thank You penny thank you honey do you feel like you got the feedback and I have the tape Yeah. So I'm just going to basically recap that you didn't want to put more effort into this if the council was like, nah, we're not, we're not interested. I'm hearing interest. Yes. I'm hearing, that sounds good. And you're hearing interest. Models are important. People are interested in models. And so we would love you to continue this work. Cool. And it's much appreciated. So with that, we'll end our workshop and take like a one-minute break and then start back up. I [56:33] Councilor Penny Jordan: looked at these numbers and... [56:38] Council Chair (presiding officer): Welcome to the Town Council regular meeting on Monday, October 5th, 2026. May I have a roll call, please? Councillor Anderson? [56:51] Caitlin Weidenbach (public commenter): Here. Councillor Harriman? Here. Councillor Jordan? Here. Councillor Sarbeck? Here. Councillor Swayze? Here. [56:59] Council Chair (presiding officer): Councillor Thompson? Councillor Chair Cypress? Here. Thank you. Would you all please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance? At this time, I'd like to invite any members of the public that wish to speak on items that are not on the agenda tonight. Also, if you were here for the workshop, we did not call for public comment at the end of the workshop, and I just want to make sure that people feel that they're able to comment if they would like to. At this time, if you do have any comments to make, please approach the podium. We do have a sign-in sheet, which we would love for people to use during public comment. Leave your name and your email address, especially if you have a question, then we're able to reach back out to you. Because during public comment time, this is just really our time to listen. So anybody that would like to comment at this time, you have three minutes, and we would like you to please give us your full name and address. Seeing none. Item five is town council reports and correspondence. Do we have any updates? I [58:40] Speaker E (unidentified): don't really have any updates on the school building committee meets on Wednesday, so I'll have an update at the next meeting. But I did just wanna mention, I sent a correspondence to the council with regards to the Gullcrest Drive, and that had also come from some people who had reached out to me. I just hope that if council members have an opportunity to take a drive down there on a weekend to see the parking situation down there, I do think it's something that we're going to have to talk about and address at some time soon. But I do urge everybody to kind of take a look. I did provide some photos, but I think seeing it in person is always valuable. Something that just started? it's it came to really to my attention when I watched a planning board meeting last a couple weeks ago, and it's something that I'd seen probably last year during lacrosse season. But I don't, my son doesn't play soccer, and so when I started kind of hearing more about it, and I just happened to be driving by Spurlink on Saturday, I decided to take a ride down myself and really saw it. And I mean, it was, there were some spaces that were open, but I think it's just because those games had ended, but it Did seem like the parking was just on both sides all full, so I think it and it sounds like it has been going on for a while. Any [1:00:09] Council Chair (presiding officer): other reports or correspondences? I'd like to just take this opportunity quickly to highlight a couple of things. Last week The conservation committee had a dedication ceremony at the Pollock Brook area for a burial ground that was discovered. And town planner Maureen O'Meara put in a lot of investigation and preparation for this, along with the Historical Preservation Society and the conservation committee. Committee, and it was really, I think it was an honor to be a part of that moment, and so I wanted to commend all involved. That was really neat, and if you ever have the opportunity to be in the trails out there near Spurwink Church, sort of at the bottom of the cemetery area, and you go off into the woods it's really beautiful and then you have this lovely educational plaque on a boulder that helps you understand the history of the area that you're in it's pretty special. So the other thing I wanted to highlight was the Cape Elizabeth Fire Department on Saturday evening held their annual awards and recognition evening and it was the first time I had ever been able to attend. I had the pleasure of attending with counselors Anderson and Jordan. It was fantastic. It is amazing to me I am still amazed living in this small town and I know I say this during budget season I'm gonna say it again during budget season what we do for our town and hearing about the incredibly high standard of care and service that our EMTs paramedics firefighters fire police provide to this town and the support that they provide to other towns neighbors so I was I was blown away I was so impressed so I just wanted [1:02:26] Speaker F (unidentified): to highlight that yeah and they are also very grateful for Town Council support. They, I think they, I think the chief recognized that he was blessed to have the town council [1:02:43] Councilor Penny Jordan: supporting him. And the town manager. He said that too. [1:02:49] Council Chair (presiding officer): So, just wanted to highlight a couple of those kind of goings on. All right, so item six, finance committee report. No update at this time. So at the later October meeting, I believe Christy will be addressing us for the quarterly report? Yeah. Okay, fantastic. So item seven, town manager's report. All right. [1:03:15] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): So the chair and I do not compare notes before our separate reports. Sorry. Stole some thunder? No, I think you said it with the passion that it deserves, and I credit you with that. I'm gonna go ahead and say it for the record, and this report does get sometimes picked up by the local paper, so I want to go ahead and say the words again. But I think you put it much more eloquently than I will, so I do appreciate that. But a special thank you to our fire department and all of the fire rescue wet team and fire police personnel recognized during the annual appreciation and award event over the weekend. Members were honored for the years of service, and several received unit citations for responding to some of the year's most challenging calls. We rely on these dedicated individuals during our most distressing times, and I am sure I speak for many when I express our deep gratitude for their commitment to always answering the call. So thank you counselors for attending, and I know it meant a lot to the whole department. A couple counselor requests and follow-up items, I've gotten some questions about just what is the construction going on route 77 now down near Spurwink now that the town center intersection work has finished. What that is, the installation of our stormwater retrofit projects to help filter stormwater before it enters Trout Brook, and all of the work that's going on within the Trout Brook watershed. So that was a grant-funded project from a couple of years ago in the capital plan that's finally coming to fruition and being installed, probably just one more week of that construction. And as well another council initiative that's wrapping up would be the landfill solar project. That construction is nearing completion with a target of November for the facility to be commissioned and online for generating solar power for the regional grid. So that project's just about done. A number of fall events, this is a very busy time for our local government cycle, so I thought I'd just take a moment to touch on a couple of the deadlines or events. But please, this is the time of year to visit the website often, there's just, there's a lot of great activities across a lot of departments, and also some deadlines coming up. So we do have property tax bills due October 15th. Absentee voting begin in person in town hall today with very high numbers to kick off the election season. This process will continue at town hall during normal operating hours through Thursday, October 29th. The senior tax property tax assistance program that you discussed at length in the workshop today, those applications are available, and they're available through our assessing office And the deadline for filing those is November 19th for the current fiscal year, FY27 tax year. And I just can't stress enough, residents have to fill that application out every year. We do our best to communicate that, but every year we see people in December wondering when to fill out that form. So the office and the staff upstairs have done a great job of getting the word out and really helping people through the process. But those are due November 19th. Public Works has a couple of very popular events coming up. Do not miss the hazardous waste drop-off day that's November 7th, 9 a.m. to 1 p.m. That's a popular one, and it's always within a week or so people are like, so where else can I get or when's the next one? Well, it's probably not for another year. So that's November 7th, and the clothing swap event at the library that's sort of put on by the library and the recycling committee, that's another popular event that is actually on Halloween this year between noon and 3 p.m. So last one is, this is actually fire prevention week, October 4th to the 10th. So the fire department is very active with the schools and are also reaching out and working with a lot of local daycares on fire prevention and safety. And as always, this is the great week to check your detector batteries in your home. Did you cue the fire truck to be going? I know. Did you like that? I don't think the public could really hear that, but to hear the fire truck in the background at that moment, that was pretty cool. And I'll end with that, Madam Chair, can I [1:07:45] Speaker E (unidentified): mention one thing I forgot? The, there is going to be a groundbreaking for the new middle school on October 17th at 12 o'clock. I should have mentioned that. So if people wanted to come by, I think the middle school band's going to be playing and they're going to have a ceremonial shovels and all that fun stuff that groundbreaking you usually do. And then there's Harvest Fest afterwards, and Harvest for Bronco Parents Association put it [1:08:13] Council Chair (presiding officer): on Harvest Fest. Thank you. Okay, we're moving on to item eight. I'm going to ask for item eight to be tabled, actually, there has been technical difficulties with our ability to have the minutes available to the public. And so I'm asking for a motion to table, please. [1:08:44] Councilor Penny Jordan: I'll move to table in a minute. [1:08:48] Council Chair (presiding officer): And we all just vote. Vote. All right, and Tim is not, Tim's not online. All right, so all those in favor, hopefully today was just the day. I know it was a day, you guys had a day. All right, moving on to item 9a. I do have a proclamation to read aloud, and then I would love people to be able to just vote in the affirmative after I read it aloud. So, whereas domestic abuse and violence is a serious injustice and public health concern that affects people and families of all races, ages, genders, sexual orientations, and income levels, and whereas more than one in three women and more than one in six men in the United States have experienced contact, sexual violence, physical violence, and or stalking by an intimate partner during their lifetime. And transgender and non-binary people experience abuse from partners at disproportionate rates. And whereas each year nearly half of all homicides in Maine are related to domestic abuse and violence. And whereas confidential assistance, safety planning, advocacy, shelter,, and other support services are available to people affected by domestic abuse and violence through Maine's statewide domestic violence helpline and local service providers. And whereas community members, employers, educators, public officials, and service providers all have opportunities to support survivors, promote safety, challenge abusive behavior, and strengthen a coordinated community response. Response, and whereas raising awareness and fostering communities that support safety, accountability, and prevention are essential to ending domestic abuse and violence. Now therefore be it resolved that the Cape Elizabeth Town Council does hereby proclaim October 2026 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month in the Town of Cape Elizabeth, and we urge all citizens to recognize this observance and to learn more about the local services available to support victims of domestic abuse and violence in our community. I [1:11:30] Councilor Penny Jordan: say it's so moved. A second. All right, any discussion? [1:11:35] Speaker F (unidentified): I have a question. Do you know who wrote this and when, where? [1:11:47] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Did it come from, there was, so there was a template provided. Oftentimes organizations will reach out to us and provide an example, and then we typically, as staff, just check it against some of the accepted ones. We try not to include one organization's name in a proclamation, so we typically change it. Some examples come with like town manager's name at the bottom. We always switch it to the council. So, I don't want to say it 100% had one source, but Through These Doors locally was active in helping make sure that we were going to recognize this month, and then I think staff did make some adjustments to the provided template. [1:12:33] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, I'm just wondering about whether or not half the homicides in Maine are related to domestic violence abuse still, given our increase in homicides overall, but oh okay, it might be a little bit lower because other homicides are up. I just, I wondered if this was current information, that's all. I see, but I'll support it. Are [1:13:01] Council Chair (presiding officer): there any members of the public that wish to speak on this item at this time? Please approach the podium. We'd love to hear your name and your address, and you'll have three minutes. Thank you. Good evening, my name is Rebecca [1:13:17] Public commenter (Through These Doors representative): Hobbs. I'm co-executive director at Through These Doors. I know some of you. I appreciate you reading this proclamation tonight and having this conversation. I can answer that question about homicides. We specifically shared language about nearly half because it is true some years that percentage is more like 45% than 50, but it's still very close to 50, if that's helpful. But I just wanna thank you for considering this proclamation and including it tonight. [1:13:59] Council Chair (presiding officer): Any discussion among the council? Okay, seeing none, all those in favor? On to item 9B, public hearing for the second amendment to the Town Center Infrastructure Improvement Municipal Tax Increment Financing District. The Council is considering amendments to the Downtown Center Infrastructure Tax Increment Financing, which is TIF, you may have heard TIF before, district. These amendments seek to extend the term of the district for another 10 years to end March 31, 2045, and to amend the project costs as laid out in table one of the attached draft document the district will also be renamed the town center downtown omnibus tiff district tonight is the public hearing required prior to submission to the main department of economic and community development for state approval so at this time i declare the public hearing open and we invite any members of the public To approach the podium and give their comment, we'd love it if you'd give your name and address, and you'll have three minutes. I'm [1:15:33] Brian Harris (public commenter): brian harris at 34 farm hill road i initially came here today to encourage you to dissolve the tiff district the two approved projects in the town center now take up three of the four available sites in town outside of these projects there's a single one third of an acre site that's available for development. TIFs are meant to be economic development tools to support the infrastructure needed to allow for private development. Current zoning, lack of available land, and current use of existing land limits new development in the town center. That being said, for better or worse, the state has created a perversive but attractive incentive for creating TIF districts, which allows the community to retain 100% of the new tax by revenue generated by the TIF. Outside of suggesting that the state discouraged this sort of reallocation of funds locally, the communities that play this sort of game under the veil of economic development, including us and many of our neighboring communities, given that it's a kind of if you can't beat them join them and a sort of support it with your nose held. Unfortunately Cape Elizabeth is heavily dependent on residential tax base. The current TIF district makes it even more so. We've taken a large concentration of commercial properties out of the contributing growth in the tax base to the general fund. And the TIF specifically does not allow the use of these funds for our greatest needs and expenses, including schools, libraries, public safety, general government operations. The proposed expansion of the allowed uses of the funds in the TIF district will allow some expansion of the potential uses, but remember, this is not a slush fund. This is not a new bucket of money. This is property tax revenue that has been diverted into a fund that could have otherwise been used for general purposes. As such, please treat the funds with reverence. The funds in the TIF should be given the same scrutiny as funds from the general funds because they are general funds. They've just been diverted. There are examples of successful TIF districts. There are also examples of reallocation of funds into TIF districts that deprive the remainder of the community of needed tax revenue. For example, 42% of the City of Chicago's total property tax revenue is captured by TIF districts, which results in starving the public schools of needed funding while directing funds to large downtown development projects. I guess the question I'll leave you with is, if the Town Center does not have an additional potential for growth, if the tools of the TIF are meant to be used to support, is there any purpose for having the TIF district other than avoiding state and county taxation if? Avoiding state and county taxation is the only reason. Just be careful that we don't end up with a gilded town centre or sweetheart deals for developers or over funding administrative roles or public safety just because we don't have anywhere else to spend these funds given the restrictions of TIF funding, and I know my time's up. I'll just add that finally the entire basis in establishing the TIF plan expenditures of 12.1 million is faulty and misleading, and if you'd like I can explain to you why. The table that was used to calculate it shows you the full replacement value of all municipal infrastructure and equipment in the entire district. The assumption being that if all of the funds for the TIFs were used, it would replace every single sewer line, every single water line, every single police, the police station, the fire station, all of their equipment. There's no intention of doing that with the TIF funds of replacing every single piece of municipal infrastructure in the town centre. So the basis of the TIF plan should not be based on replacement value of every asset. It should be based on the need and the effective age of those assets and what that need is within the town center. Thank you. Thank you. Are [1:20:09] Council Chair (presiding officer): there any other members of the public either in the chamber or online that wish to comment during this public hearing? Seeing none, I'm gonna declare this public hearing closed. We do have a draft motion to set the vote. May I have a motion, please? [1:20:52] Speaker E (unidentified): Ordered that Cape Elizabeth Town Council sets the vote for the Town Center TIF amendments for October 19, 2026. [1:20:59] Council Chair (presiding officer): Second. Any discussion among the council? Okay. Oh, Pat. [1:21:05] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): I just, for the record, since a counselor was reviewing this material and pointed it out to me, there are some references at the top of some tables in the draft document that say airport, industrial, park, municipal, TIF district. And I just want to clarify, it's just carried forward from a previous template used. We do not have an airport TIF district, nor do we plan to. So I did confer with our town attorney and all of the numbers on the sheet and all the references to the town center omnibus TIF are accurate. It's simply a header placement. So that'll be corrected for your final draft. But I just, I wanted to point that out. [1:21:53] Councilor Penny Jordan: I wanted an airport. No airport. [1:22:01] Council Chair (presiding officer): All right. All those in favor? Okay. Okay, thank you. Okay, item 9c, another public hearing, this time on the general assistance ordinance. Updates have been made to the general assistance MMA model ordinance and assistance maximums for the 2026 through 2027 year. At the September 21st, 2026 town council meeting, a public hearing was scheduled for today, October 5th, 2026, for public comment on the adoption of the general assistance ordinance and appendices. So at this time I'm going to declare the public hearing open. Are there any members of the public either in the chamber or online that wish to comment during this public hearing? Okay, seeing none, I'm going to declare this public hearing closed and we have no motion. Does this need to go to ordinance, Pat, is my question. [1:23:26] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): I don't believe we typically have. This comes out every year. The only thing, and we're trying to make sure to hone in on consistency, if the council is, what we did on the last item was we actually scheduled the date that we anticipate a vote. Now, you could table it when that date comes, but I think it's very beneficial to the public to say we will be voting. We plan to vote on this on October 19th. So if someone would like to make a motion on the fly to move the General Assistance Ordinance to a vote for October 19th, I think we will try to catch that in these suggested motions. I'm [1:24:06] Speaker E (unidentified): gonna go back and use our last motion. Order the Cape Elizabeth Town Council sets to vote for the General Assistance Guidelines for the October 19th, 2026 meeting. Okay. I'm [1:24:25] Council Chair (presiding officer): Looking at Kaitlin, do you feel good about that motion? All right, it has to pass muster. All right, any discussion among the council? Okay, all those in favor? Thank you, and thank you, that's a good catch. All right. Now item 9D, special use permit for a Gullcrest food truck. Pursuant to section 19-7-14, the Cape Community Arena requested a food truck special use permit for their 2026-2027 season. The attached application was reviewed by the police, fire, and code enforcement departments. All departments have no concerns and recommend the permit be approved as written. Are there any members of the public, either in the chamber or online, that wish to comment on this item? Please approach the podium. Give us your name and address, and you'll have three minutes. [1:25:35] Caitlin Weidenbach (public commenter): Hi there. My name is Caitlin Weidenbach. 21 Hunts Point Road is my address. And I don't have much to say except thanks for bringing this to the town council. We've done food trucks at the rink for the last three or four years, and they've been very popular. I help coordinate scheduling the trucks, and we appreciate you voting on this tonight, and I'm available for any questions. [1:26:00] Council Chair (presiding officer): Are there any questions from the council? May I have a motion, please? [1:26:17] Speaker B (unidentified): Order of the Town of Cape Elizabeth approved the Cape Community Arena Group's food truck special use permit for the 2026-2027 season as requested in the attached application dated 9-21-2026. Second. [1:26:34] Council Chair (presiding officer): Any discussion? All those in favor? Thank you. I have to catch up to get through all the general assistance forms to get to the next item summary. There we go, library, come on, there it is, there we go. All right, thank you. Next up we have the item 9E, library community spotlight selection policy proposed changes. In order to allow for greater flexibility for library staff and publicizing and planning the library's annual summer reading program, the policy governing the selection of a community spotlight organization has been amended to remove any references to specific dates. Are there any members of the public or the library that wish to comment on this item at this time? You're welcome to give a thumbnail sketch. Sure, it's, it's pretty self-explanatory. We had [1:28:06] Speaker K (unidentified): We had a great participation in applicants for our community spotlight program, which last year was the first year. We had 15 different organizations apply, and the Locker Project was the chosen organization last year. But staff, in sort of debriefing the program and how it went, realized they really need more time. Time, so we just removed the reference to dates, just to give us more time to start publicizing it early, get applications earlier, and move forward with plans earlier, so that's about it. Makes sense. [1:28:51] Council Chair (presiding officer): Yeah. Sure. All right. May I have a motion, please? I [1:29:00] Speaker E (unidentified): order the Capesville Town Council approve the revisions to the Thomas Memorial Library's annual summer reading program Build a Better World Community Spotlight selection policy. [1:29:09] Council Chair (presiding officer): Any discussion among the council? It's not really [1:29:16] Speaker F (unidentified): I is it a discussion? I guess it's a suggestion. It seems to me that this is, this is a non-substantive amendment to this policy. And at some point, it'd be nice if the town council could take up a policy that would enable people like the library, people that want to make non-substantive changes to their policies to go ahead and do them. We could call them ministerial functions or non-sub or something like that, just to facilitate the ability of our departments to conduct business and make decisions that make their operations flow more smoothly without making substantive changes to their operations. So just food for thought for another time. I know we can't talk about it now, but I think it'd make it life easier [1:30:22] Speaker B (unidentified): for people if we did that. Okay, I just have a comment on that though, but who decides what's [1:30:28] Speaker F (unidentified): a substantive change in? Well, we define them the way the legislature does or similar. We a policy would have to define what they are. Yeah, food [1:30:42] Council Chair (presiding officer): for thought. Yeah, discussion for an upcoming meeting. Absolutely. Okay. Any further thoughts or discussion? Okay. All those in favor? Thank you. Now on to item 9F, paper reduction amendments to chapter 16 and 19. We need to schedule a public hearing. So at the August 10th, 2026 meeting, the town council referred the paper reduction amendments to the ordinance committee. The amendments have been recommended by the planning board to reduce the volume of paper submissions. Are there any members of the public either online or in the chamber that wish to comment on this item at this time? Being none, may please have a motion [1:31:42] Councilor Penny Jordan: ordered the Cape Elizabeth Town Council sets to public hearing on Monday, October 19th, 2026 at 7 p.m. at the Cape Elizabeth Town Hall, 320 Ocean House Road. The Chapter 16 and 19 ordinance changes are titled the Paper Reduction Amendments. Second. Discussion or questions? As the person sitting on the ECO Main Board, I got to say I'm all for this because one of the things that they mentioned at the most recent meeting was that paper recycling in terms of the ECO Main bundles it and sells it to vendors that want it. The sheer nobody's buying it like no one the only people that are buying it apparently is Indonesia so those the carbon impact from having all of our paper packaged up and then put on a container ship and sent across the Pacific. Yeah, this is something that will be good for the town. Yes, why is nobody buying it? Because nobody's really nobody's buying newspapers anymore. Nobody really Magazine subscriptions are significantly down, blah,. So there's no U.S. Manufacturers that want to buy paper for recycling purposes. They want cardboard bad. So cardboard from EcoMain is way up. Same for plastics. Food-safe plastics are a big thing, and so is steel and aluminum. But, yeah, paper is bad. [1:33:19] Speaker F (unidentified): Interesting. You'd think if it was more valuable it would be more wanted but no. [1:33:29] Speaker E (unidentified): There's a record number of hmm after I think I heard it like six different times it's [1:33:38] Council Chair (presiding officer): Interesting to know this it is thank you Andrew all the hmms were you know we were all in we were [1:33:45] Councilor Penny Jordan: Enlightened and I didn't think anybody would really care [1:33:47] Council Chair (presiding officer): But we were enlightened further discussion or questions all right all those in favor thank you all right item 9g the historical society request for use of town copyright material so the town is the copyright holder for a children's activity book titled Fort Williams Centennial Celebration Historical Coloring Book the Cape Elizabeth Historical Preservation Society is requesting permission to print additional copies of this book to hand out to children's groups visiting the museum at Fort Williams are there any members of the public either online or in the chamber that wish to comment on this item all right seeing none may have a motion please I ask that the order the [1:34:46] Speaker B (unidentified): Cape Elizabeth Town Council authorizes the Cape Elizabeth Historical Preservation Society to print additional copies of the Fort Williams children's activity book titled the Fort Williams Centennial Celebration Historical Coloring Book. Second. [1:35:02] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Comments or questions? There it is. I have a copy of it. Oh, yeah. [1:35:05] Councilor Penny Jordan: It's very cute. Did you color it yourself, Beth? [1:35:08] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Yeah, I'm not going to show you the work I've done inside, but this is what the outside looks like. [1:35:14] Council Chair (presiding officer): And I'll just remind people, this is being given out. They're not charging. Yeah. We're not in charge of the crayons. [1:35:27] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): They will be providing crayons with it, but it's not coming out of the town funds. [1:35:33] Council Chair (presiding officer): Nice, no budget line for crayons for children. We do it all right. Further discussion or questions? Okay, all those in favor, thank you. Item 9h, appointment of registration appeals board chair. Title 21-A, section 103 requires municipalities with a population of 5,000 or more, we do it, to have a registration appeals board to hear appeals of persons aggrieved by a decision of the registrar to either remove a name from the voting list or refuse to place a name on the voting list. Melissa Newsome, town clerk, has prepared a memorandum nominating Anne E. Swift Keata to continue to serve as the registration appeals board chair. Are there any members of the public either in the chamber or online that wish to comment on this item? Seeing none, may have [1:36:40] Speaker F (unidentified): a motion, please. I move that the town council confirmed the nomination of the town clerk to appoint Ann E. Swift Kayada, 14 Stonebridge Road, to serve as a chair of the registration appeals board for a term until October 5, 2030, and until a successor is sworn. Second. [1:37:08] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): Discussion or questions? None? All right. Did you already take public comment? [1:37:19] Council Chair (presiding officer): I feel like I took public comment. Did I? I think so. I feel like I did. There was no public comment. I think I did. I'm on a roll tonight. All right. All those in favor? Thank you. Double check. Okay, we are at item 9i, council communication email guideline. So the communications working group has drafted guidelines for council email communication with residents. It is intended to guide counselors with respect to their rights and responsibilities in responding to resident emails. Are there any members of the public either in the chamber or online that wish to comment on this item? Okay, seeing none, may have a motion, please. I'll [1:38:19] Councilor Penny Jordan: move that the Cape Elizabeth Town Council adopts the communication guidance for town council as drafted by the communication working group. Second. All [1:38:30] Council Chair (presiding officer): Right, briefly, I hope everybody's had a moment to look at this. I'd like to thank Penny for taking very seriously the discussion we were having and made this nice visual graphic to kind of support and give guidance to counselors. I'm going to recommend that it go into a packet for the council at our caucus, the word escaped me for a moment, at our caucus on a yearly basis so that any time there's turnover, and it never hurts to be reminded on a yearly basis, it helps people understand again their rights and responsibilities. So are there any questions or comments about [1:39:19] Speaker E (unidentified): Jonathan, I appreciate everybody's work on this. The one thing that I just think needs that should be removed is on number three, that individual council response will cc the chair. I just don't think that should be a requirement for each counselor. I think that should be up to the councillor's discretion on whether or not they want to CC the chair. I'm just trying to imagine situations where you could get a citizen who writes an email to the council complaining about a vote, and let's say it was a split vote, and you were either in the majority or the minority, and the chair was on the opposite side of you, and you choose to email this person back saying yes, I agree with you, what you're saying, and as you could see, I didn't agree with this, and the chair didn't agree with this, and I think the chair was wrong on this, and to have to CC the chair on something of that nature, I just don't think is necessary. I think we should be able to as counselors converse with constituents without having to CC anybody else on the council. I just, and that's the only thing I really see. I get, I like the fact that the chair would cc the entire council on sort of the response because I do like the fact that the chair is now given the responsibility to write back on these emails because I think that's very valuable to have that, but I just, I would like to see that part of the individual counselor or individual council response cc the chair. I think that should be removed. Well, [1:41:05] Council Chair (presiding officer): this is definitely something that we talked about quite a bit in that communications meeting and trying to keep lines of communication open. And I absolutely see your position. I'm not gonna argue against it. I'm gonna just give you the, like you gave a position that we didn't consider. It was more expressing a concern that the counselor wanted the chair to be aware of, especially in considering upcoming agendas. And so I'm going to look at my fellow work group members and instead of striking it, does it matter to change will to may? Does it matter to you? [1:41:56] Speaker E (unidentified): I think if you put may in there instead of will or shall, I think it would be just fine. I think we're all adults, and I think that there could be sensitive issues that come up where I'd rather see a counselor wanting to reach out to a constituent and express what their feelings are, but they may not if they know that they have to CC the chair. Who knows what that chair might do? Do. I don't think that any chair that I've served with would do anything with it, but you never know. And obviously these are all public emails, so they are subject to FOIA, but just the sort of, I have to CC the chair, I think if that was changed to may CC the chair, I would be in support of it if it was changed from will to may, to kind of give [1:42:52] Council Chair (presiding officer): The option. I'm going to look over at Stephanie. Yeah. [1:42:56] Speaker F (unidentified): I mean, by doing that, you might as well eliminate the whole provision. Because certainly, any time we respond to an e-mail, we may CC all the town councillors or just the chair, whoever we want, right? So what's the purpose of having that provision if it's a may? [1:43:15] Speaker E (unidentified): Well, technically, I don't think we should be CCing the entire council on an email where you're going to kind of discuss substance, because then I think we could run afoul of the open meetings requirement. And I'd be fine if we just took out that whole thing myself. I was trying to compromise by having May in there. But again, and I just don't, I think there could be some times where that might sort of scuttle response to a constituent if you have to cc the chair on what your response is going to be, or the person might take it upon themselves to just individually decide that, hey, I'm just going to get in touch with that person outside of this. Because I don't even know if this is basically saying, does that mean that every council response to a citizen has to be cc'd? [1:44:08] Councilor Penny Jordan: This is the one that we all had the most discussion on. And if I recall, I was along the lines of Jonathan that we were all adults and we're here to serve the citizens of the town. And we should be able to make choices based on the fact that we were elected as individuals. Individuals and This was one of the ones where I think we had the most debate about I would agree I [1:44:47] Council Chair (presiding officer): So I'm very comfortable with the word may instead of will, and the reason why I am gonna go against Scissorhands is that I'm approaching this document not just for people who've been on the town council for a long time or even a couple of years, but someone who is brand new and doesn't. And that sentence provides a little guidance, like you can do this, and it is useful. I find it useful as the chair to know that, for instance, the that Andrew has replied to someone about traffic safety or something like that, just like hey are these being are these being fielded, that sort of thing, in that vein where you may you may. And so that's why I would argue to keep it in there as instructive, not required exactly I. [1:45:48] Councilor Penny Jordan: I think we have to treat people as intelligent human beings and people who, ideally, people who are elected to the council are qualified to make a decision about whether they're going to CC the town manager, the chair. And by putting in the word may in there, it's like almost holding somebody's hand and go, you can do this if you want to. I really am a firm believer that sentence degrades the people who are coming on to the council that we're thinking they don't know how to make decisions about who they communicate with. It so that's just I'm going to say Caitlin then Andrew which I which I think I said many times two. [1:46:46] Speaker B (unidentified): Things one it doesn't differentiate if you're emailed directly versus if you're emailed to the whole council, so that's like two almost separate topics, but I agree with taking the whole thing out and I also can agree with putting the may in because I've been on the council a long time and served with a lot of councillors and some of them may have needed to have a statement that said may in there may be a problem, but yeah I don't think it should be required either way. [1:47:31] Councilor Penny Jordan: I guess I'm going to be a little pedantic, I'm not a lawyer, but this does clearly say this is a guide guidance, it doesn't say communication rules for the town council, it doesn't say communication requirements, so all of this is to me a use your best judgment. But I'm happy to make a friendly amendment to my motion saying with the adjustment of item 3 to say may instead of will. [1:48:09] Council Chair (presiding officer): Does the person who made a second have to accept? I'm getting good at this. Penny, did you second? I don't remember. [1:48:28] Councilor Penny Jordan: I don't see anything in this that is going to slap your knuckles with a ruler if you don't CC the chair. Yeah, I think it's a guide. [1:48:39] Speaker E (unidentified): I agree, Andrew, that it is a guide. I just, that language of will, I just get a little bit, I don't know, disturbed by that. So I'm fine with it being changed to May. [1:48:55] Council Chair (presiding officer): Thank you for the conversation. [1:48:58] Speaker F (unidentified): Are we open for discussion? [1:49:01] Council Chair (presiding officer): We're discussing right now. We're in it. [1:49:04] Speaker F (unidentified): Yeah, okay, so I'm the outlier here. I think this is a good idea, and it's not because I feel that town counselors aren't responsible or careful about their responses or how they want to respond to an email. My perspective was coming from the position of the chair. And if citizens are writing to the town council, and we've been seeing a lot of that lately, I think it would be helpful to the chair to know when one of the town councillors responded, and that was the whole point. So the chair wouldn't be blindsided or surprised or unable to intelligently respond to some citizen communication coming in. That was the point of it. It wasn't to say to the counselors, we really don't trust you to communicate properly. It was more looking from the position of the chair and helping the chair navigate this really large number of emails that we get from multiple sources. So that was why I like this in here and why I still do. [1:50:35] Councilor Penny Jordan: Are we leaving it in with the may? The [1:50:43] Council Chair (presiding officer): motion is may, has replaced will. Yeah, [1:50:48] Speaker F (unidentified): I'm not going to go along with may. I think the may is, I mean, of course. I mean, if you're going to put may, I mean, what's the point of having it in? [1:50:58] Councilor Penny Jordan: I'm going to probably say something really bad, but I've been known to do that before. But I've been on a council with a chair that I would not want to cc just [1:51:13] Speaker B (unidentified): saying and that's why it's a guide not a rule so it's just also hard because you don't have to do any of it we're not making rules we're just making hey new counselor if you're not sure what you're supposed to do here's an idea of something you could follow until you get a feel for what you [1:51:40] Speaker F (unidentified): you want to do well that does sort of yeah there's no must even if there is a must there's exactly [1:51:47] Speaker B (unidentified): there's no shall will it's just it's just for the new people who may need some help and understanding what they may do and this just tells them that they may cc the count the chair [1:52:05] Speaker F (unidentified): if they want to what if they want to cc another counselor they sure can well then that should be conversation you just can't have a conversation yeah so then if we're going to say may we ought to be saying or any other town counselor i don't want to be going down the road of that at this [1:52:26] Council Chair (presiding officer): I really feel like we put this guide together to, as you said, to help codify a little bit that, you know, we, in our working group, we seemed happy with the chair responding in that neutral way, making sure everybody was getting responses, getting, you know, and things getting sent where they belonged. i don't want to go too far down the and i 'm sorry if it sounds hurtful but the nitpicky road of i think that personally i felt really appreciative of this matrix it helps it puts down kind of on paper what to a certain extent is already happening and it helps the newer member new members know maybe kind of what to do and i appreciate your high esteem of everybody that ever is elected on the council and i also appreciate caitlin's experience of not everybody really knows if [1:53:36] Speaker F (unidentified): We're gonna have may then this suggests that an individual council can't respond to anyone other than the chair and I think that is incorrect and that's not what we want to say so it should be individual council response may cc the chair or council members and if we do that then I can go along with this the only danger I see to that [1:54:05] Speaker E (unidentified): Is it just runs afoul in my opinion of the open meetings law because it basically creates a situation where you are possibly having discussions over email with numerous other counselors that could create a quorum, and that's obviously not permissible. CCing a chair or one other counselor is. So I just think that would bring about more confusion than actually be helpful. [1:54:37] Speaker F (unidentified): But that's another whole rule. I mean that's- [1:54:42] Speaker E (unidentified): Right, but if you have it in a guide that basically says, hey, in our guide, you can run afoul to the open meetings law. I don't think that 's good practice. [1:54:52] Speaker F (unidentified): Sending an email, sending a response to the whole town council is not running afoul of the open meeting law. What would run afoul of the open meeting law is for other town councillors to start chiming in. That's what would run afoul. [1:55:06] Speaker B (unidentified): When does that click in, right? Like, if everybody, say you're just in a room, right, and I make a statement, and you all hear it, are we running afoul? Because I've spoken. Does it require a response back from someone? [1:55:27] Councilor Penny Jordan: That's what I say it requires. [1:55:28] Speaker B (unidentified): It requires a response. So I can just go on talking and talking and talking, and it's not considered a discussion until somebody says yes, yep, a nod, a wink. [1:55:47] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): I mean, on one hand, you could say, oh, once you get to three or four responses of a group or quorum, but really it's not that. If you're speaking to the whole council with the intent of influencing their vote on an item and that is not happening in public, you are violating aspects of the public meeting law. So it's not so much the quorum thing that we try to avoid over email conversation. But if you had an elaborate response to a citizen request that was really pointing towards all of the upcoming ordinance changes you wanted to see passed or language involved that shouldn't be occurring in an email to the full council either. So I think don't get lost on the idea of this guide. I know I came on and was a new manager about the same time that a lot of new counselors ended up on and we did go through a little bit of a learning curve period of just who should respond and we went through a period of no one responded to certain citizen emails because we were too lost in who was supposed to. I think if you remove the people and the topics and the issues this is a pretty good flow of information. This you could look at this and say okay this makes sense the chair is going to acknowledge so I don't feel as a new counselor that I have to be the one to do that because there's a system in place. So obviously people don't have to follow this perfectly for every issue. I think adding the word may does help with that. Copying the chair or not copying any counselor at all makes a lot more sense than just copying different counselors for different issues because that can then be construed as not following a process and looking to gather and collect votes for an upcoming issue. So I think it's if you remove all of the little things that can happen which is why it's only a guide it pretty much covers a good flow of information with our constituents. Let's [1:57:54] Speaker B (unidentified): call a vote. I [1:57:55] Council Chair (presiding officer): think I would like to move forward. Do we have to vote on the amendment? All right, and then will that? [1:58:04] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): No,, no, it was friendly. You amended the main motion. [1:58:07] Council Chair (presiding officer): Yeah, so it was friendly. All right, so end of discussion. All those in favor? All those opposed? All right, and now item 9J. We are going to go into an executive session for an employment matter. We will not be voting once we come out of executive session, So this is for all intents and purposes, the end of the public meeting, just for everybody to note. And I don't see anybody in the chamber or online. [1:58:50] Speaker E (unidentified): Millions and millions of viewers on CETV. [1:58:53] Town staff (Assessor/Tax Collector): There's one viewer still online. [1:58:57] Council Chair (presiding officer): Well, I will ask if there are any items not on the agenda that one person online would like to bring to the Council's attention. Nope. Okay. Well, I'm going to go ahead and ask for a motion to go into executive session, please. [1:59:21] Councilor Penny Jordan: Order the Cape Elizabeth Town Council enters into executive session pursuant to 1MRS Section 4056A to discuss the Town Manager's Annual Performance Review. [1:59:35] Council Chair (presiding officer): Second. Discussion? All those in favor? Thank you. Let's go.