Bucksport Council Advances Data Center Moratorium to Second Reading

[0:00] Councilor Hayer: Ordinance amending Bucksport Town Code A250-41 to clarify the authority of council committees. Mayor Bissonnette. [0:07] Councilor Perrion: Yes, I just wanted to bring this forward. We had a, without going down the rabbit hole too far, just had an example several months ago of a committee voting to have a meeting in the future. And it kind of conflicts with how the council does its business because even if there were only five of us here in order to pass something it would take four people. So for a committee that only has three people on it, even if it was unanimous to bind the council to anything, including a meeting, seems rather contradictory. And where we've changed the format of these meetings somewhat, and most of us tend to be here for community meetings anyway. I figured between that and what had happened several months ago, it would be a good idea to change the language and the rules, which has been included in your packet, and as I mentioned to the town manager right before the meeting, the only suggested change I would have to that language is just to add somewhere in there, where there are the series of things after comments the word meeting itself just for clarity sake outside of that I think this covers everything that I was [1:22] Councilor Hayer: trying to accomplish by to you looking for an amendment to add meeting that's [1:28] Councilor Perrion: it yes yeah but I'm not on this committee so I'll [1:36] Councilor Hayer: make a motion to approve as amended as amended as amended second okay all in favor motion passes next item on the agenda it's almost like a service committee meeting all [Councilor Rags: in] favor all [2:06] Councilor Perrion: our council meeting to order for September the 24th this meeting is being broadcast live on spectrum cable TV channel 1303 and stream simultaneously on the Town of Bucksports YouTube channel. We have a full house this evening, so just a couple of housekeeping items that I traditionally do when we have a full house. If you have your cell phone with you, this would be a great time to make sure it's silent or vibrated or whatever you need it to be. If you do plan on speaking this evening, please come to the podium, state your name and address, and everything will be directed at you when it comes to comments. And just so you know, there are microphones throughout the room, so if you whisper something that you want to person sitting next to you, there is a good chance it will be on YouTube. I just want to make sure we're all in the same level of awareness. [2:54] Deputy Mayor Eastman: Roll call. Deputy Mayor Eastman. Here. Councilor Perrion. Here. Councilor Hayer. Here. Mayor Lucenet. Here. Councilor Rags. Here. [3:02] Councilor Perrion: Councilor Doty. Here. Councilor Rankin. Here. We do not have any presentations or town council recognitions this evening. We do have, for consideration of minutes from previous meetings, we have the minutes from our meeting on September the 10th. Those are included in your packet. Any questions or comments on those? How would the council like to proceed? Motion to approve. Second. Second. All those in favor? Opposed? Okay. I'll abstain. Okay. Reports, documents, and correspondence. Both were included in your packet, but we have reports from the Orland police calls from September the 10th and September the 12th of 2026, and also the ridership report from Downey's transportation for August. Any questions? Do not have any discussion item. You have two new ordinances for consideration. The first is the first reading, the ordinance repealing and replacing appendices A through H of the general assistance ordinance for the period of October 1st, 2026 through September 30th. Mr. [4:25] Town Manager: Mayor, if I vary, this is an annual item that the Council acts on. These through our general assistance program, there are various maximums that are established by the state, and we just have to update our ordinance to basically match those maximums. The question action would be just to move this forward to a second reading and a public hearing at your next meeting. Motion [4:51] Councilor Perrion: to [4:57] Councilor Harry: move it forward to a second. [5:02] Councilor Perrion: Second. All those in favor? Also we have a first reading moratorium [5:10] Town Manager: ordinance on data centers in the town of Bucks. For me, this is an item that was referred out of committee to the full council. I don't have a lot to add. It's, I think, pretty self-explanatory, and I'm counselor Harry. You kind of started the conversation. Happy to answer any questions. Oh yeah, again, I wrote this [5:36] Councilor Harry: down because I just more clear when I do this. So I just want to be clear about what we're actually deciding tonight. So we're not deciding yes or no to a data center. We're deciding whether or not we should start reviewing proposals for data centers before we know what rules we want and what protections we need and what this kind of project could mean for those, for us, people who live here and work here. To me, it's like letting someone start building before we've checked the wiring, the roads, the Water and the fine print, and that's not how we protect Bucksport. We should do our homework first. And a lot of us on council have said plainly that we don't fully understand yet what a data center could mean for us. And that's it's really complicated issue, and I really believe that's exactly why I shot pause actually makes sense. What really worries me is starting down a road of reviewing proposals before we have the information, the standards, and the protections that we need. That simply just not fair to the people who live here. That people have trusted us. They already have high taxes, and they don't need us to take risks on their backs. Folks are already under pressure, and we shouldn't add more risk to them without knowing what we're looking at. Some people are worried that it will make us look unfriendly, and I don't see it that way. A short pause to me says we're serious. It says we want development, but we want it done our way, the right way, and we want clear rules that everyone can see before proposal is on the table. And I think we need to be honest, it's already out there. These meetings are public. I think any developer would also understand what the sentiment is in our town. And in fact, a moratorium and opposition to a moratorium could serve to make the conversation much louder. So a moratorium for me, I feel like a moratorium will keep us from learning the hard way in the middle of a real proposal what we should have figured out ahead of time. And it's in fact our responsibility to figure this out ahead of time. We should set our own rules on our timeline based on what's best for the people who live here. Other towns have learned that once a proposal is filed, the clock starts ticking, the pressure builds, and we're forced to react rather than be proactive and plan. And frankly, I think we deserve better as Bucksport citizens. We should make our plan before we have to make a decision. And to me, this is the key point. Maine is still studying the risks and what protections we need. And if that work is still going on, why would we rush into reviewing proposals you before we have our own rows in place? Frankly, if a proposal came in next month, I couldn't honestly tell Bucksport residents that we were ready to review it. Not when guidance is still coming, not when we had the chance to wait and choose not to. So I urge the council to support the moratorium, give ourselves time to understand the risks, write our own rules, and protect the people who live here. Our first responsibility as elected officials in Bucksport is Bucksport. A developer's first responsibility is naturally to its business. That's not a criticism, that's just common sense, and why we need to own this process. If we're going to review proposals this big, we owe it to the town taxpayer. We owe preparation, we owe clear information, and frankly, to let a proposal guide what we learn, guide what we regulate, is letting somebody from a business or an investor dictate what we need to do as Bucks for it. And I feel like we owe our citizens more than that, and to prevent problems that fall on our community. I also feel like we've learned the hard way that investors and companies don't tend, don't always commit to what they promised us. We've learned that twice. It's been very expensive learning that. And so why would we put our weight on a proposal that an investor presents us, small, big, no matter what size the data center. We've learned from two different corporations that we trusted. Our staff put the work in to bring them here, and they never followed through. I'm not judging those businesses or companies, but why would we walk down that road a third time? And thanks for listening. I'm [10:14] Speaker G (unidentified): still under the belief, I've changed it a little bit, that I could support a moratorium on large-scale, over 20 megawatts, but even the state's moratorium was for over 20 megawatts, not under. That's, they're considering that small-scale. And the study they're doing now is all related to large-scale, over 20 megawatts. So I don't know what more information we are going to learn from small-scale about this current study, because this is all geared towards large-scale. And the townspeople, with taxes the way they are and electricity the way they are and all expenses through the roof, the biggest thing I heard was help with getting industry and businesses to town, not cutting services. And people even this week and last week, but last week I wasn't there, this week, are stopping into the garage, and they don't want cut services. They want us to help bring in revenue to offset the taxes. So I can't support this moratorium. I could support a moratorium of size over 20 megawatts, because that's the end, the one in Brunswick is small-scale, and that seems to be very welcomed. [11:44] Councilor Harry: Brunswick has now put a moratorium on for new ones because they're learning. I [11:48] Councilor Hayer: think I read the headline that it was because they didn't properly announce the meeting to the public that's where it started was they had a meeting about regulation that they didn't make clear and that brought a lot of fire from the public I mean I think whatever we do we need to inform the public as to what it is but one concern I have is if we bunch them all together it's going to be difficult to have a conversation about what's most applicable here which is under 20 that was identified in by Bain, it's identified in the Mercer study, excuse me, I got the wording of that wrong, Mercer, me sir, if the me sir study also indicated that, and that was funded by the state, not a company, I think an [12:31] Councilor Harry: important thing to know though is the size of the data center doesn't necessarily impact the impact of data centers. So a 20 megawatt data center and a larger one, they're still studying the impact of all the sizes. And I don't [12:45] Councilor Hayer: think, but who's studying that? Because I mean, everything I've read said the state study is a lot large-scale, large-scale, it's not about small. But what's to [12:55] Public commenter: prevent down from putting these in small modules, 20 megawatts out of at a whack, you put in a 20, oh, they're going fine, we're gonna put in another 20, another 20, and all of a sudden you're up to 100. I'm not saying, I'm not saying it could happen or won't, I'm just, you know, no, I'm saying we could, we could get an [13:14] Councilor Hayer: an ordnance together. We could get a complete ordnance together based on what's out there, because they're all over the country, and I searched and searched, and I had a hard time finding a lot of complaints under 20 megawatts, and I found one example in Minnesota where it was 700 feet from 50 houses and it had no, there were no complaints in the municipality. [13:33] Councilor Harry: Can I ask you though, what's it going to hurt with a pause? [13:37] Councilor Hayer: We've done a study with the state. I would like to keep some of that momentum. [13:42] Councilor Harry: It's the state itself that's studying this. [13:45] Councilor Hayer: The state's studying large-scale. I put a little more weight in the study that was done on a local level. [13:54] Councilor Harry: It's an economic development study, it's not an environmental study. [13:57] Councilor Hayer: But they did address a lot of those issues. [14:00] Councilor Harry: But they also addressed... [14:01] Councilor Hayer: But if we have medium-trace consular hair on issues, we're going to end up right back at megawatts. We're going to end up right back at the hyperscale, and it's going to be hard to have conversations because nobody's going to disseminate between the two. [14:15] Councilor Harry: Okay, I'll stop here, but I just want to say the path of least resistance, in my opinion, is to put a moratorium on until we know what we're talking about. It's clear we don't actually understand the technology. We could have a 20 megawatt and a 20 megawatt and a 20 megawatt. [14:29] Councilor Hayer: But we permitted whole oceans, and we didn't, that's not to say, we don't need the technical. There's a different council. But we didn't need the technical understanding. We had an industrial site with industrial regulations, and it went through there. [14:45] Councilor Harry: These aren't the same conversation. [14:47] Councilor Hayer: The scale is comparable. [14:49] Councilor Harry: The impact is, though. [14:52] Councilor Hayer: Can you demonstrate where under 20 megawatts is having an impact? [14:56] Councilor Harry: I cannot, and that's the reason for a pause. [14:58] Speaker I (unidentified): Would you, what were you thinking for moratorium, six months? Yes. What would be down in the middle, what about three, just to satisfy? [15:09] Councilor Harry: The moratorium is up to six months. If we had good ordinance and regulation developed in one month, we would have a vote to rescind it. It's a maximum number, not a minimum number. So we can have a three week, it could, if some, if code enforcement or whoever drafted the ordinance put it in front of us in a month or in two months or in three months, we would vote as a council to rescind within a hundred and eighty days. That's just the top level. It's just the state mandate. So you think based on [15:40] Speaker I (unidentified): what our CEO has isn't good enough to determine on the ordinance is correct [15:47] Councilor Perrion: place correct I don't know if it's a reflection I just I don't think it's a reflection on the code enforcement officer at all I think what it is just that we want to make sure that the ordinance that would be put in place is and I know that's not what you meant to say council I'm just right this is just [16:04] Speaker I (unidentified): based on what he code enforcement was up last time saying that we were pretty [16:09] Councilor Perrion: much funny right I think the question that's here is and don't let me put words in anyone's mouth but the question here is basically the moratorium is to take a look at I'm gonna try to keep it as simple as possible what we want to do moving forward and I think a big portion of that is let's say it out loud those beyond the seven of us anyway that's but in terms of the length of the moratorium because that was a hangout for me too is that anytime that there's an ordinance that we are comfortable with the moratorium could be rescinded and the ordinance could be put into place council red I know you've been no [16:55] Public commenter: I'm taking it all in here, but I wrote so I could get through the points here, and so let me begin by saying Mr. Town Manager, Town Council, and community members, I've written there this to share my concerns regarding potential data center developments in our area and to emphasize the need for proactive protections. We are currently facing a speculative development wave. While economic growth is important, our town can move forward without compromising our natural resources, our marine ecosystem, or overall quality of life. Therefore, I urge the Town Council to consider implementing a full 180-day moratorium. This pause will allow us to gather necessary facts and review the final report of the State of Maine Data Center Advisory Council scheduled for release at the end of January 2027. Key considerations for me are first is going to be legal and regulatory oversight. Oversight. I believe we should engage our municipal legal counsel, particularly leveraging his environmental and Department of Environmental Protection background to serve as a watchdog during complex, multilevel permitting processes. Infrastructure and electricity. According to national trends, data center energy is rising rapidly. While ISO New England notes data centers are not currently driving regional load growth, major projects undergoing study will impact the system by the winter of 2728. That's a pretty scary sentence in that the study is going on right now, but it could implement the grid by the winter of 27 going into 28. That's pretty quick. Water resources, the data center cooling requires significant water supplies laws, raising concerns regarding our local sourcing and the chemical and thermal quality of the discharge wastewater, and then environmental and health regulations. Comprehensive oversight is necessary for land use, noise, infrasound, ambient heat, light pollution, air emissions, and backup generators, and hazardous waste, including the state prohibitions on PFAS containing cooling fluids that take effect. That's going to be in 2032. Furthermore, as I've stated in the past, clear decommissioning requirements must be established. When you go to rent an apartment, you've got to pay up front a month's rent, and you've got to pay the last rent, and then you get into renting that apartment. The same thing should happen with the developer here, that they have to put up money, either cash or some sort of a bond, to decommission whatever they come along with. Anyway, back to my note, the main getting the main data center Advisory Council established by executive order in April 2026 is actively evaluating complex technical issues, and community members have been engaged to participate through public sessions and surveys. We must take proactive steps to safeguard our community's health, protect our drinking water along the river road and in the village areas, and prevent long-term environmental liability. It's about protecting our community's future. So that's what I had written here. Now I've got two other things just to go back on. There's a lot of technical elements as counselors are now discussing that are going on with this advisory committee. Whether it's 20 megawatts or 100 megawatts, it makes no difference to me. I want to get the results of the report. This 180-day moratorium would get us out past that report, but locally I'd like to point out to you two important things, and that's our water and the electric power that will be required for this process. The water, as you know, we're we're still doing things around the silver lake dam. When the water when the paper mill was up and running, we had an auxiliary source of water. There was a pump house that could move more water up to the lake and so forth. Silver lake is responsible for your in the village, your drinking water, your fire protection, it's your public safety aspect that we have to pay attention to. And two weeks ago when we discussed the silver lake dam, we were looking at the levels that had to be maintained against mean sea level, and so that to me is a pretty important thing for the for the village itself with so many people involved here. The other thing is the power that's going to be generated. This report that councilman Eastman, that report was generated in April 2025, and it was a good report put out by the state, and they came up with different ideas on how a number of communities in Maine, I think there were six of them, and Buck support was one of the six, that how we could grow ourselves to recoup from what happened out here at the mill and Yes, there was about batteries, megawatt battery storage. There was taking some sort of a wood product in one end of a machine and ending up with a fuel out of the other. And there was data centers many mentioned, but it also mentioned using the resources of the power plant down here that because it was in a certain distance within the power plant that they would get a favorable electrical rate to draw that particular business into the area. But here's what really happens, okay? This power plant down here is a peaking unit, and by law in the state of Maine and by the DEP they have air quality standards that apply to a peaking unit only. And when you move over to continuous running or almost continuous, then you have to go play by a different set of DEP rules. Now again back to Councillor Eastman in the report that was some 66 pages of PowerPoint, which was really well done and so forth. But I'm also here to tell you that at the same time the Bucksport generation did a feasibility study to convert from peaking to a continuous operation, and the feasibility study analyzed to convert the plant to a peaking over to a continuous or almost continuous operation. And what they found was the involves severe economic regulatory and mechanical changes, and they got into the thermodynamics of simple and combined cycle and heat rates that were not going to be favorable. And the in the end they said that making the cost of electricity over here would be uncompetitive in the marketplace. So I can go on I have pages and pages here about this, these two particular items, but let's not, let's, let's think about that. This counselor here said this is about bucks for this is going to be about our water. This is going to be about our electricity. If we can't use the power plant down here, we're going to have to have power coming in off the grid. When the grid fails, then you're going to go to diesel-powered backup generators. Each generator is going to generate about two and a half to four megawatts of power, and you're going to buy a fleet of them. I use the word fleet because that's their word. In order to back up 25 megawatts of power, you're going to need six to ten backup generators that are going to throw diesel emissions out, and the noise is going to be there, trust me. And if you go to a hundred megawatt operation, you're going to be looking at twenty five to forty of these backup generators that are going to run simultaneously, not one at a time. And it's not going to be your home Generac machine keeping the power on when the lights go out. So anyway, I'm done off my pulpit, thank you. Very much for listening tonight. That's where I'm at, and back to my original thing, I support a hundred and eighty day moratorium. Let's get past this end of January decision point from the advisory board. Sure, I'm even I sort [25:34] Councilor Harry: of and I 'm owning that I don't know enough to know enough but a data center could propose to have a water system that generates itself which doesn't use much water as we work as was explained to us in regulatory review it's also the most expensive way to do it so in five years when they realize that 's too expensive they can change it and it's not regulated they can go back to the other way so I just would caution us not to think if a proposal comes in and it's got the and I can't put the technical language to it, but got the system where use closely closed-loop system, nothing stops them from changing halfway through there. And this is that's kind of the point, right, they can come in with one proposal with a set of circumstance and change their business plan and we don't have regulation around that. And I think it's just very important to [26:26] Public commenter: understand that in a lot of lines of the closed-loop system, those systems come down once a year, once every two years, they have to be cleaned out, all the goop taken out of them, and off it goes. There are other systems that they're looking at right now, we have a treatment plant in town, there are systems being considered that they will take the discharge of the treatment plant and use that for cooling. Now that would require lots of miles of pipe down the street to bring it to work, I mean Tracy here the counselor here is right about there are different schemes out there that are coming along, and that's why I really want to see the results, whether it's a big scale or a grand scale, of what the advisory committee comes out with along what they think about closed-loop systems and if they get into wastewater treatment. But let's at least have the opportunity to read it and see what's in there. [27:23] Councilor Hayer: I'll just add one more thing. I mean, I think it would be a better conversation if we were having one about 20 and under and 20 and above. But, you know, I just think it's going to get lost. I agree. [27:33] Speaker G (unidentified): It's all going to get blanketed under one thing, and they're different beasts. They're much different. [27:41] Councilor Rags: So one question I have is why. Would something have to be specific? One way or another, why can't we just be looking at setting up guidelines for things, for the things that we're concerned about, regardless of which it is? I mean, some of the same things apply. Oh, sure. [28:05] Councilor Harry: Regardless of size has the same, maybe not the same level of implication, but they still have the same unanswered questions as far as how, for example, less than 20 megawatt facility, the generation would have to run from peak to 24 7. Now that's an impact to the environment in air emissions. We're close to Acadia National Park. I'm not sure if that would trigger the Clean Air Act or not, but regardless of size, the 24-7 power generation and the impact, to your point, is similar. We don't know decibel size or things like that. They're certainly worth considering. [28:50] Councilor Hayer: I understand that, but we do have an industrial site that something could come tomorrow that could use every bit of power we're talking about, and we'd still have the same problem. I mean, it would be better to regulate the entire whole thing then it shouldn't be just data centers because something could come along that [29:05] Councilor Harry: would do the very same thing, but we've had somebody come to town, sir comes, listen, we've had somebody come to town look at the site, we've had a company look at the site for a data center. It's current, it's relevant, it should be discussed, but [29:24] Speaker G (unidentified): it isn't, but it is an industrial site with already industrial options and regulations. They could be very strict regulations. Yeah, I mean, [29:35] Councilor Harry: I agree, I think this is very timely because the data center has come to town with an interest, not, there's nothing, there's not a proposal, but there's certainly been an interest, and I think we would be diligent to do it with any sort of proposal that we didn't think the land use ordinance would cover in its regulation I'd [29:56] Councilor Rags: like to just clarify that the town the town does not own the property that we would assume someone would be looking at doing this type of development so really it's if the current owner decides that they want to sell the thing that concerns me a little bit is we don't have say over it 's a it's a private sale the thing we do have say over would be that the outside regulations right so I feel like when we talk about that we would review a proposal in my mind we really wouldn't I mean we have a planning board and in that regard can review it, but it's not as if we have total say in anything that happens there. So I mean, I really feel like it's our only thing we can do is to set up some guardrails. I was thinking about with a number of assets that exists there, we know that there shouldn't, there should be plenty of interest, so we should feel like we have some things in place so that we hope that we get the right fit that's gonna benefit the town. And I feel like from all of the emails and all of the comments we've been getting, there's a yes, people want and need tax relief, but there's a limit to what people are willing to have happen to their quality of life, and I think we have to find a way to respect that conversation. [31:35] Speaker G (unidentified): Is this the longest I've ever sat quiet? I think so. I think we should document. Yeah, we [31:41] Councilor Perrion: should listen. I promise the public will get a chance to speak. I'll tell you where I am. I'm in support of a moratorium, and I will tell you why I'm in support of a moratorium, because what we've heard this evening, it's a lot of good discussion, but it's, there's a lot of speculation behind it too. And I don't use that word lately, I don't, and I don't use it in a pejorative manner. What I mean is that this is the opportunity, I think, for the town of Bucksport to get its ducks in a row and say this is, you know, let's, let's, let's talk about the facts for a minute. That is an industrial site where the mill used to sit, is an industrial site. It is not out of the realm of expectation for there to be industry on that site, and quite frankly, there have been a number of people in the town of Bucksport who have been clamoring for industry on that site for the better part of it, well over half a decade. So I think what we need to be mindful of it is that, but also to do it as responsibly as possible. I am perfectly comfortable to sit here and say to this group that I don't know enough about data centers necessarily to sit here and tell you whether I'm for or against them. I've certainly seen bad examples and I've seen good examples. But I think Councilor Tarian just made a good point. I think every councilor has made a good point. But Councilor Tarian's in terms of if somebody were to come and want to bring a proposed site or business to that site, excuse me, that would go to the planning board. I think it really behooves us to have our ducks in a row before it gets to that point, if at all possible. And I think that if there is a responsible company that is interested in that site, quite frankly, if we get our ducks in a row and do it the way that we're charged with doing, but that puts them in a good position too as well as the citizens of the town of Bucksport and I'm not going to go on and on about it because I'm good at that but that 's that's that's where I am on it I understand there are a number of you here that would like to speak about that speak about this I certainly want to give you the time to do that we will do that here in just seconds please direct any comments to me, any questions to me, and if there's an expert here that I can identify that can help answer them, then I will do so. If not, we'll work to get you some answers. And what I will say is that just in the interest of time, I may rein it in a little bit, and if somebody has already made a point, maybe we don't need that same point four, five, six times but there's also straight the numbers too so I'm going to try to play a balancing act with that I'll do my best so anyway well can I have one last thing sure I'll give the council a final say and then we'll open it up to [34:46] Councilor Hayer: the floor you know I can get supportive of a moratorium but I hope we can eliminate what we know we don't want pretty quick so that the conversation doesn't evolve into that absolutely I want to put the people that report to [34:58] Councilor Perrion: the town manager our code enforcement officer our economic community development director others in the best position to help do whatever needs to be done here and I feel like if we do what we're charged with doing we're considering doing that anyone else from the council I'm gonna open it up Tom [35:25] Public commenter: Mott Bugsport, you've all made good points, and we, in the short time I've been here, I realized economic development is needed and all the benefits that would come from that, and the last point you just made was the point I'm going to speak to, which is it would behoove us to put a moratorium in place and be able to call upon it regardless of what industry ends up looking at that industrial site and want to do something with it if we knew our bounds and meets about what is concerning us for the ongoing health of Bucksport and reducing the burdens on Bucksportians. And we're able to invoke a moratorium regardless of what energy or what size or what capacity. It doesn't have to, we don't have to get in the weeds. We've done a lot of good research, but it's very specific. And I know it's specific because you've gotten some movement from data centers. But I don't know, it could be a furniture-making mega-shop that needs all those self-same resources. I'm making this up, obviously. So, here's my point. When people come with a proposal, if we don't have the ability to step back and listen to what they're saying, do research, and then parse out what they're not saying, which is equally important, then we're not doing our due diligence. So I'm for a moratorium. And I leave you with this one thought, which I finally found because I found it so striking I saved the fortune cookie, and it goes the expedient thing and the right thing are seldom the same thing, Mr. Peterson. [37:55] Dick Peterson (public commenter): Give you a heads up, I'm Dick Peterson in the downtown section of Bucksport. I have here a few things you might want to just pass around there that shows you already have review opportunity. So I'm going to read a few things so it can be easy for me. I'm not a good public speaker. I'm currently a member of the Bucksport Community and Economic Development Committee. I previously served on the Bucksport Planning Board and the Zoning Board of Appeals. Because of that experience, I understand both sides of what we're discussing tonight. We have a responsibility to protect the people of Bucksburg. We also have a responsibility to encourage economic opportunities, and I believe we can do both. Tonight, I want to begin with one simple question. What are we trying to stop? We don't have a data center application sitting in front of us tonight. We don't know how large a proposed facility would be. We don't know what technology it would use. We don't know how much water it would use, how much power it would require, or what it could add to our tax base. So why would we put a moratorium on an opportunity before we know what the opportunity is? I would ask the council to consider these ten points. Bucksport already has a land use review process. We are not starting from scratch. We have an ordinance. We have a planning board. We have a town council. We have professional staff, and depending on the project, we have state and other regulatory agencies involved. As Councilor Raab pointed out, sorry I'm going to go to you, but Councilor Raab pointed out, But the power plant over here, which is capable of 187 megawatts from my understanding, is only a peak system. So you'd have to go through the process already of getting approval for that. That's going to take a long time, that isn't going to happen overnight. So we have that piece. So as we go through that, Tracy here pointed out, we need to make sure we have everything in place. Well, I passed out a form here on a quick look up in the town of Bucksport, having been on the planning board, we do have a review process. Bucksport has already a protection ordinance. Our existing ordinance addresses noise, setback, buffering, screening, storm water, protection, other impacts associated with development. The state of Maine also has environment requirements that may apply to a large project. If an application comes in, let's use the regulatory tools we already have. Point 3. We don't have to solve hypothetical problems before we have a project. If a proposed data center presents a noise issue, address the noise issue. If it presents a water issue, address the water issue. If decommissioning needs to be addressed, address it. That's it. You have the power to do that right now. A moratorium doesn't give Buckfort more information, an application does. 4. Not all data centers are the same, as we've been talking about here. We should look at the massive data center somewhere else in the country and automatically assume that 's someone else's data center of 300 to 500 megawatts or 100 megawatts would be the one we're looking at here which is not the case we don't have the land mass even what the industrial park over there to build one that big so export assets that make worth looking at 0.5 we have former industrial mill site we have significant electrical infrastructure and we have a community with a long history From industrial development. Those aren't liabilities, these are assets that should be marketed. Six, we need economic development. When the mill closed, Bucksport lost a major employer, economic activity, substantial part of the industrial base. For more than ten years, we've been looking for opportunities to bring significant investment back. A major private investment could add substantial tax value to Bucksport. We don't know what that number would be until we have an actual proposal, but first we have to give someone the opportunity to propose it. Seven, we're competing with other communities. Companies looking to invest in significant amount of money have choices. Bucks, what message? Our door should be open. We have rules. Show us what you want to build. We don't want to say we're not ready, come back later. There is a very little risk in listening. I can only hope a developer will come through the door, tell us what they would like to build, how much will they invest, how much electricity will they need, how much water will they use, what will the noise level be, how many construction jobs will there be, how many permanent jobs, what will the taxable value be. Then we can make decisions based upon facts instead of assumptions. Number nine, if we discover a real problem, we can deal with a real problem. Our planning board, town council, town staff are powerless. If something needs to be addressed during the review process, address it. If we eventually discover genuine deficiencies on our ordinance, then let's discuss the specific deficiency. Efficiency. We don't need to stop everything today because of something that might happen tomorrow. 10. Opportunity doesn't always knock twice. Bucksport has spent years trying to attract investment to the former mill property. We've all seen what Whole Oceans has done. Nothing. Bucksport's major investment. I don't want our first message to the company to be wait. I want it to be come talk to us. Show us your proposal, answer our questions, meet our requirements and let Bucksport decide whether the project is right for the community. So I'd ask the council tonight not to adopt the moratorium. We don't need to choose between protecting Bucksport and developing Bucksport. We can do both. We already have ordinances, we already have review process, we already have people responsible for enforcing those standards, and we have the ability to ask the hard questions when we have the actual project in front of us. Let's not finally get their attention, then put a sign on the door saying, come back later. Keep the door open, let them come through it, let them make their case, let us do our job, and let Buckford make the decision based on actual project and actual facts. Moratorium stops a possibility. Our existing review process allows us to examine one. I believe examining the opportunity is a better direction for Buckford. Thank you for listening to me. [45:54] Councilor Perrion: Lady in the red sweater in the second row, I have a letter to read first before I finish. You can please come up if you don't mind waiting just a moment while I read this letter from a constituent that asked that it be read, and just because I don't want to forget it, so I'll read it really quickly, or as quickly as I can. Dear Bucksport Town Council members, if I don't, I excuse me, I don't know at this point if I am for or against an AI data center in my beloved town of Bucksport. That is because I, as well as most everyone I know, have so little knowledge of them. Therefore, I'm asking you the council to implement a six-month a moratorium on this issue in order to give us all some time to educate ourselves about the issue and whether we want an AI data center in our town or not, as this could have a huge impact on our town. Thank you for all the time you so willingly give in trying to lead us in the right direction, respectfully. That's from Donna Smith, and I don't know her exact address, but she lives on the River Road. Mr. Mayor? [46:47] Speaker G (unidentified): Yes. Can you clarify that this is not an AI data center? We have no idea. That's right. This is AI. Data centers are used. [46:57] Councilor Perrion: I read word for word. [46:58] Speaker G (unidentified): by millions of companies. [47:02] Rusty Wade (public commenter): Absolutely. Hello. Hi. My name is Rusty Wade. And I just would like to say that we have an uneven track record as far as businesses that have come here and how they've treated us, or our land and everything else. And we need to be a little more aware and more on top of what's going to happen with this, with a whole new type of industry. And the source of energy for this data center would be where the energy, electrical pipes are there. And so physically it would be close to downtown if it's making, and we don't know if it will or not, a lot of noise or not. People are not going to want to come to downtown. It's going to be an unattractive place to be in, and I think we need to think thoroughly and not make any more mistakes as to choosing what business comes. [48:14] Public commenter: I'm [48:22] Brenna Youngblood (public commenter): Brenna Youngblood. I live out on the Mill Hill Road again. As I said last time, public speaking is not where it's at for me, so I apologize. I have prepared myself and I'll go sit myself down. Admittedly, I'm not a tech expert in any capacity, 20 megawatts, 100 megawatts, no idea, nothing. But I am a new RN. I was a CNA before that, and I'm also a mom to three beautiful children who go to school here in RSU 25. I think that my last role truly encompasses why I am as passionate as I am about my vehement distrust of data centers, technology, parks, or anything of the sort. We won't reap the benefits of a data center within our town. We will likely only pay the price that the companies don't want to pay themselves because they don't have them in their yards. Their clean drinking water won't be compromised and their electric bills won't rise. We will very likely subsidize these things. We will endure the never-ending hum of the centers if they're large enough. There are no long-term studies yet. And, of course, because these are relatively new phenomenon, I may foray into a wheelhouse that I am more educated on. The FDA approval for new medications and treatments can take anywhere from 10 to 15 years. There are preclinical testing, research, clinical trial testing, and these all take place in separate phases. This is done over a 10 to 15 year period. period. This is what we do before a medication or treatment can be placed on the market for public consumption. This is a very extensive and involved process to ensure safety and efficacy. There is a question of data centers causing vibroacoustic cardiovascular disease with incunities. This is a thickening of cardiovascular structures. This is caused by constant low-frequency noise that is not detectable by the human ear. We likely won't know the potential impacts of data centers in our backyard for a very long time. While there are many predictive models and environmental assessments, formal long-term epidemiological or multi-decade impact studies, specifically tracking communities hosting data centers, remain relatively unheard of. Researchers are largely relying on extrapolated data from heavy industry, power generation, and urban heat research. We will not have comprehensive data on technology park influences for many years to come. As a constituent in Bucksport, I am afraid of what a data center could do within the locale. There is a potential we may not hear the damage but we could feel it. The noise emitted by data technology centers can emit low frequency noises that is below our capability of hearing but it still has the capability of causing cortisol to rise disturbing our sleep patterns and can negatively impact animals abilities to navigate as well as reproduce. A moratorium on data centers will allow us time to gather our data and information to find if this may be potentially true and impacts it could have on our small community. I've been told that my opinions that i share are also shared on behalf of some other constituents who could not make it tonight. We don't believe having information will make Bucksport look not business friendly and if the business is trying to come in think that we're difficult for wanting this data and information before agreeing to their presence being here we probably don't want to have them doing business where we and our children live i'm [51:39] Councilor Perrion: going to say this before because it's it's almost happened a couple times and this is where i have to play the heavy because it's in the town code in meetings like this the council meetings we started to do this and it's image it's in the Charter it's in the code. I can't allow that to happen it's not it has nothing to do with my opinion on what people are saying you can look it up for yourself. I just want to get ahead of it before it happens. I understand that there are various opinions here but I can't allow things like that. I just wanted to get ahead of it. So, who's next? [52:24] Matt Connolly (public commenter): My name is Matt Connolly. I live at 155 Main Street, but my friend Katrina Bischheimer can't be here tonight, and she sent me a letter that she would like me to read. So, that's what I'm going to do. Everybody else seems to be reading tonight, seems to focus. Okay, Katrina says, I'm writing to express my opinion about the proposed moratorium for data centers. Data centers may generate tax revenue for our town, although not necessarily immediately or as much as one would expect long term. Data centers employ lots of people to build them, but then employ fewer people to operate long term. Once the hidden costs of various pollutants to the environment and human health are factored in, what is the true cost-benefit ratio of these data centers? There is a lot of new information daily about some new aspect of data centers. The point is that technology around these centers are rapidly evolving and it takes time and study to understand what we might be dealing with. Bucksport has a unique history. Having been a mill town for many years, once the mills shut down, citizens worked hard to define our community in order to attract new businesses that aligned with those values. Now we are having a difficult experience holding AIM accountable for the closure of the mill's old landfill, and AIM is trying to abandon local dams. What about when data centers become obsolete and outdated? Who is responsible for the cost to clean up the toxic buildings, or the building materials high in PFAS and batteries, or whatever else that is left behind? Do we want to go through this again to make provisions for it without making provisions for it now? Another unique characteristic about Brooksport is the Penobscot River and the bay. It is polluted from various industries through time, but in particular, Holter Kim dumping tons of mercury for many years. The river is finally having some restoration work completed in an attempt to contain this mercury underneath the river sediment. Would a data center impact this work by using the river perhaps as water as a coolant or part of the coolant system? If we don't have specific targeted ordinances for data centers, companies will take advantage of our natural resources without appropriate regard for the environment, the town, or its citizens. They will take the profits and leave. Having targeted data center ordinances to address many of the issues associated with these data centers up front is necessary to minimize this possibility and allow us to choose what fits best for Bucksport. This takes time to research and develop. We wouldn't build a quality house without blueprints or the right contractors. Why accept a data center without specific guidelines or ordinances? The State of Maine is due to release a report about data centers in January 2027. It makes sense to work on targeted ordinances and obtain additional guidance from that report before proceeding. Our town has an obligation to be transparent, to protect our citizens, and to attract new businesses. In summary, I am in support of a six-month moratorium on all data centers, given the In the rapidly evolving technology used in data centers, it is essential to allow the town the time necessary to develop meaningful, targeted ordinances based on other towns' experiences, the unique features and history of Bucksport, and the State of Maine's upcoming report. It would also allow time for citizen input to ensure it aligns with our values, those that we articulated in the work done by various committees after the closure of the mill. These are the same values that are still posted on the walls in the town office. Thank you for considering support for a moratorium on all data centers as proposed by Councillor Tracy. Here sincerely Katrina Bischheimer. Thank you. [56:34] Rusty Wade (public commenter): Just [56:37] Town Manager: Like I could just clarify process. Sure, there's no formal adoption one way. There's no formal adoption that would take place tonight. If the moratorium him were to move forward by the council tonight, the next step would be a second reading and a public hearing at your next council meeting. So I just want to make sure that we're all aware of just the process here. Thank you. Anyone else? Good [57:16] Don White (public commenter): evening Don White export. There's a lot to this stuff. This whole issue of data centers, moratoriums exploding all over the country. It's exploding all over the state of Maine. Many towns have adopted moratoriums for certain reasons. They wanna take more time to figure this out. What are data centers? The most recent ones is the elephant in the room. AI-driven data centers are what's being built now. Before, like in Brunswick, there were local issues, local things for clouds and whatever this stuff is on the computer I don't even understand it, but other towns have decided that they need to take a real hard look. I'm sorry, but small to medium sized data centers do cause problems. The state of Michigan, state of Indiana, state of Virginia has a hundred and forty organizations taking a look at data centers because of the explosive nature of data centers around that area. So the size, we don't we don't know anything about it. There's low density, there's high density. High density meaning they pack in a lot of stuff in a small space, they run hotter, different cooling mechanisms, closed systems, open systems, this system, that system, they all have issues. As council rab pointed out, if you have a closed system, you've got a discharge, you've got a discharge in pipes that usually discharge for rubber chemicals, where you're going to put it, stuff like that. We need to understand where do they get the power from. They get their power from the grid or the or jira that's over here. We need to understand that. You need to understand exactly if that thing runs 24 7, what's it what's it going to be like. Now we're not used to that. It could they could they might have to apply to change their permit. They might they get a better rate. One thing we they get a better rate, local tax rates go up wherever these things are built. That is the standard at this point. That's my understanding in the digging into the weeds and I don't I won't get into it too deep. There's problems, there's serious problems. Data centers make a lot of money for their investors, but the elephant in the room right now is that artificial intelligence is driving this right now for the development of the new ones. The technology is changing all the time. What's it going to be like in 10 years? Is it going to be outdated? I don't know. We're just living in wild times, folks. We need a moratorium to get our act together, to come together. We have a responsibility to each other, our people, to the people who move into town. It's not going to be people moving in town if you have a low hum. These things are low frequency. Low frequency means you have a not high decibel level sometimes, but you have this hum thing that is intrusive. It's intrusive for the local people, and that's what that's what's reported wherever these things are built. They're no fun for local communities. Ben Green at the University of Michigan has done a study. It's not a totally conclusive study, but he's a professor at the University of Michigan. He's also a professor at Gerald Ford School of Public Policy. These things are not good for local communities is his bottom line. I don't know. Things are changing all the time. Technology is changing all the time. They're learning how to pack these things in smaller spaces, they're hotter spaces, and they need water, whether it's a closer that fits an open system. They're gonna, they're gonna have the water is going to be really sucked up, as council rep points out in a Silver Lake. But who knows, we need time to protect ourselves. The sentiment is here in town, it's clear, it's clear that people are really worried and don't understand 180-day moratorium for us to put, puts, put something together to protect ourselves. We could maybe greet people, we could maybe bring people in from other towns that have this kind of thing. Why is, why did Brunswick, which had a successful data center experience, why did they now ban, excuse me, why do they now have a moratorium for one megawatt and above? Some reason somebody board my [1:01:57] Councilor Hayer: understanding was they had a meeting and they didn't make a public announcement they were going to hold a meeting on regulation. They, that's why [1:02:04] Don White (public commenter): they enacted the moratorium. That's that data center down there for running, I [1:02:08] Councilor Hayer: talked about the data center. I'm saying that's why they enacted the moratorium. [1:02:11] Don White (public commenter): They never announced how big that's, that data center in Brunswick was. It's running by First Light. That one started, it's doubled in size, then the moratorium came. I don't know what the, I don't, would like that. I'd like to talk to somebody from Brunswick, I'd like to talk to somebody from Aylsworth. Why do you want a more time? Why don't you talk to Bangle? We've got all these towns and it's, it's happening, and I think we need to, we need to do the responsible thing. It's just a moratorium, it's not saying no. Thank you. Yes. [1:02:46] Ralph Chapman (public commenter): Thank you. My name is Ralph Chapman. I live on School Street here, and I've made a mistake in that path, so I'm going to be very brief because I only want to make a couple quick points. The first is that all of the regulations that the town currently has, every word of them was written before consideration of a data center. That's because the data center technology is new and has been pointed out as changing. To correct a somewhat faulty perception that I hear is that if a formal proposal comes to the town, it establishes when, it at some point in the process, that the regulations that are in place at that time are the ones that govern it. And so it's not necessarily possible, please correct me if I'm wrong on this, it's not necessarily possible to retroactively correct a missing regulation after a development is in the processes of permitting. And that's the reason why you need to be get the regulations in place prior to learning what the details are of a specific proposal. And then just one other point, which is that there are data centers that are not artificial intelligence related, but almost always they are then located in the buildings of the institution that they serve. For example, a hospital will have a data center for their medical information management systems. Public safety emergency services dispatchers will have a data center associated with that. Those small data centers are located, where they are used. A data center of the sort that could be put here in Bucksport is undoubtedly only for the purpose of artificial intelligence, and I just wanted to clarify that point. And then finally, I'd like to pass out a single page that I wrote up earlier today. This is not necessarily for this evening, but looking ahead, I'm trying to give you some resources to understand the context for what is the hardware portion of artificial intelligence. Artificial intelligence is hardware and software. The hardware are the data centers, the software are all the processes that the high-tech companies are working on previously. And what I have here is I'm recommending three written sources of information to give you a sense of, to the extent that you have time and the willingness to learn about artificial intelligence. I'm given an annotated comment on three publications, two books and a newspaper article. The two books are, you've all know on Harari's book Nexus, A Brief History of Information Networks from the Stone Age to AI. The second one is a book that I've not yet read, but I've heard the author interviewed at length, his name is Josh Tarangio. His book is called AI for Good, How Real People are Using Artificial Intelligence to fix things that matter. And the third thing is an article published just in the last couple of weeks in the London Financial Times by Nobel Laureate Joseph Stiglitz called The Progressive AI Agenda for the Economy. And those last two references that I've given to you, I cherry picked. I cherry picked those to be the most positive toward AI publications that I know of that were not self-serving from the tech company CEOs. And I recommend them because I like to look at, I like to be challenged against my first impressions. My first impression is our official intelligence has some really serious problems. These last two publications I mentioned try to put it in a good light. And I the reason that I recommending them to you is at least one of them, the Joseph Stiglitz article in the London Financial Times, the editor billed that as a positive AI column, and I read it and I said if this is positive I don't really want to read a negative one. In any event I thank you for your time and attention and I am is in support of a moratorium in order to have time to get the ducks in a row. Thanks very much. Jump [1:08:24] Public commenter: all along 26 Elm Street. I know they're abyss and that s we don't rehash things. Two things that have been said that kind of stand out to me. One is a company who's gonna be scared away because of a moratorium. This company I [1:08:51] Councilor Hayer: don't think we want to do that. [1:08:55] Public commenter: You know, a development of any sort and we've seen other developments come and go. There's a gamble for the developer and scramble for the town, and a company that's going to be scared away isn't the kind of company that I want to bet. And the second is, you know, his senior voice. [1:09:26] Councilor Perrion: It's nice to know I'm not the only one that happens. [1:09:32] Public commenter: Oh, yeah, it came back to me. That, like Mr. Chapman said, these ordinances were written, I don't know when, but a while ago. I think we need to look at our ordinances based ON THE TECHNOLOGY THAT IS OUT THERE NOW, THE INFORMATION WE HAVE OUT THERE NOW, AND TAKE CARE OF OUR ORDINANCES THE QUARTER EVENING. [1:10:07] Deputy Mayor Eastman: YES. HEY, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS MICHAEL MORTON. I HAVEN'T BEEN IN THIS TOWN FOR ALMOST 30 YEARS. I MOVED BACK TO BUCKSBOROUGH TO TAKE CARE OF MY DAD. REAL STORY, REAL QUICK STORY. I SEE MOST OF THE PEOPLE HERE ARE OVER THE 50 BAR, OKAY? Technology is booming. It's our future. We're going to be living with technology for the rest of our lives. We all know that. Look at us. We're all looking at laptops. What's making that laptop go? AI. We're getting information before our brains are even thinking of it. We need to, this town coming back, for 30 years I've lived in other towns. I've never seen such a town so poor that can't bring business in. This town lived, my father worked at a paper mill for many years for this town. It saved this town. We lost it. Everything fell apart. We can't keep business here. We don't like the business because that's not the type of business we want. Let's put in 15 coffee houses. We don't need 15 coffee houses. We need business that draws in more people to work, and then you bring that in, and if you want a quiet town, you go to Searsport. [1:11:22] Public commenter: That's all I have to say. Thank you. [1:11:25] Councilor Perrion: Anyone else? Anyone? Yeah. Hi, [1:11:40] Matt Murphy (public commenter): my name is Matt Murphy. I live at 2 Spring Street. And very, complicated issue, and I really appreciate the council thinking and talking a lot about this. But it boils down to me. Let's say, I don't have any idea if Bucksport is a town where people love AI or hate AI or want a data center or don't. But let's say we did a survey and the town overwhelmingly said AI is awesome and we want a data center and we want the council to do this. If you're in business or education or a nonprofit or government and you want something to happen, you would put together what our requirements are, like a request for proposals. Like this is, we want one here and this is kind of our requirements, these are some of the things that we want. Whether you're buying a car or putting up a furniture factory where the mill was, where we can make great recliners, famous Buck Sport recliners, whatever you wanted to put there, you'd put together, these are our requirements. And so if the town was crazy for a data center, we want a data center, I would hope even with that the council would say, well, let's get together and get the people that we need to know about this stuff and get our requirements together. As opposed to say, hey, we want a data center, whatever you guys wanna do, just send it to us and we'll figure it out as we go along. You'd have some requirements. And I know the ordinances are there and that's really great. But as others said, those weren't written with data centers in mind. And the requirements that Bucksport would have for wanting a data center would be very different requirements, I imagine, from those if we were gonna wanted to have a recliner factory at the mill site. I mean, it would be different stuff. So it just makes sense to me that when you look at it that maybe everyone in Bucksport doesn't want a data center. That would, to me, say all the more reason to think about what our requirements are, because not everyone is going to be happy with a proposal that comes through. But even if everyone was delighted by it, I'd still want to see homework done ahead of time of this is what we're looking for, as opposed to whatever you want to give us. And then the last thing about my second point is that the big giant companies that run paper mills around the state of Maine are big giant companies. Bucksport had a couple big giant companies. They don't always think about the town first. The people who want to put in a fish farm don't always think about the town first, and I don't know if a giant data company is going to, their main goal is to make Bucksport better. So that having guidelines together puts our interests first for us, as opposed to whatever they want to do, and hopefully it'll be good for us. So, thank you. I'm [1:14:46] Councilor Perrion: going to rein it in at that, not because I want to. I don't see any more hands, but having run meetings for a little while, this council has heard me say this a number of times. We're coming up on the 90-minute mark, and the difference of efficiency in a meeting between minute 89 and 91 is vast. And so I'm going to shut it off for now. We'll see what the council wants to do. If this does move on for a second reading, there obviously will be a public hearing for that as well. Any other questions or comments from the council? Motion [1:15:19] Councilor Harry: to move this ordinance to a second moratorium. Right, sorry, yes, a motion to move the moratorium on that is that all data centers for a second reading in public hearing. Yep. So they [1:15:36] Councilor Perrion: move in second. Question comment. Move fast. All those in favor? Opposed? All right. We have three agenda items this evening. First is Resolve 2027-26, which is Approving Funding for Rebid Services for the Town Dock Project. [1:16:04] Councilor Harry: Most groups? Go ahead, Tim. [1:16:08] Town Manager: I was just going to say, this is Community and Economic Development Director Rotella's agenda item. Mr. Rotella. Speak to it. Hello. So we put this project out to bid. As you recall, this is part of the 4.1 million dollar grant that we received from Senator Collins' office. And the town had set aside $103,000 to have the project going forward. It was designed. We had our consultants there. $35,000 of that $103,000 came in the form of a shift grant from the state of Maine. So how much sports put in $68,000. Unfortunately we did not receive any bids when it was put out the last time although 17 different parties took out paperwork. So the consultants the harbormaster and myself all on our own accord called several different people to find out the why did we not do what did what didn't happen what do we not have. So we believe we have that situation rectified and what I'm asking for is the $9,900 to put this project [1:17:16] Speaker G (unidentified): back out to bid. So there was a technical hiccup that somebody didn't like the [1:17:23] Town Manager: technical hiccup is everyone thought that Proc Marie who is stationed in Rockland was going to bid on the project. They were going to have cheaper cost because they're a lot closer than everyone else to land here. So instead of communicating amongst each other everyone just assumed and didn't bid and prop didn't prop didn't bid because they gotcha. One company did say they don't bid on projects under five million dollars and we have four million nine hundred and twenty five thousand in money because we also have the eight hundred twenty five thousand dollars in the lawsuit money so that we could do three-phase power instead of having cruise ships running generators and also adding the hydrant line down there as well. And then if you put in the hundred and three thousand we've actually it would be over five million dollars. So we had another conversation about that and they asked us to send them paperwork. [1:18:21] Councilor Perrion: Any other questions in the public motion [1:18:27] Speaker G (unidentified): to approve. Second. Second. All those in favor? [1:18:36] Councilor Perrion: Resolved 2027-27, approving the Liquor License and Special Amusements Renewal for Sweet Cheeks Diner. Motion to approve. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any questions or comments? All those in favor? And our last agenda item is Resolved 2027-28, approving the Liquor License Renewal for Bucksport House of Pizza. Motion to approve. Second. Questions or comments? All those in favor now. [1:19:11] Town Manager: Managers report. Yes, thank you, and good evening. On October 6th at 6 o'clock, 6 p.m., the Brown Hall Committee will host a candidates forum at Brown Hall. Residents will have an opportunity to hear from candidates for Town Council, School Board, Main House, and Main Senate. Richard Rosen will moderate the forum, which is intended to encourage respectful and civil discussion of issues affecting our community. The evening will conclude with an informal networking with, excuse me, with informal networking and light refreshments. For those unable to attend in person, the forum will be live streamed and subsequently archived on YouTube. This year's paving projects were completed yesterday. Highway staff have begun shouldering the newly paved areas and will continue this work over the next couple of weeks. The Hancock County Commissioners will hold a public hearing on the proposed 2027 Hancock County budget on Tuesday, September 29th at 8 30 a.m. The hearing will take place in the Commissioner's Meeting Room at the Hancock County Courthouse. Members of the public may participate either in person or online via Zoom, and that link is available on the county website. Staff from the Towns Auditing Firm, RHR Smith & Company, were in the office this week working on Fiscal Year 26 audit. That is, the annual audit is required by state law, and thanks to Finance Director Wilson for the time that she spent working with the auditors and helping to bring that process to completion. Finally, the advertisements for the Deputy Fire Chief and the Deputy Police Chief positions have been posted. Applicants will participate in an oral board process consisting of outside public safety personnel who will provide their input as part of the selection process. The town will consider internal candidates for both positions first and then we'll turn to external candidates if necessary. Any questions, discussion [1:21:09] Councilor Perrion: of items not on the agenda for council in public? We'll start with the public and I believe Mr. Chapman you had an update on, yes, thank you. [1:21:22] Ralph Chapman (public commenter): Or George, yeah. Again, my name is Ralph Chapman. This time I'm coming to you as the chair of the town committee called the Community Resilience Committee. The council appointed Community Resilience Committee has been working for a couple of years now toward seeking funding for projects in town related to the Community Resilience Partnership that at that time was located in the governor's Office of Policy and Innovation for the Future. In any event, an application was sent in for funding and although I have not received any notice and I don't believe the town has received any written notice yet, but the governor issued a press release on September 2nd which I found online that lists Bucksport as an awardee of $75,250 for the project that we had settled on dealing with a social vulnerability study and a planning process for follow-on work after that. So I wanted to let the council know that as far as I know, that money has been awarded to the town. And I believe the process is one in which the council will have a time to formally accept the funds. [1:22:56] Public commenter: Thank you, thank you. [1:22:59] Councilor Perrion: What else from the public? Usually just [1:23:07] Dick Peterson (public commenter): Let's speak for just a minute to ask a question. I won't be here for the October hearing, which is fine. Moratorium, okay, it's gonna pass, but I want to make sure that we understand the moratorium. Who's going to be responsible for getting that information because that's very important to have that in that piece? I think Mr. Mayor, if you go forward with it, make sure you give the dollars and what you need to do to do your research, please. Moratorium doesn't accomplish anything without the resources. Thank you very much, John. [1:23:53] Public commenter: Paul along again. First, want to commend the council on a well run meeting the night. I thought it went very well, not just because it came out the way I wanted it, I just thought it was a very well-worded meeting, so thank you. I was reading in the newspaper about the last meeting and the permit issued for the Best of All the Lights, I think it's called, and that Wednesdays on Main was going to pick up some of the expense of increased police fire department other departments. And I just, it kind of struck me that moving forward, and I understand budgetary constraints and I don't know if it's contractual thing with these departments, but if as we move forward if there can be an a reallocation of resources when something That as important as that comes up for the town, so that it's not over time, it's a reallocation of your time. I just think that would be something moving forward we consider. Anyone say something contractually, we wouldn't be able to do that. Well, maybe when we write the new contract, but just something to consider. Thank you. Thank you again. [1:25:44] Deputy Mayor Eastman: Question, Mr. Mayor, what are you doing with the traffic light right at the bridge? I've never, that's, that's a death trap, I'm sure. Yeah, that's horrible. That's, that's a nightmare. You're shoving businesses right on top of each other, you've got half the mill direction that way. You've got half an oral in that direction. Why don't we do something that way? And don't take me wrong, I'm not a business amount by any means, but who would put Aroma Troach right beside the Dunkin' Donuts on the most busiest street in Blacksport, Maine in the summertime? I mean, it's dead in the winter. I mean, it's not a problem. It's the summertime. So what's your plan for that? Is there any plans for that? I've heard things for smart lights, rotaries, all that good stuff. It's a state road. They control the light and they control the access. So they control all that. So Bucksport just lets what you can't say. They control the light. I think their plan is this spring [1:26:49] Speaker G (unidentified): to put the new light in. To put a new light in? A motion center. Okay. [1:26:54] Deputy Mayor Eastman: I kind of blanked off on that. So I just and I'm driving through here I lived in Old Town for many years and it's like I never had a problem going through lights so bad as this. And it's a nightmare. [1:27:05] Speaker G (unidentified): Isn't it springtime? Spring or summer? [1:27:10] Town Manager: F-Y-27. [1:27:12] Deputy Mayor Eastman: Okay. So a spotlight of some sort. Because that's dangerous right there. People are going and the out-of-state area is going one direction, thinking they're going across the bridge and they're going straight. [1:27:22] Speaker G (unidentified): It's a mess. And as to my understanding, not that this matters at all, but the light being put in Orland is somehow gonna tie into the so I didn't know about that. So there's a light going to be put up there by home co-op. Okay. All right. Thank you again. That's the state. Okay. Just [1:27:44] Councilor Rags: Something quick when I was looking at the where we added the change to the ordinance for the committee's, it reminded me that we have purpose and information available for assignments on the majority of the committees, but then, like cemetery's not listed there, right? Or resilience. I think it's because they are different type of committee. But a while ago we talked about figuring out what the makeup of them should be and how that's gonna get posted going forward. So just wanted to bring that back up to say if there need to be changes there now might be the time the [1:28:37] Councilor Perrion: makeup is part of [1:28:47] Councilor Rags: it but right we talked about when you read the committee's here it says the purpose of the committee and then in addition to that so it's really the two things it's the purpose but also how like it says that there are three or four members of the council on these particular committees but I don't think that there's anything that clarifies that on the other types of [1:29:17] Councilor Perrion: Thank you everyone good discussion. Do we need it this week? You know do we need a committee meetings before our next meeting? If there is nothing else chair leads to a motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn second all those in favor. Thank you everyone have a good night.