Just a quick update for those of you who may have read What's Up with Rising Tide?

The bill giving municipalities the ability to place conditions on state liquor licenses cleared both chambers of the Legislature and was enacted as an emergency on May 30, 2019. That means it is now the law of the land, and we are right back to where we were with Rising Tide before the Council meeting that spawned the attention getting headline.

Speaking of that attention getting headline...

Imagine if instead, the headline following that April 22nd headline had read:

Council Finds Way to Allow Local Business to Keep Operating

It certainly would have been more fitting. Because, as it turns out, that's the real story here. 

On Monday, May 20th, the Council approved a budget that included the Fire Chief's plan to decommission Engine 1. In the days leading up to that meeting, I received a slew of emails and phone calls about the Chief's proposal, so first I want to thank everyone for reaching out. It was clear from the communications just how valued the Munjoy Hill Fire Station and the people that operate it are. I am gratified to see the community's passion around ensuring not only that our firefighters are treated fairly, but that the residents of the Hill and beyond are appropriately protected by our local Fire Department. 

It does appear, however, that there was some confusion about the Fire Chief's proposal and about the role the council would play in making this decision. This was evidenced by the number of people who called, wrote, or testified publicly to protest the closing of the Munjoy Hill station, something that was never being considered. To be very clear on that point:

The Munjoy Hill Fire Station is not closing.

I also heard from many people who were concerned that 12 firefighters would be losing their jobs. That is also not accurate.

There will be no reduction in force at the Fire Department, and no one is losing a job. There are 226 full-time employees in the Fire Department now, and there will be 226 on July 1st, when the new fiscal year and the new budget kick in. 

And after the vote, I heard from people who wanted to know which councilors had voted against keeping the engine. It seems that a lot of people were under the impression that the council would be taking a direct vote on Engine 1, which was not the case.

So what exactly was proposed, how did the vote go down, and what does it all mean for Munjoy Hill and the rest of the city? Good questions. Here's the deal.

When I saw this headline in the paper, I knew I’d have some explaining to do:

If you're wondering why on earth five councilors would vote to violate our own ordinance, you're not alone. Here's the explanation.  

Over the last two-and-a-half years we've been discussing homelessness in Portland front and center and in great detail at the HHS & PS Committee. We've  had many difficult conversations to date, and I expect we have many more ahead. 

That's why as we near a decision on the site selection for the new Homeless Services Center, I want to take a moment to celebrate some of the wonderful partnerships that have grown out of this process. Shining a light on the challenges of our current system has inspired multiple new community collaborations. These partnerships will help us, as a community, reach the goals set by the Council back in 2011 when it created a task force to develop a strategic plan to prevent and end homelessness in Portland, Maine. I'm pleased and proud that this process has helped move us closer to that aim. 

On two separate occasions (July 2018 and April 2019), I created two separate timelines to illustrate the shelter process that has taken place since I joined the HHS & PS Committee in 2016. It's important to note that discussions about the current shelter system in the city and the need for improvements pre-date my election to the council, so these timelines don't represent the full shelter planning process in Portland. They do, however, give a good overview of what's happened at the committee and council level over the last three-and-a-half years. 

After our most recent HHS & PS committee meeting on March 26th, I spoke with a resident who wanted to know how we’d gotten from a list of nearly 700 parcels to the 3 sites we are currently considering as potential locations for the city’s new Homeless Services Center. In response to her question, I decided to create a “Part Two” to my Micro-Timeline of the Oxford Street Shelter replacement process.

For Micro-Timeline: Part Deux, see below. Micro-Timeline: Part One exists here, and you can see both of them together, in one place, here. Happy reading.

A local politico who I have great respect for (Joey Brunelle) has been publishing blog posts titled "Who Funded Your Candidate?" which I think are a fantastic idea.

I agree that it's important for people to know who's funding local campaigns. That's why in 2018 I introduced a charter amendment to add an additional campaign finance reporting period for municipal candidates in Portland. 

But back to those "Who Funded Your Candidate?" posts. Like I said, I think they're a great idea, and for the most part, they're very well done. But I do have a small problem with them...which is actually kind of a big problem.

In August of 2018 I introduced a charter amendment to add an additional campaign finance reporting requirement for municipal candidates in Portland. Here's why I did it and what it does.

As you are likely aware, the HHS & PS Committee is currently working through a list of potential sites for the city's new Homeless Services Center. This facility will replace the city's current facility for single adults experiencing homelessness, the Oxford Street Shelter, and it will likely have something in the neighborhood of 150 beds. 

We're working hard to vet all of the potential locations in the city for this establishment and to choose the best possible location. To find out where we are in our process and how it is likely to proceed from here, read on. 

Additions/changes in red.

The Health and Human Services & Public Safety Committee (HHS & PS) has been working to fine-tune the proposed Earned Paid Sick Leave ordinance since April of 2018. Now, after many months of feedback, consideration, and work, we have an updated draft ready for another public hearing. That hearing took place on January 8, 2019 at at 5:30pm in Council Chambers at City Hall, 389 Congress Street.

After the public hearing, the committee made a few more changes to the ordinance, which have been added to the original article below. 

You can download  the current draft of the ordinance here.

To help you wade through the changes, I've provided a section by section guide below. I've also written a quick rundown of what the ordinance does—and what it doesn't do—in a separate blog post.