TUESDAY, MAY 28, 2024, at 7:00 P.M.

The regular monthly meeting of the Cranston City Council was held on Tuesday, May 28, 2024 at 7:00 PM. in the Cranston City Council Chambers, Cranston City Hall, 869 Park Ave., Cranston, RI  02910. for the purpose of conducting the items of business appearing on the docket.

YouTube Live Stream

This meeting was streamed on YouTube. Click the link to view the meeting.

I.                   CALL TO ORDER

The meeting was called to order at 7:00 P.M. by Council President Jessica M. Marino.

II.                ROLL CALL

The roll was called by the Clerk.  Recorded as Present:  Councilman Robert J. Ferri, Councilwoman Kristen E. Haroian, Councilman John P. Donegan, Councilman Richard D. Campopiano, Councilman Christopher G. Paplauskas, Councilman Daniel Wall, Council Vice-President Lammis J. Vargas, and Council President Jessica M. Marino.  (Councilwoman Nicole Renzulli arrived at 7:20 P.M.)  Also present:  Stephen Angell, Council’s Legal Counsel; John Verdecchia, Asst. City Solicitor; Christopher Millea, City Solicitor, David DiMaio, Budget Analyst; Anthony Moretti, Director of Administration; and Tracy Nelson, City Clerk.

III.             PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by the body.

IV.             APPROVAL OF MINUTES   (votes may be taken)

MOTION made by Councilman Wall, SECOND by Councilman Ferri to take all three sets of minutes as a block.

VOTE:  Ayes – 7 (Ferri, Haroian, Donegan, Campopiano, Wall, Vargas, and Marino).  (Councilman Paplauskas was absent from chambers at the time of roll call)

V.                PUBLIC ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AND COMMENDATIONS

CITATIONS of Recognition for the Cranston Combined Percussion Ensemble students and instructors as recipients of the New England Scholastic Band Association: 2024 Percussion Scholastic A Champion and WGI Percussion Scholastic A World Championship Semi-finalist; presented by Council President Marino   (no vote)

Council President Marino spoke briefly and read aloud the names of the Director, the staff, and the students.  Council Citations were presented.

VI.             PUBLIC HEARINGS AND PUBLIC COMMENT

     Public comments under this section are limited to DOCKETED subject matters only.

Al Reyes, 10 Chestnut Ave. is a member of the Childhood Lead Action Program.  He commended the Council on passage of the Lead Safe Homes Ordinance.  He submitted an APRA request for 2023 violations.  He was told there were no records.  Since then, there have been two; 1890 Broad Street and his residence.  Cranston has a high rate of lead poisoning.  He has reached out to the inspections department to offer training.  It has been declined.

Susan Blake, 173 Grand Ave. stated the Lead Safe Ordinance requires enforcement.  It is not the tenant’s responsibility.  It is the city’s responsibility and obligation.  There are only two inspectors.  Emails are dodged by the inspectors.  She is asking for Council support enforcing the ordinance.

Melissa Porter, 1890 Broad St. is a long-time resident of the city.  Her current living conditions are atrocious.  She questioned the safety of the building.  She and other tenants want to know the status.  They have formed a tenant union.  Mr. Butler will not meet with them.  It is time to get answers from the city.  They have continued to pay their rent.

Heather Burbach from the RI ACLU is here regarding their letter docketed by Councilwoman Renzulli.  The letter speaks for itself.  It is based on public statements made by the parties.  She is here to answer any questions.

VII.          RESOLUTIONS

VIII.       REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

IX.             PUBLIC COMMENT FOR UNDOCKETED ITEMS   (no votes)

     Public comment may be permitted under this section for UNDOCKETED items only.

Susan Blake, 173 Grand Ave. spoke about Budlong Pool.  She is asking the City Council to stand up to the Mayor and demand an independent assessment of the water tightness.

Robert Santurri, 27 River Farm Rd. expressed concerns about large groups of kids playing basketball, parking on the sidewalk, and blocking the street in his neighborhood.  The city has an ordinance.  He spoke with the compliance officer and was told it is a grey area.  There was also a recent accident at the intersection.  A driver went through a stop sign at 40 mph.  He captured it on video and showed it to the police.  He was told the police department does not have enough help.

Robert Santurri, Jr., also of 27 River Farm Rd. has volunteered in many roles for the city.  He is here tonight as a resident, for his father.  Speeding has been a constant issue.  He spoke to Paul McCauley back in 2018 and was told a stop sign could not be placed on the other side of the intersection.  Bad neighbors destroy good neighborhoods.  He is asking the City Council to address this nuisance.  Otherwise, good people will continue to leave the city.

John DeGenova, 558 Phenix Ave. is a member of the American Legion, the largest veterans’ organization, with over two million members, founded in 1919 by WWI veterans.  There are many memorials in the city, including an honor roll on the wall outside Council Chambers.  He asked everyone passing by tonight to look at the names.  They are real people, mostly young.  Those with a gold star never returned home.

X.                ELECTION/APPOINTMENT OF CITY OFFICIALS

APPOINTMENT of Susan Maria Pires to the Juvenile Hearing Board, to fill the unexpired term of Kristen E. Haroian, expiring December 1, 2026; as requested by Council President Marino   (vote may be taken)

MOTION made by Councilman Paplauskas, SECOND by Council Vice-President Vargas to approve the appointment.

VOTE:  Ayes – 9 (unanimous)

APPOINTMENT of Judy Abate to the Tax Exemption Study Commission created by Mayor Hopkins’ Executive Order 23-02, for the period of June 1, 2024 through June 1, 2025; as requested by Council Minority Leader Renzulli  (vote may be taken)

Council President Marino announced there is a scrivener’s error.  This appointment is not subject to a Council vote.  No vote will be taken.

XI.             REPORT OF CITY OFFICERS

            None

XII.          EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS

XIII.       COUNCIL PRESIDENT COMMUNICATIONS   (no votes)

           Acknowledgement of Memorial Day

Council President Marino stated Memorial Day has many different meanings to different people.  She looks forward to the yearly service by the students and staff at Baine School.  It is not just a remembrance.  It demonstrates how Memorial Day resonates in the students’ lives; how people come to America to enjoy our freedoms.  She thanked all for their service both past and ongoing.

XIV.        COUNCIL MEMBER COMMUNICATIONS  (no votes)

From Councilman Ferri and Council Vice-President Vargas:

1890 Broad Street Status Update:

·         Code Enforcement Report   
Please provide any Updates and Fines from 1/1/2021 to the present

·         Building Inspection Report     
Please provide any Updates from 1/1/2021 to the present

·         Current Building Permits

            Please provide any Updates from 1/1/2021 to the present

Councilman Ferri Council-Vice President Vargas put this on the agenda on behalf of Cherie Cruz and the tenants’ association.  Residents came forward to speak tonight.  They are trying to get answers regarding code enforcement.  Three photos were displayed on the screen.  The first is of one resident’s front door.

Council Vice-President Vargas referred to the second picture, the bedroom of one tenant.  In the corner there is a crack where you can see outside the building.  Caulking has been done to avoid outside air entering.  The third photo is of the same door as the first.  It shows a ditch filled with water outside the exit to the unit.  The concern is a tenant’s ability to escape in an emergency.  

Solicitor Millea cannot speak to when these pictures were taken.  He spoke with Mr. Marchetti, the Housing Inspector and Mr. Rodio, the Director of Inspections.  He realizes this is a hot political issue.

Council Vice-President Vargas interjected.  For the record, this is not a political issue.  It is a safety issue.

Solicitor Millea continued.  The inspectors have been out many times.  They receive calls daily.  There are zero life-safety issues.  There is one pending violation scheduled for Municipal Court on June 10 regarding the exterior of the building’s facade.  For the benefit of the Council members who were not present in 2021, he reviewed the circumstances of an incident that occurred under the previous owner.  Someone nearly fell through the second-floor balcony.  At that time, the entire building was deemed unsafe.  Work began to make the building livable.  The entire second floor is still not safe.  No one lives on the second floor.  Every resident lives on the first floor.  The tenants maintain that there are a number of violations.  The apartments have been inspected.  The violations have been noted.  None are life-safety.  They are for various situations.  He is repeating what he has been told by the inspectors.  He has not been there.  Each violation has been re-inspected.  They are about 95% complaint.  Some apartments have re-inspection dates in June.  The second-floor balcony needs to be rebuilt.  The trench was dug so the soil could be tested for density and ability to hold weight to prepare for new pillars.  The work is being monitored by an independent engineering firm, RBG Architects.  They were not hired by the city.  The trenches fill with rain.  We have all been dealing with rain.  Today, the construction company was working on the outside of the building.  There was a matter in District Court against Elmwood Realty.  He is not sure of the basis.  He has not seen the complaint.  The District Court Judge ruled to dismiss all three charges.  Regarding permits, there are three in place for Elmwood Realty.  Whether or not the answer is likeable, they have as much time as needed as long as progress is moving forward.  It is clear the city has dealt with the safety issues of the building itself.  The individual apartments are a problem between the tenant and the landlord.  The city is not a party to that.  The city has done compliance checks.  The matter is not over.  It is being dealt with appropriately by the inspectors.

Council Vice-President Vargas pointed out the majority of Council was here for the 2021 incident.  She recalls the Council and Administration working together with the Red Cross and other organizations to best help the residents with that tragedy.  She wonders what obligations or rights the City Council has to avoid another tragedy here or anywhere else in the city.  The owner is not here tonight.  She defers to the solicitor or legal counsel to advise what rights she, as a Council person, or the legislative body has.  When this appeared on the docket in November 2023 they had pulled a building permit.  She thought permits expired or had to be renewed.

Solicitor Millea explained two of the permits are moot.  They involved demolition of the old balcony.  That work has been completed.  The other permit is for the front.  Construction started July 15, 2021.  So long as work is being done the permit is valid.

Council Vice-President Vargas asked if building permits transfer to a new owner.

Solicitor Millea is not sure.  There is nothing to stop a member of Council from contacting Elmwood Realty or Mr. Butler.  As a member of the bar, he is required to go through Mr. Butler’s counsel, Atty. Stephen Litman.    

Council Vice-President Vargas has seen the property.  It has been under construction for five to ten years.  She wonders what the Inspections Department would consider not safe.  Not having two accessible exits, or at least one?

Solicitor Millea stated the Housing Code is written by the state.  The city enforces it.

Council Vice-President questioned if it is being enforced.

Solicitor Millea stated the main concern that deemed the building unsafe to the public was the balcony.  That has been addressed.  He trusts Mr. Marchetti and the department to issue citations when appropriate.

Council Vice-President Vargas is not trying to be punitive or malicious.  She just wants to ensure residents are safe.  She’s concerned about the City Council’s responsibility if they know of safety issues.  What can/can’t they do in an ongoing case like this?

Solicitor Millea understands.  The inspectors have gone out and seen the issues.  They have not been deemed as safety issues.  The trench is part of the process.  There are two doors.  The tenant can get out of the other.  If there was a life-safety concern, the inspectors would issue notice or shut the building down. 

Council Vice-President Vargas is not an architect, attorney, or inspector but she does not think the structure is safe.  Affordable Housing is limited.  At what point does the building become uninhabitable?  These photos were taken five months ago.

Solicitor Millea will ask the inspectors to go out again tomorrow.  It is not fair to the inspectors to show pictures from five months ago.

Council President Marino repeated Solicitor Millea’s statements.  He is aware of some permits issued for this property and represented that one was from July of 2021 under the name of a different owner than the current one.  He does not know if that permit has expired or is transferrable to the new owner. 

Solicitor Millea stated it has not expired, according to inspections.  Work is still being done.  Whether or not it’s been transferred or is the same entity is a different issue.  According to Mr. Rodio the permit they possess is valid and current.

Council President Marino asked the nature of that specific building permit.

Solicitor Millea read from documents: “to construct doorway shelters and temporary shoring of second floor egress and balconies, to provide temporary egress until repairs and reconstruction of rear balconies are completed under separate permits and design documents” which is currently going on now. 

Council President Marino commented that sounds to be for the second floor.  It referred to balconies.  She heard nothing about the first floor.

Solicitor Millea responded there is nothing going on with the first floor.  To refresh the recollection, the reason this property was originally deemed unsafe was the second- floor balcony.  Someone nearly fell through it.  It was required to be fully torn down; not only in the front of the building, but also in the rear of the building.  Those are the two permits to allow for destruction.  According to engineers and architects, new footings have to be designed, and are currently being built, surrounding both sides of the building, front and back, to provide for a second-floor balcony which would support the weight to allow people entrance and egress to the second-floor apartments.  Those balconies are not yet completed because the footings are not yet completed.  That’s the photo that was shown of the trench that people are complaining about.  That is what’s being done to test the soil, to test the cement, the weight; all things he does not fully understand, but an architect or an engineer would.  The balconies will need to be constructed and attached to the building according to code.   

Council President Marino asked if there are currently any other building permits associated with the property and how often inspectors g out, given that it’s been over three years.

Solicitor Millea has been provided only these three permits.  Inspectors receive frequent complaints relative to the individual apartments.  Inspectors have been going out regularly not only to inspect the inside of the apartments but also to look at what’s being done on the outside.  As of today, construction was going on in the quad area. 

Councilman Ferri commented we have a situation that’s been going on for three years.  People’s lives are affected.  Progress has been at a snail’s pace.  There are rats.  The building is disgusting to look at.  It’s right near a school.  Some things have been done in the last couple of weeks, but for three years they’ve had broken windows, rats, no access to some of their doors, cracks in the walls.  The tenants want to know that we are doing everything in our power to get them to the finish line so they can live without the threat of danger.  He’s not blaming anyone in particular.  Maybe we are short inspectors.  Forget political affiliations, we need to do what we can as a city, as a Council, as inspectors, as the Administration, as a group, to give these people peace of mind. 

Councilwoman Renzulli asked when the building was deemed safe for tenants to return to the first floor.  She asked if each apartment had two means of egress at that time and if the trench existed.

Solicitor Millea believes each apartment on the first and second floor has two doors.  No entrances were created or blocked.  The trench is out seven or eight feet and is the width of the balcony.   

Members of the audience disagreed with the distance of the trench from the door.

Councilwoman Renzulli asked Solicitor Millea to find out if the trench was there when they moved back in or if the trench appear afterward.  She also asked if there are time limits on work needed to make a place habitable.

Solicitor Millea understands, from the inspectors, that as long as work is being done, the permit is valid.  Don’t forget this all happened during COVID.  There were supply chain problems.  He would have to assume the landlord wants the building fixed as soon as he can because there are about 30 units upstairs that are no longer being rented.  He is not receiving rental income.  It’s in his own best interest to finish as soon as possible. 

Councilwoman Renzulli asked if the city, at any point, has authority or legal options.

Solicitor Millea indicated there may be legal options for the tenants.  He is not offering them legal advice.  As far as the city is concerned, so long as work is being done and the proper permits are pulled and there are no life-endangering conditions, it’s not in the realm of the city.  It’s a problem between tenants and private ownership.  The city is doing everything it has to as far as inspections are concerned.  The trench is part of the process.  There are two doors.  The doors open.  If there was a life-safety concern, inspections would immediately provide notice or even shut down the building.  If there are violations, they are noted.  If there is compliance, it is noted. 

Councilwoman Renzulli recalls when this first happened.  She was there almost daily.  In this room, we need to figure out what can be done to help the situation.  She also recalls the city was limited in what they could do because it is private property.  We may have to do something as residents to help other residents or ask the state because they have mechanisms.  Since state law trumps city law, maybe there’s something they should do. 

Councilwoman Haroian asked how many families are living in the apartments in these conditions. 

Director Moretti does not have those statistics.  He added that property owners also have property rights.  The city can’t overstep or apply undue pressure; otherwise, we could end up in a lawsuit with the property owner.  What the city can do is enforce the laws.  Sometimes we don’t like the laws, but those are the tools in our toolbox.      

Council President Marino stated there are clearly landlord/tenant issues, and process of the judicial system, but there’s a duty upon the city in terms of inspections.  That’s why Councilman Ferri and Council President Vargas brought the issues up this evening. 

Councilman Wall referred to the terms “trench” and “moat”.  If we are condoning this as a city, it is wrong-minded.   The pictures sicken him.  Someone can pull a permit to leave someone’s residence like that in perpetuity and it’s okay?  He doesn’t see it that way.    

Councilman Donegan agrees with what pretty much each colleague has said, particularly Councilman Wall.  Over the years, and certainly with this situation, a source of frustration is the inability to get information from certain departments.  The inspections department is particularly difficult.  What would be helpful, for context, would be for the body to have a complete report of every inspection, every violation found, every follow-up, the date, and the people present, from January 1 through the present.  We need that, in writing.  If required, he will put in a public records request.  The Council has the ability to enact, repeal or amend ordinances for the public health, safety and welfare of the residents.  Having all the information will best enable Council to do that.  He hopes Council can have that by the next Council meeting.  If there are any questions about what he is requesting, he is happy to put it in writing.

Council Vice-President Vargas referred to pictures submitted and being circulated among Council this evening.  She would like them added to the record.

MOTION made by Council Vice-President Vargas, SECOND by Councilman Ferri to add the pictures to the record.

VOTE:  Ayes – 9 (unanimous)

Director Moretti remarked that the requested timeframe, back to January 2021, is coincidentally only during the Hopkin’s administration, not the Fung administration.   

Councilman Donegan was mirroring the date on the docket.  He is happy to go back to the date of the city’s incorporation.

From Councilman Donegan:

Enforcement of the Lead Safe Homes Ordinance

Councilman Donegan provided background.  The ordinance was passed last year.  The genesis of that ordinance was seeing what happened on Broad Street. He originally requested a Safe Homes Ordinance which would require proactive inspections every five years of rental units in the city.  He received push-back.  He limited the subsequent proposal to just lead.  Over 800 Cranston children entering kindergarten were tested.  3.1% have lead poisoning.  That is higher than the rest of the state when you extract four core cities.  That is why it is important to enforce the ordinance.  It has a direct impact on educational outcomes, health and well-being, and economic output.  The ordinance merely gives the city a mechanism to enforce a state law already on the books.  We stayed enforcement until June of 2024, despite the ordinance being passed in October of 2023, to give time for a plan to be put in place.  He is asking what the plan is to enforce the ordinance.

Solicitor Millea addressed the RI General Law.  As of January 1, 2024 different regulations started for houses built prior to 1978, which probably covers 70-80% of the city.  There are two specific parts.  One is that it only affects someone who has taken title to a property after 2005.  The other part is whether or not they are renting out to someone who is “at risk”, which is defined by statute as someone under the age of six or pregnant.  There are two things wrong with what Councilman Donegan is asking.  First, the ordinance was passed without a fiscal note and the city is short inspectors.  The city would need a minimum of two full-time inspectors to enforce the nature of the ordinance.  In the statute, the Attorney General’s office is responsible for a database it has not yet created, but they anticipate will be available around October of this year.  Unless and until the database is accessible to our Inspections Department there is zero way to enforce the ordinance.  We don’t know who has the property or who is subject to the lead certificate.  Going back to the prior conversation, this back flows to the Building Code created by the State of Rhode Island.  Without the database, it is near impossible to enforce the ordinance.

Councilman Donegan believes the Department of Health has a log of addresses who have a lead certificate and accompanying expiration date.  Couldn’t we just start with those that had a certificate that expired?  Or by sending a letter to owners of pre-1978 structures that this may apply, to begin educating them? 

Solicitor Millea asked who would do it.  We don’t have enough inspectors.  There is no money in the inspection budget to hire two additional inspectors or someone to go through the records in the Clerk’s office to identify properties built prior to 1978 and cross-reference a list from the Dept. of Health.  The Attorney General needs to create a database not just for Cranston, but the entire state.  Without that, it is near impossible to determine who has a lead certificate, who should have one, and whether or not there is someone considered at risk.  It comes down to the financial ability of the city.

Councilman Donegan is distilling this down to “the city will not enforce it”.

Solicitor Millea stated the city does not have the means to enforce it right now.  It’s a lack of personnel, funding, and research.  Ultimately, the database the state is to create, under the statute, to allow for enforcement, does not exist and they hope to have it available in October.  That is the answer the City is getting from the State of RI.

Councilman Donegan asked if the Inspections Department could confer with the Tax Assessor to run a report of pre-1978 structures, export it into an excel spreadsheet, mail merge, and print letters to send out to these addresses. 

Solicitor Millea believes the statute only applies to properties being rented out.  It’s not just a house that was built before 1978.  There are multiple layers to the law.  He’s not sure if the Tax Assessor’s office has the ability or the manpower to do that. 

Councilman Donegan suggested we attempt to capture where this might be applicable.  If the Tax Assessor can identify pre-1978 structures, we can send the letter to multi-family homes in the city under the presumption there’s a fairly good chance this would apply.  Cast a broad net and say this ordinance may apply.  It’s better than doing nothing while kids are sitting in Cranston schools struggling because they are dealing with lead poisoning at home.  In 1949 the U.N. declared housing a human right.  This is the kind of thing we need to address to make that a reality.  We are not doing enough to enforce the ordinance.  We’ve had seven months to plan.

Council Vice-President Vargas is hearing there is no funding at this point to do any type of enforcement.  She echoes the sentiment of her colleagues in terms of educating our residents.  June is Healthy Home Month.  She’s wondering if there is an opportunity to at least start educating the public through social media platforms and other means.

Director Moretti reiterated the state’s database is delayed by three months.  If we can attach it to that we will save so much time, energy, and cost.  If we try to start July 1 we will be draining resources from the department.  He’s sure we can obtain data on age of properties.  The question is if they are rental properties.  He does not believe the Tax Assessor differentiates between a rental unit and non-rental unit.  He is happy to look into it.  Otherwise, it’s a needle in a haystack.  Sending letters to people isn’t cheap with the cost of postage.  If we can do it within budget, with the resources the Council provided, he is happy to do so.  He did raise a concern at the time the ordinance was passed that a fiscal note should be attached because there would be a cost.  He was stricken down saying there wouldn’t be.  It would be more efficient to wait until the database is live.  We would lose three months on the timing but would save a lot of time.  If we can filter the properties, we can make a valiant effort to put a dent in it.  If not, he would have to give it further thought.

Councilwoman Renzulli pointed out we do have a mechanism in the schools.  We can send home flyers with children.  They are at higher risk.  Maybe start there.  It’s not a great fix to the problem but we have limited resources and many other things, like Broad Street, which need to be taken care of.  Let people know their rights.  Anyone can look up the year their house was built on Zillow.  It might be a band aid until we have a database.   

From Councilwoman Renzulli:

Scope and Authority of Council Investigations: Discussion on a formal request by the ACLU of Rhode Island concerning the recent resignation of former City Councilwoman Aniece Germain; and accepting the letter which makes this request into the record (VOTE MAY BE TAKEN). The ACLU has raised substantial concerns regarding the events leading to Ms. Germain’s resignation, particularly the appropriateness and authority of a Council investigation into her private organizational affairs. Clarification of Investigatory Powers: According to Section 3.17 of the City Charter, the Council has the authority to investigate the "official conduct" of any city department, board, commission, office, agency, officer, or employee. We need to establish a clear understanding of what constitutes "official conduct" and ensure that investigatory actions are confined to this scope. The ACLU contends that considering  an investigation in the case of former Councilwoman Germain overstepped the bounds of Council authority, as the issues with her non-profit's tax-exempt status were unrelated to her official duties as a council member. We should also discuss the premise that any one council member has the authority to “take action” in the form of an investigation, as well as address potential overreach and the misuse of investigatory powers. This discussion can/should include council members, legal, and the administration as it aims to uphold the integrity of the Council's investigatory powers, safeguard against potential overreach, and ensure transparency and fairness on this body and in this chamber.

Councilwoman Renzulli referred to the letter from the ACLU.  It was sent to all Council members.  She asked for a motion to enter the letter into the record.

MOTION made by Councilman Campopiano, SECOND by Councilman Paplauskas to enter the ACLU’s letter into the record.

Discussion:

Councilwoman Renzulli requested a legal opinion from the Council’s attorney clarifying Council’s investigatory powers and the definition of official conduct as it applies to any member of the City Council, employee, or member of a board or commission.

Atty. Angell is hesitant to give a legal opinion in public absent specific facts.  Usually, opinions are given in written form, for client use.  To a large degree, it is a term of art that can be interpreted by the investigating body to determine what comes before them.   No one member has the authority to start an investigation.  It would be listed as an item of new business and the City Council would vote whether to investigate or not.

Councilwoman Renzulli does not understand how their lives outside of Council could be considered official duty. 

Atty. Angell said this is a law school question that would take weeks for him to lecture on.  He will not go through every permutation.  If there are particular facts, he can give an opinion to Council, as his client, in private, not in public. 

Councilwoman Renzulli questioned the absence of a legal definition of official conduct of a public official and the Council’s ability to define official conduct themselves.  With changes in the body, the definition could change.  That seems unfair going forward.

Atty. Angell has no judgment on fairness.  Different groups are entitled to interpret words differently.  That’s how the law evolves.  In this particular context, investigatory powers of the Council have been used infrequently.  They’ve never been used in his time exposed to city government.  This Council would have to consider specific factual circumstances and vote as a group to determine whether or not it would investigate the conduct of an individual or group of individuals.  He pointed out there is a Code of Ethics that’s been adopted in the City of Cranston which talks about the appearance of impropriety.  It also adopts the State Code of Ethics and statements of the Code of Ethics in the State Constitution.  That does not mean this group can substitute its judgement for those items.  State law and the Constitution would trump local ordinances and charter.  The Code is clear.  It gives a pretty broad grant of accountability for all public officials, appointed or elected, with respect to the air of impropriety.  That Code of Ethics would be best to inform what official conduct may or may not be.  Again, we are speaking in hypotheticals and speculating. 

Councilwoman Renzulli asked Atty. Angell if, in his opinion, there were a question of someone’s ethics, is that something that would be investigated here or does the state law not trump to send it to the State Ethics Commission. 

Atty. Angell stated that ethics, in and of itself, is a philosophy informed by law, religion, social mores, and other things.  There are courses taught on ethics.  The State Ethics Law in particular addresses conflicts of interest that arise out of an individual’s personal gain or gain of their family, punitive or other, relative to their elected or appointed positions.  It is a narrow view into the world of ethics that is defined by the Code of Ethics itself.

Councilwoman Renzulli asked Atty. Angell if he advised Council President Marino relative to Aniece Germain.

Atty. Angell responded he is the attorney that advises all nine people in the room.  To whom and what advice he gives them is governed by the rules of professional conduct as dictated by the RI Supreme Court; just as he has advised prior Council President Paplauskas and each member of Council. 

Councilwoman Renzulli asked Atty. Angell what advice was given.

Atty. Angell will not disclose, in public, any advice he gives to any individual member of the body or to the body as a whole unless the body votes to have that disclosed.  Only a client can release a lawyer from his obligation to reveal secrets.

Councilwoman Renzulli asked if he is invoking attorney-client privilege with Council President Marino.

Atty. Angell answered it is with every single member of the Council with matters pertaining to just them. 

Councilwoman Renzulli questioned if this is a matter that pertains individually to Council President Marino if, as stated earlier, she cannot act on it alone. 

Atty. Angell has no idea how anyone acted on this particular issue.  That is speculating.

Councilwoman Renzulli repeated her question.  What advice was given by legal counsel?

Atty. Angell, as a practicing lawyer, subject to the rules of professional conduct, does not disclose the advice that he gives to any individuals nor is he in a position to disclose the names of individuals to whom he gives advice unless those individuals make themselves known to the public.  It’s not his election.  He is required not to speak.  He will not violate that oath.  The question has been answered. 

Councilwoman Renzulli did not write the letter.  The ACLU wrote the letter compelling the Council to have this conversation.

Atty. Angell is not talking about their letter.  The letter is moot as far as he is concerned. 

Councilwoman Renzulli wants to know if Atty. Angell believes that official conduct as Council members involves their outside professions or personal lives.

Atty. Angell reiterated his earlier answer.  The term official conduct is a term of art to be interpreted by the body (this body) that would conduct the investigation.  It means what it means to the body, at that particular point in time, against the factual backdrop of what is being presented, as to what one’s conduct may be.

Councilwoman Renzulli asked Atty. Angell if this situation involving Councilwoman Germain, with regard to her non-profit and their tax situation, would be considered her official conduct as a City Council member in Cranston.

Atty. Angell will not give an opinion on that in public and it is a moot point. 

Councilwoman Renzulli disagreed.  She does not feel it is a moot point.

Atty. Angell mentioned there is an ongoing investigation with the State Police.  There is no matter before this Council with respect to any one individual’s official conduct.  There is no point giving an opinion, nor will he.  He welcomed Councilwoman Renzulli to ask Mr. Millea or Mr. Verdecchia.

Councilwoman Renzulli directed her question to any solicitor.  We often ask for legal opinions based on our charter.  No one, in her time on Council, has had an issue giving a legal opinion on interpreting the charter.  We may get differing opinions, but we are given opinions.  She cited ARPA funds and Sage Drive as examples.  She is asking, in their opinion, what official conduct means.  The ACLU had no problem asking us to discuss what official conduct is.  She is not a lawyer.  She is asking the questions the ACLU is bringing up. 

Solicitor Millea will not speak to the specifics as to what has caused this conversation, whether it be the ACLU’s letter or the investigation currently pending.  He may differ from the opinion given by Atty. Angell in that he believes that official conduct would deal with the official conduct of someone as an employee of the city as each of the nine members are employees of the city, as he is, as well as Mr. Verdecchia. Mr. Moretti, and Mr. Angell.  That’s his legal opinion.  He will concur with Atty. Angell that it is not defined anywhere in the charter.  But the common definition, in his opinion, is conduct in one’s official capacity.  That is his answer in general terms.  He is not speaking about any of the facts that we’ve been arguing about.  Often times he and Atty. Angell give differing opinions.  You’ve heard both.  

Councilwoman Renzulli was trying to ask the question generally.  She does not understand why no one cares about this.  It potentially affects all of us; everyone who is elected; every employee.  She can’t believe the unions think their employees can be investigated by Council based on something they do outside their capacity as laborers; or that someone as a member of a social club that has something questionable going on expects that the City Council could perhaps investigate them.  That’s the point we need to discuss.  The ACLU wants to know if the view of Council President Marino, that the information was sufficient to trigger the Council’s investigatory powers, reflects the view of other Council members.  They are writing to request the Council make it clear they do not.  If we do not have the authority to engage in an investigation of what someone does outside their capacity as a Council member, we need to know that.  She thanked Solicitor Millea for giving his opinion. She thinks anyone that can read knows what official conduct means, whether they want to say it out loud or not.  We know what our official capacity is.   

Council President Marino respects the ACLU as an organization.  There is a pending investigation.  The ACLU does not have all the facts.  Their letter says “under the facts known to them” which is through media reports.  The letter is speculative, presumptuous, and therefore it is conjecture.  It is for those reasons that the letter should not be accepted into the record.  Facts do matter.  The pending investigation will play itself out relative to those facts.  That is the proper forum for that.  One fact that does matter is that on November 30, 2022 Councilwoman Germain, as Councilwoman Germain, sent an email to Cranston residents, constituents, and some Council people asking, promoting and accepting donations, both monetary and in the form of goods for Hope and Change for Haiti while she was also the Executive Director.  While at the same time, at a minimum, its status as a 501(c)(3) tax deductible non-profit had lapsed.  The ACLU letter is conjecture, and she is not inclined to introduce it into the record for that reason. 

VOTE ON MOTION:  Ayes – 3 (Renzulli, Campopiano, and Paplauskas); Nays – 6 (Ferri, Haroian, Donegan, Wall, Vargas, and Marino).  MOTION FAILS. 

XV.           COUNCIL BUSINESS MATTERS CARRIED OVER

            None

XVI.        INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS

The following New Business items are listed for reference and for a vote to be referred

to the appropriate Council sub-committee for a public hearing:

MOTION made by Councilman Donegan, SECOND by Councilman Ferri to consider all New Business items as a block:

VOTE:  Ayes – 9 (unanimous)

XVII.     INFORMATIONAL ITEMS – NO ACTION NEEDED

RESIGNATION of Kristen Haroian from the Juvenile Hearing Board received May 15, 2024

RESIGNATION of Robert Santucci, Jr. from the Affordable Housing Commission

received May 16, 2024

XVIII.  ADJOURNMENT (vote may be taken)

MOTION made by Councilman Ferri, SECOND by Councilman Wall to adjourn at 9:30 P.M.       All Ayes

Minutes approved as written June 24, 2024

Attest:  ____________________________

                  Tracy A. Nelson, City Clerk