City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you. Thank you. ¶¶

June 30th, 2026, Lowell City Council meeting come to order. City prayer. Dear God, today as this session opens, we pray that your presence will be before us and everyone who serves in the decision making process of the city. We pray for your direction, which will lead us, our city, to be strong and unified. May we continue the legacy of our founders. May we be granted this day the wisdom to make decisions which will be for the good of our city. We also pray for your special blessing on all those who are working to transform our city and make it a better place to live and work. Amen. Pledge allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Roll call, Mr. Clerk.

Counsel Chow.

Here.

Councillor Cotto.

Here.

Kyle, I'm here to get you.

Here.

Councillor Duran.

Here.

Councillor Liang.

Here.

Councillor McDonough.

Here.

Councillor Marcia.

Here.

Councillor Noon.

Here.

Councillor Robinson. Here. Councillor Rourke. Here. Councillor Scott. Here. 11 years.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk.

Any moment of silences? Councillor Marcia. I have two, but I can't find them. I don't know where they went. Maybe someone else does in the meantime. The President Yeah, I have it. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm sorry. I'd like to have a moment of silence and dock in chamber for two honorary people. First, I'll do the woman, Beverly Anthus. She passed away and she attended Crosby High School in Waterbury, Connecticut, and graduated from New Bedford High School in New Bedford, Mass. She received her degree in fashion and merchandising from Mount Ida College in Newton, Mass. She met her beloved husband, George Anthus, on a blind date in 1964, and she had been with him until his death in 2022. Beverly had an amazing 50-year career in retail with Filene's Basement and Lord & Taylor. She was the first female store manager for Filene's. in 1975 and went on to lead stores for the company for years she kept working in retail in her later years at chico's and really enjoyed helping people she lived in lowell for most of her adult life and enjoyed all the friendships she had she had a group of women that we all know very dearly Beverly adored her only daughter Pamela Huckabee and her husband Malcolm and her four grandchildren Emily, Alexa, Jacob, and Austin. She really enjoyed watching her grandchildren play sports. We offer our sympathy to her family. And I would also like to offer a moment of silence and dock in chamber for the Lowell native professional entertainer, loving father, grandfather, brother, uncle, and friend, John Jack Baldwin. Jack was born in Lowell, graduating from Lowell High School with the class of 1972. Jack built a career in radio broadcasting that spanned decades and left a mark on everyone who tuned in or worked alongside him. He got his start in Boston during the heydays of rock and roll radio before finding his way to the studios of WJUL in the basement of UMass Lowell, where he would also find his true love, Judy. He later hosted morning shows in Manchester as the nearly famous Jack Baldwin on WHOB and WZID before returning home to finish his career among dear friends at 980 AM WCAP, where he was a familiar presence at Lowell like monsters and spinners games, Lowell Folk Festival and every special event in between. Throughout it all, Jack took great pride in meeting the next generation of broadcasting professionals. He mentored all these people. To truly know Jack was to know that he was always, as his WCAP afternoon show put it, living for the weekend. He was the life of every party. Jack is survived by his son and CFO for the city of Lowell, Connor Baldwin, and his wife, Sandy, his beloved granddaughters, McKenzie and Harper, his two brothers, Charles and William. I think it's Ricky, isn't it, Rick? Many nieces and nephews. He was predeceased by his longtime companion, Judy Callery Baldwin. Jack will be deeply missed by all who knew him. And I'd also like to offer a moment of silence and docking chamber for all those who passed away since our last city council meeting. May they all rest in peace. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilor Mercier. Seeing no other moments of silence, if we could please dim the lights.

2.2 presentation declaration of independence by State Rep. Elliott, State Rep. Tom, and there is a person from the State Senator Howard's office.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, City Manager, and the residents of the great City of Lowe. As we gather just days before Independence Day, it is an honor to stand before you with Representative Elliott, Senator Howard, staff, the House of Representatives, and the Senate to present this commemorative copy of the Declaration of Independence to the City of Lowe. This year is truly a historic one. We are celebrating the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States and also the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. We're also recognizing the rich history of our own city of Lowe as we also celebrate our 200th anniversary. This milestone reminds us not only of where we have come from, but also the responsibility as we share shaping the future. This commemorative decoration of independence is part of the Massachusetts 250 Initiative, a statewide effort to honor our history and inspire civic engagement across the Commonwealth. I encourage everyone to visit Massachusetts250.org to learn more about the event, educational opportunity, and celebration take place throughout this special year. The Declaration of Independence is more than a historic document. It's a symbol of courage, hope, and belief that government should serve its people. For 250 years, its idea has inspired generations of Americans to work toward a more perfect union and continue to expand the promise of freedom, justice, and opportunity for all. Here in Lowell, we know that our strength came from our diversity, our resilience, and our willingness to work together. Our city has welcomed people from every corner of the world. And together, we have built a community that reflects the very best of the American story. As we celebrate the Independence Day, let us honor those who came before us, reflect on the values that unite us, and recommit ourselves to serving our neighbor and strengthen our community together. Together, we can ensure that the principle of liberty, equity, and democracy continues to guide our city, our Commonwealth, and our nation for generations to come. Thank you. I wish everyone a safe, joyful, and happy Fourth of July.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, Mr. Manager. I think Representative Hung said it all. The House of Representatives has printed one for each and every single town. I don't know, did you want, you have a light agenda, did you want us to read through this this evening? But Revolution 250 has moved forward with the completion of the reprinting of the official Ezekiel Russell Declaration of Independence as printed in Salem in July 1776, as with the Declaration 250 years ago. uh the intention to distribute to each and every town in massachusetts similar because massachusetts was the only state in back in 70s 1776 that asked every minister to read from every pulpit in every parish the only state that asked every town clerk to to handwrite the text in the town records. So in keeping with the tradition, we are the only state in the United States that's trying to distribute the authentically printed reproduction, Franklin-style printing. So thank you for giving us a few minutes to carry out our responsibilities from the House of Representatives. And we want to give this gift to the city.

city will could we all come up and take a picture with it thank you

Thank you so much. The senator sends her regrets.

Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Mercier, seconded by Councilor Noon. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 3. City Clerk. 3.1 minutes of the Public Safety Subcommittee, June 16th. City Council Regular Meeting, June 16th for acceptance. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Robinson, seconded by Councilor Rourke. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. For City Council motions, 4.1, Councilor Duran, request City Manager ask the property department to discuss the recent prevalence of odors, what is causing the issue, and how wastewater is addressing it. Seconded by Councilor Liang, Councilor Duran.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. So many residents in my neighborhood, including me, smell odors from Duck Island at various times. But recently, a number of residents have noticed that the sewage smell has been more prevalent and stronger, particularly over the last month or so. Mr. Fox, our chief utility officer, has been great at responding and reaching out to residents who have raised concerns. But since we only hear from those who tell us that they're concerned, I think it would be great if we can get a motion response so that everybody knows what's going on and what the city is doing to address this. Mr. Fox has also invited neighbors to tour the Duck Island Wastewater Treatment Facility on July 7th, so that's a week from today at 5.30 p.m., so that residents can speak with his team, see how the wastewater treatment process works, and learn about the odor capture systems firsthand. you can reach out to oh I should have written the email down but reach out to Mr Fox uh through the city website or you can reach out to me and I can connect you so that you can just be on the list but I think that's a great opportunity it's a pretty cool facility and I look forward to seeing it again thank you a fox at lolma.gov yes but I wasn't sure if there was a different one but thank you thank you Mr Mayor Council Robinson thank you concentrate

Thank you Mister may I just like to thank my colleague for following this I to have received calls on this side of the river in. Again Mister Fox has been very very very responsive and I it's greatly appreciate it. Could we possibly through to the city manager could we possibly try to schedule something with maybe even the neighborhood groups as well to have a presentation on exactly what's going on with that because I know I know Mister Fox has been SENDING OUT E-MAIL AFTER E-MAIL INDIVIDUALLY TO THE PEOPLE AS THE COMPLAINTS COME IN. SO MAYBE WITH SOME INFORMATION SPREAD TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD GROUPS IN CENTIVILLE AND BELVIDERE, MAYBE THAT WILL HELP US WELL.

Manager Golan.

Thank you very much, Mr. May, through to the council. I do believe this is a good motion. I was talking to Councilor Geran about this, as well as Councilor Robinson, in regards to some of the exciting things that are going to be happening in that area. But I do believe that that'd be a good opportunity. I can't stress enough that if people have that opportunity to be there on July 7th at 5.30 p.m., please let us know. Because Mr. Fox and his team would love to even host another one. enjoy letting people know what's going on and i think that from the administration standpoint at the urging of the council we've been looking at uh you know what does wastewater look like tomorrow uh and by tomorrow i mean within the next five years to ten years we have a lot of uh opportunity in in and around that area so um we're pretty excited about it but counselor i know that the The team is over in Centerville an awful lot with the Centerville sewer separation. So I know that they get their fill. But if the folks in Belvedere want myself and Mr. Fox to come at any point in time to discuss this or to continue the discussion, I think that'd be a great opportunity, as well as anybody else in the city. I know that Mr. Fox, myself, and the team would be more than happy to go.

Thank you, Manager Golden. Anything else, Councilor Robinson? Thank you. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered.

Mr. Mayor. Councilor Robinson. I'd like to make a motion to suspend the rules to take something out of order.

What?

I'd like to take informational reports out of order, please. 5.2.

Motion by Councilor Robinson to take the informational report 5.2 out of order. Seconded by Councilor Rourke. All in favor? Signified by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 5.2, informational reports. Informational report, NEMCOG annual report. Mr. Manager.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, and three to the council. Ms. Raitt will be here, I think, speaking on this matter. If you want to take that over, if that's okay with you, Mr. Mayor.

Good evening.

Do we have our slide deck available in the meeting packet?

Well, good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the City Council, manager and staff. I'm Jennifer Raitt. I'm the executive director of the Northern Middlesex Council of Governments, and I'm joined by.

Hello, my name is Kelly Lennema. I am deputy director at the Northern Middlesex Council of Governments. Thank you for having us tonight.

So we came here last year in April, actually, to provide our first annual report to the city for some time, which is basically a chronicle of all of the work that we do with the city over the course of the year. So it'll give you a preview of both our local activities directly with the city of Lowell as well as our regional activities. And in the report itself, it just describes our agency, for those of you who are not familiar. With NMCOG, we are the regional planning agency. We're based here in Lowell, and we serve nine communities. That is Billerica, Chelmsford, Dracut, Dunstable, Lowell, of course, Pepperell, Tewksbury, Tingsborough, and Westford. And we have an 18-member council, which includes a representative from each select board, as well as the city council, the planning boards, and then an alternate member who's included in that. In the past year, we adopted a strategic plan which covers a three-year period of time which we're in the middle of. And our strategic priorities include the following, including mobilization and acceleration of any local plans and regional plans so that our goals are attained and opportunities for funding are secured and other things are prioritized across the region as well as locally. to lead regional collaboration as well as advocacy and engagement, which we have been doing pretty consistently, as well as ensuring the ongoing health of our agency and the growth of the agency. The local designees here from the city include Councillor Duran, who is the Lowell City Council representative, Councillor Duran also serves on the Northern Middlesex Metropolitan Planning Organization, which is the entity that we operate that helps to both program and plan for how we are going to utilize millions of dollars in federal transportation funds. And Kelly will describe how we've been doing that here in the city as well as beyond. Additionally, Jerry Frechette, who is the vice chair of the Lowell Planning Board, is also our treasurer and also serves in many other roles for NMCOG, has been an invaluable member of the council actually for more than 17 years. The alternate seat, which is a designation that can be filled by the city manager, is currently vacant. So Kelly is actually going to describe the work that we've been conducting with the city, as well as all of our regional initiatives.

Kelly. Thank you. So over the last year, I just want to give you some of the highlights of the work that we've been doing with the city. Some of this work is funded by the assessment from the city of Lowell, but the majority of the work is funded through district local technical assistance and through our contract with Massachusetts DOT through Federal Highway. So in the last year, we were able to organize and fund the Urban Land Institute Technical Assistance Panel around Gallagher Terminal. So that was a study looking at economic development and transit-oriented development around Gallagher Terminal and downtown. The final report for that will be coming out in July, so we're excited to deliver that to you shortly. We also provide direct assistance to the Lowell Regional Transit Authority through the bus stop inventory, through providing ongoing assistance and mapping. And as you'll see later on, we are assisting the LRTA in developing bus stop design guidelines for bus stop improvements. We also are assisting with the Lowell Urban Renewal Plan, which is looking at updates, potential updates and recommendations for your three urban renewal districts. We are currently working on a corridor study of Wilburn Street. So this is, I believe, on the request of one of the counselors, but we're working with Liz Altman, your transportation engineer, to study whether a signal is warranted at either of those ramps. This is an update to a study that we did back in 2010 in the hope that this would lead to future transportation improvements that could be funded through our Metropolitan Planning Organization. We maintain a regional traffic counting program where we take traffic counts across the region. A lot of that information goes directly into our transportation studies, but all of that data is available to all of the public. We have a public-facing dashboard that shares all of our traffic counting data. We supported your transportation team on implementation of your Safe Streets and Roads for All grant, which really identified multimodal safety improvements in some of the most vulnerable areas of the city that are most directly impacted by high rates of crashes and pedestrian and bicyclist fatalities and serious injuries. And then I think one of the most important things that we do, particularly with Belinda, sorry, with Councilor Duran sitting on the Metropolitan Planning Organization, we manage the Transportation Improvement Program. So specifically for the City of Lowell, these three projects that are listed here, the Work Bridge, the VFW Highway, and the Lowell Connector, those represent about $330 million of federal transportation funds that the City of Lowell receives as participation in the Metropolitan Planning Organization. And then finally, we partner with the Lowell Innovation Network Corridor and Housing Innovation. This is really directly related to both working on the recent housing summit that the university just put on, but also supporting the university in identifying small bridge improvements and other traffic-related improvements that can happen around the university to support that kind of growth and economic growth. Regionally, we mentioned some of the odors that have been experienced by residents of the city. We actually work with the Merrimack River Collaborative, and that is something that I know that other people in the city participate in. And this is really a collaboration with Merrimack Valley Planning Commission, the MWRC, and really an early detection of CSOs, and so that we can help focus on water quality across the region. We have developed the 2025 to 2030 Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy. That is a plan that is recognized nationally that avails all of our communities of federal funding through Economic Development Administration for economic development and growth. We've also recently completed At Home in Greater Lowell, which is a regional housing strategy. And at the request, I believe that came about at the last year when Ms. Raitt presented to you, at the request of the council, our housing summit last fall really focused on homelessness. And as a result of that summit, each of the planning board members on our council led a conversation with their planning boards in every single one of the towns and in the city of Lowell to identify specific actions that each of our communities can take and that each of them were willing to take to address homelessness and housing production, not just here in Lowell, but in the suburban communities across the region. We're working with the city on a regional housing services office, and this is an office that we'll be working with five different communities on. And we do a lot of long-range transportation planning, so that includes our long-range transportation plan and Vision 2050, our Greater Lowell Vision Zero plan, and most recently, the Metropolitan Planning Organization just adopted the Greater Lowell bicycle and pedestrian plan, which really looks at a vision for a connected bicycle across the entire region, and then individual pedestrian networks across each of our communities. And so with that, I will hand it back to Jenny, who's gonna talk about work coming in the next year.

Thank you, Kelly. So to continue some of the things that we have just talked about, it includes, we're working on the Greater Lowell Bicycle and Pedestrian Plan, now the implementation of that, which includes a conceptual plan for Gorham Street. The plan was just endorsed and fully adopted by the MPO, so now is the official plan. In the document that was shared with the city, which is in the meeting packet, there are many hyperlinks within the document that you can go to and find additional information, data dashboards, additional reports and follow up. That includes for At Home in Greater Lowell, the final phase of that is happening right now. The Merrimack River Revive project, which is something that is an engagement through our stormwater collaborative, which Lowell participates in. We also provide green communities regional support, including the city of Lowell. We're gonna be piloting a TIP design advancement and micromobility funding program, which will be an opportunity for the city and all of our other communities to apply for potential funding for local projects. And then also we'll be working on a coordinated public transit human services transportation plan which helps to connect people who are in need of additional transportation mobility services in the region beyond the traditional services that the LRTA provides. And then lastly mentioned before, the regional housing services office will be kicking off and that includes the city of Lowell as well as four other communities within the region. We also were just, you may have seen, we also were just awarded a Brownfields Assessment Program grant through the US Environmental Protection Agency and we intend to work with the city on some priority sites to look at assessments as well as work regionally for other opportunities. And then lastly, we'll be offering some additional technical assistance should Lowell be interested as well as our other communities for small scale clean energy and infrastructure permitting processes. So we're looking forward to continuing the work with you over the next year and are glad to answer any questions at this time. Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Jen and Kelly. Councilor Robinson.

thank you and um thank you to the organization for a tremendous amount of work you you just kind of highlighted um one question can you list with the regional housing plan i mean again it's it's no secret if you look at the grouping with by community um the city of lowell is pretty much the only gateway city that's kind of grouped within the cluster that we work within I'm hearing only five out of the 18 working on this housing service plan and that's kind of disappointing. I think that is an area that we all need to figure out how to incentivize others to kind of get involved and kind of offer to do something. I mean, obviously it's not gonna be as much as a city like Lowell, but five out of 18, do you have any suggestions or ideas to try to help incentivize other communities to step up and join the five that are?

Mr. Mayor, the Regional Housing Services Office is actually, it's a little bit different than the regional house, the At Home in Greater Lowell regional housing strategy. That is for the communities who wished for and to, over the past year we've been piloting this program, which is to look at monitoring of existing affordable housing inventories and additional housing policy planning potentially. So it is really just taking care of those housing inventories, the units that are listed on what's called the state subsidized housing inventory, making sure that units don't fall off the inventory, and that any new units or homes that are created are counted on the inventory. We of course hope for all nine of our communities to participate in that initiative. but it is a cost to participate in it, and not all of the communities were ready to participate at this time. But we fully anticipate that other communities will join in once we begin and launch the activities, which are set to kick off this next month. So we have the anticipation that others will join, but it is just starting.

If I may as well, I think the other side of this is the At Home in Greater Lowell, the regional housing strategy. And that is what I mentioned that each of the planning boards in our communities have been having conversations and we've been working with each of these communities to identify what actions can they each take in order to address housing, the needed housing production in each of the communities. And I would say the responses that we've received from those planning boards are everything from developing new overlay districts to identifying areas where they can reduce the minimum lot size to encourage more housing production. I know that the town of Westford has gone above and beyond with regard to their MBTA communities and is looking at, I believe, what, 800 new housing units. So I would say each of our communities has identified different ways that they can work to address the needs for housing production locally. So we're not letting them slide. We're maintaining this conversation. We have a conversation at probably every other council meeting where we're checking in with them and reminding them how are you planning on implementing at home in Greater Lowell. So this is something that each of our nine communities is actively working on and we're making sure that they do so.

thank you for the update and it's encouraging to see uh as you said westford's willing to do it and a model to help increase the housing inventory is going to be completely different community by community and even neighborhood by neighborhood within that community so greatly appreciated that you're keeping your foot on the pedal on that thank you

Thank you. Motion to accept in place on file by Councilor McDonough, seconded by Councilor Duran. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Thank you, Jen and Kelly.

Thank you.

Thank you very much. 5.2 information report traffic ordinance. Mr. Manager.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, Councilors, and for the edification of the folks at home. This is just obviously a list of things, handicap parking signs, stop intersection signs, and loading zones. So if there's any concerns, any thoughts, please feel free.

Councilor Rook.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So just out of curiosity, there'll be stop signs at the end of Baltimore, Walton, and Wesley, and West Albert.

It's the manager.

That would be correct. A counselor is largely council child that a steady motion was initiated by by a request. I'm just curious.

Thank you. I still vote yes for it.

Thank you. Council. Roar. Council of Chow. Uh huh.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I truly appreciate Councilor Rook's concern for this old neighborhood. And I did drive by the area, again, since Councilor Rook mentioned about the number of stop signs in that area. And the other short streets that are cut through between certain hours of 3 to 6 p.m., they all have stop signs, except for this one particular street, Baltimore Avenue. And I want to thank the manager and the traffic engineer for looking at it to see what can be done for the families on that street. Thank you so much. Thank you, Councilor Chau.

Councilor Duran.

Yeah, I think I am still, though, confused. So because I thought last at the last meeting, it was said that the other cross streets at West Albert already had a stop sign, which was the reason for this additional sign at Baltimore and West Albert. So sort of following on on Councilor Rourke's question, I don't understand how we went from having two to really having none to now having three and and i don't particularly care but i'm confused about what the facts were and how we got to this point thank you manager golden

That is something that was put together by our traffic engineer when they had gone out and checked it out. And I was looking for her a moment ago, but she's not here. So I can't exactly get to the bottom of the third stop sign. But if it's to the council's wish, we can hold that, whichever the council would like to do. But a lot of this is typically, at least in this particular manner, it's initiated by the resident requests. And obviously, Ms. Altman went out, saw it, and felt it was necessary.

Thank you, Manager Golden. You all set. Councilor McDonnell.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Two, just two quick comments. One, I promised a resident that I would thank you and Ms. Hultman on TV for getting two handicap, or whatever the number is of handicap placards on Warren Street. Very thankful people over at the Bagshaw Mills were insistent that I don't just tell them that I said thank you, but that I do it on TV, so thank you. In the other piece, I guess, Not a comment on this, but it just said how quickly Councillor Chau was able to move here on Baltimore Avenue. I am really looking forward to, in two weeks, this motion on Chapel and Elm. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor McDonough. Councillor Decoto.

Thank you, Mister Mayor. With the City Manager, well, Ms. Altman, I would like to have her here at the next meeting because I did go down the street, West Albert. I'm not sure if what was erected this past weekend is going to stay through the winter because if it is and there's snow on both sides, two cars are not going to get through that. You have something to say, Mr. Mayor? I'm sorry, go right ahead.

Manageable.

I thank you very much. Mister May through the council that is a trial piece which I thought that is all minute shared it. She had actually put it up on Saturday with the help of some of the neighborhood kids.

No, I don't stand up the safety aspect of it. I really do. I don't worry about it down the link that does come. I'm not sure if there's going to be enough room there that wouldn't be enough.

Yeah, that OK. We would be coming down for the winter.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilor Decoto. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Rook, seconded by Councilor Mercy. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. We'll go back to the motions. Motion 4.2. Councilor Duran requests the auditor be present to the Finance Subcommittee a brief financial summary for FY26 after the books are closed. Seconded by Councilor Decoto. Councilor Duran.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MAYOR. SO NOW THAT OUR FISCAL YEAR IS ENDING AS OF TODAY, I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE A GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR THE FINANCE SUBCOMMITTEE TO GET A REPORT FROM OUR CITY AUDITOR ABOUT HOW THE YEAR WENT AND REALLY ANY INSIGHTS SHE MAY HAVE ABOUT THE YEAR END OR OTHER THINGS FOR US TO CONSIDER GOING FORWARD. SO THAT WOULD BE GREAT. THANK YOU.

Thank you, Councilor Duran. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.3, Councilor Duran, Councilor Skar, request the city manager ask the proper department to consider options for addressing safety concerns at the intersection of Lawrence Street and Borica Street. No second if needed. Councilor Duran.

um thank you very much i i had this long thing written out about it like if you're coming from this direction then you have all these concerns but basically it's a complicated intersection and depending where you are which direction you're driving from from and where you're heading and whether you're familiar with the intersection or not It's sometimes unclear who has the right-of-way, particularly for drivers, in my view, going eastbound on Lawrence Street and driving then straight onto Billerica Street. So that's, I think, what drives that question. And Councillor Scott may have some other insights.

Thank you, Councilor Doran. Councilor Scott.

Thank you. And thank you to Councilor Doran for asking me to come on to this motion. I actually did a few years ago make a motion to put a mirror there, which has helped quite a bit. But it's still a very dangerous intersection. I mean, you can't see very well even with the mirror. So the idea of Councilor Doran was to possibly look at putting stop signs there. So I think it's something for our traffic engineer to look at. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Scott. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.4, Councilor Decodo requests the City Manager provide the necessary steps in order to increase the number of all alcohol package store licenses. Seconded by Councilor Chau, Councilor Decodo.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Early last week, I was in a convenience store and a constituent had recognized me and had a six pack of beer in his hand. He goes, I was actually looking to get a bottle of vodka. And I said, I didn't think about that. And I said, what? And I asked the store owner, he goes, well, City of Lowell is out of all alcohol package store licenses. Made me think, I go, what? I know this has been in existence for I don't know how many years, but we've had due to the population of the city of Lowell. That's how many licenses we have. But I'm wondering if there's any way around something like that, obviously, given the owner some extra additional revenue. But I don't know how we go through that. Is that have to go to the state legislature, Mr. Manager? Solicitor Williams.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, so you're correct. It would have to come in the form of special legislation. The max amount of the package store licenses, as you just described, is 24. We are at 24. It's a formula that's based through the state, through that statute. I think it's a city of this size. It's like one for every 10,000 residents or something like that. So the only way to increase that number is through special legislation, which has happened in other places before. I'm not, you know, I can't really comment on whether or not it would go through or not, but yeah, that is absolutely something that has happened and the council could do so.

Would that need a special vote from us tonight in order to do something like that or in two weeks and to push this forward?

Yeah, so I think if it were the will of the council, they would put forward a vote to prepare that, and my office would prepare the special legislation, put it in front of the council for a vote to send it off to the state. So we could vote on that tonight or in two weeks? Yeah, you could vote on sending it to my office to prepare that and present it and bring it back to the body for a proper vote.

All right. I'll let my colleagues speak, but I would like to make a motion to do that. Thank you.

Council Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The other question that was asked of me by some of the same some of probably the same owners was around whether or not there was a waiting list for for business owners that were already in the city doing business that are you know, they want this license and they're seeing I guess they're seeing a new business come in. That's not already in place. And they're wondering why they're not having the first access to it. So I don't know if that's something that can be looked into. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Scott. Council Duran.

thank you mr mayor um i guess to me i i think this is a very open-ended request at the moment where there's a proposal potentially to go from 24 to who knows how many of these licenses um where how they would be given out they're not necessarily going to go to the particular folks who might you know um be asking for them at the moment um and I don't know that we want an unlimited number of these so the question really is sort of what are we trying to achieve I appreciate that there is more business for some um for some of the convenience stores potentially but again until we know kind of what the process is for how these are given out how many really is appropriate for our city I'm not sure that I can support something this vague at this point I would rather have more information And maybe we'll hear that at this moment. But still, yes, I think right now it's just a too broad a request in my view. Solicitor Williams.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think a suggestion might be this is a topic that could go on the License Commission agenda. You know, obviously, their expertise, the things they deal with all the time are on this very topic. They've discussed this topic before. They've had these conversations with my staff, and that could be a good opportunity to kind of go through the pros and cons in the process. If that's easiest, that might make the most sense.

Thank you, Solicitor Williams. Councillor Chao.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just this is a good motion and made by Councillor probably know more about this than than any of us here. I want to support it because I think having more package store, this is an issue of economic development. We always support small businesses and you cannot have enough small business in our city that will create jobs and revenues and tax revenue to the city. I do have a couple comments and questions, comments slash questions. One is that the solicitor mentioned that we are at a max of 24 already, and is this based on the current census that we have, or when was the last census? that I know it's based on a certain number of population was 10,000, but I did Google this information. Some data shows that it's one per 5,000 residents, so I'm not quite sure it's 5,000 or 10,000. When was the census made, or the number of licenses of 24, what population census was it made, and we know that the population has increased. And for a city like Lowell, not just the residents visit this package store. I know many families from Lowell have moved to surrounding towns or towns that have many families and friends in the city. They do come shop in the city as well. So I do see this one for more package store. And the second question also, maybe Councilor Belanger-Rand was alluded to, if these licenses were made available, would be added, would they be made available to potential new applicants only, or to individuals or companies who already own multiple package stores? I do want to be fair, I do want to make it available to small business owners, but I don't think you would want somebody to already own 20 package store to have access to one more package licensing. So that's kind of a mouthful. I don't know if the solicitor can answer these concerns right now or wait for the report.

Councilor Rourke. Thank you. I think there's a lot of good points that are being brought up. I do think it leads to a larger discussion overall. You know, are we talking, you know, do we want to have hot liquor at gas stations or, you know, convenience stores or this or that? So, you know, I wouldn't object to going to a licensed commission for an opinion. And maybe, you know, we talk about it at a subcommittee when that opinion comes back. I think there's a lot to go through. Again, I'm not against the motion as it is, but I think there's a lot of different, you know, for example, some places just have beer and wine. Some have the full throttle. So I think we should really look into that and come back with a vote from the council, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Council Rook. Council McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I agree with, I think, most of my colleagues at this point just on the, I think the motion as it is is pretty good. In thinking through this conversation before we, because this is, as it stands, vague. I like that it's vague. in thinking through what this looks like as it solidifies i i think one thing that i'm interested in is the the location and distribution of the current package store situation so i know depending on lowell is a geographically large area with some dense sections and some spread out sections and depending on where you live Where I live, I don't actually think there is a package store that I could walk to, which is kind of silly. There used to be one, but it closed. And I only know because a couple of residents reached out and said, what happened to my Paki? And I said, I don't know. I never went to that store at that particular location. thinking thinking through not just the gross number but also neighborhood and community access to a package store because it also might be that we don't need that many more it's just that you know of our 24 or of our whatever number if we've got 10 of them sitting on on one patch of the city then you get the rest of the city it's trying to fight over 14 Etc so I don't know thank you Council Robinson

thank you um to the maker of the motion would you be okay with maybe referring this to say economic development subcommittee flush out exactly what it is you're looking for and then you can send it over to the solicitor for review at least or the commission for review at least that way you can kind of key in and narrow down exactly what what your train of thought was on this motion it's just an idea

No, I appreciate that, Councilor Robinson. I think just being a prior member of the License Commission, I think the biggest criterion in handing out a license like that is there a need. And if there isn't a need, then fine, because we don't want to pack a store 500 feet from another one. So I think City Solicitor makes up a good point. Let's vote on it today. Let's talk about it either at a subcommittee or further on, and then we can send it to the License Commission. I think that might be the way to go if everybody is agreeable with that.

Councilor Robinson?

Yeah, so you would like to amend your motion?

I'm fine with that.

Economic development?

Yep.

Okay, so I'd make a motion to refer this to Economic Development Subcommittee.

Motion to send this to the Economic Development Subcommittee by Councilor Robinson, seconded by Councilor DeCoto. On the motion, Councilor Noon.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. There's a lot of good suggestions being put forth on the table. You know, the maker of the motion is also a former license board commissioner as well. So, he knows the importance of the input of the license commission on this matter is important. So, if it goes to economic development subcommittee and then You get a recommendation or input from the License Commission, that would be great.

Thank you, Councilor Noon. Council Lee Yank.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I do support to send this to the committee. It's unlikely that I support additional liquor stores around the neighborhood. I need to look at the health, the safety of the neighborhood and the area where they wanted to put this. At my last job, I looked at the different corner stores throughout the city. i don't think it balance the different neighborhoods that these stores are being located as well i see that even some of the liquor store right now if you look at for example the one next to the star closer school it's very close to the school as well um so i i think um for this I need to actually looking into why were the maximum of 24 in the first place and what are some of the criteria into looking into additional package store like this. I mean of everything else and I think it's gonna be tough for me to look at and think that more alcohol stores and increased development economic development throughout the city, but at the same time, the health and well-being of the community, the new generation, the access of... I guess I stop here, but it's a little difficult. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Noon. You know, one of the interesting things that I've seen as being the mayor is when I get to tour some of the schools and you look right across the street, there's a package store. Stock Closet, you go to Little High School, you go to the Butler, the Shaughnessy, you go to the STEM Academy. The STEM Academy right outside the shelter has a package store. I think we've already been saturated with it, so I won't be in favor of any of it, no matter which way it goes. I don't understand why we're trying to cater to people when we have another group of people that have major issues, and a lot of them are in the lower-income areas where we're seeing these put. You know, we need to take a stance. The state has a stance, and here we are, and I just won't be voting in favor of sending it to a subcommittee or to anywhere else. When you go to these schools and you see these package stores and everything around them, there's questions. So thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. I would just, in response to that comment, you know, I'm not necessarily in favor of expanding the number of package stores within the city, but we can still have a discussion about what I had brought up as well about how the package store licenses are given out, you know, whether or not it's whether or not it's to people that are already invested, business owners in the city. So, I think there's more discussion to have. So, you know, this isn't a vote necessarily to expand the number of package stores. Thank you.

Thank you, Counselor Scott. Roll call.

This is to send it to a subcommittee, correct, Mr. Mayor? Yes. Thank you. Thank you.

Counselor Scott. Council. Council Cha. Yes. Council Dakota. Yes. Mayor Gitche.

No.

Council Duran. Yes. Council Liang. No. Council McDonough. Yes. Council Mercier. Yes. Council Noon.

Yes.

Council Robinson.

Yes.

Council Rourke.

Yes.

Council Scott. Yes.

Mr. Mayor.

Motion passes. Counselor Marcia.

Is it possible that I could suspend the rules to allow claims 9.1, where there's a speaker here ready to speak on Fernando Souza?

Motion by Councilor Marisier to take 9.1 out of order, seconded by Councilor Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 9.1 claims three property damage. Motion referred to the Law Department for report and recommendations by Councilor Robinson, seconded by Councilor Noon. Good evening, Mayor. Just state your name and address.

My name is Fernando Sousa. Good evening to you all. I just want to bring to your attention that you do have a few roads on our streets in the city of Lowe that need some attention. Back in May, I ended up smashing my car into one of your sinkholes in a pothole between Wentworth and Roger Street. I received a phone call from the city state and that it is sinking. It caused damage to my vehicle. I want the city to acknowledge that you do have, in fact, problems in our main roads. They need some attention.

Thank you. All in favor signify by saying aye. Oh, we don't need a roll call on this, right? No. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Going back to the regular agenda, 4.5, Councilor DeCoto, request the City Manager update the Council on the implementation of automated traffic enforcement cameras on school buses, seconded by Councilor Robinson, Councilor DeCoto.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We had this discussion in Council, I think February, and kind of gone by the sides. But I know in the recent weeks that the City of Quincy and Medford have signed up, and I believe the City of Worcester is going to be signing a contract. Obviously, in these financial times, when we could be looking at some revenue generators, this might be one that might help us. So I'd like to get an update on where we are with this and hopefully get it to the school committee for their vote as well. Thank you.

Thank you Councilor Ducote, Councilor Rook.

I agree with the motion 100%, but you know just from recollection, the school committee would have to put that in contracts going forward, right? Mr. Manager.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, through to the council. We've done all the preliminary work at the request of this council, and we will be sending it over to the school committee to have that discussion. And you're right, council, this is in regards to the contract that the school department has. So we will be moving forward on that, and hopefully we'll have a report back here in the next two weeks.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Council of Dakota. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered.

Mr. Mayor.

Council, merci.

Thank you. Sorry to suspend the rules again, but there's more people here to speak on City Council Motion 4.13.

There's also one for 4.8, so you want to get to 4.8 first? Okay, sure, sure. So you want to go through 4.6, 4.7, hit 4.8, and then? Or do you want to just suspend for 4.8 and 4.13? Yes, thank you. Okay, motion by Councilor Marcia to suspend the rules to allow 4.8 and 4.13 motions taken out of order, seconded by Councilor Noon. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.8, Councilor Noon, request the City Manager work with the appropriate department to promote and support residents who wish to create and maintain bee pollinator gardens. Seconded by Councilor Robinson. Councilor Noon, we have a registered speaker.

Lisa Mosca.

Hi, that's me. I am at 396 Pine Street, and I am here just to second. I would really very much like to see support for pollinator gardens across the city. i am a biologist by training i have done a lot of pollinator gardens i have a pollinator garden and i am here to support this motion but also just to say that i'm interested in providing any kind of support to the city as you pursue this if you pursue this thank you thank you council noon

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I was reached out by the resident in the Highland and I think, you know, thanks Lisa for speaking up on it. I think Lisa is going to offer her expertise since she is a biologist and this is her area also of expertise. I think it's a good thing that the city has looked to accommodate those resident of ours that would like to uh you know i would like to do that basically you know having a garden a a pollinator garden so i mean it's a good thing i mean the city of lowe is very diverse and very accommodated so this is one of the one of the other things that we do accommodating our resident thank you thank you councillor new and council joanne

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think it's great that we do as much as we can to support biodiversity, whether it's pollinators or also the plants in our city. There was just a presentation this past Saturday organized by Lowell Loves Wildlife and presented at the library. and presented by someone from peperol's invasive and native plant advisory committee talking about native plantings and how um they are important to sustain local wildlife and local pollinators and so my concern would be and and it's i think it's wonderful that the speaker is a biologist because she can understand this much better than i but i think focusing on bees alone may be a little too narrow and that we need to think about, you know, all pollinators and native plants together, just as we think about integrated pest management, as opposed to escars, we need to think about how we're, you know, trying to attract the right biodiversity or diverse biology, I guess. I'm really losing it here in our city. So I just worry about too narrow a focus rather than one that is properly integrated. But again, if we have a biologist who's interested And maybe our Sustainability Council and sustainability team are the right folks to get involved in this. But I just think we need to take an integrated approach and not sort of emphasize one kind of pollinator over others. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Joann. Councilor Robinson.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Well, and son of all, I'm glad to see we started movement on two pollinator gardens, I believe. The one up by June, July Street, as well as the Robinson School Hill. I know we got a lot of positive feedback on that. For people that might be interested as well, MNLA.com, it's a program called Growing Wild Massachusetts, program partners are DCR, MNLA, and MDAR. And it's all about planting native, impactful, wild, local pollinators for residents. They were offering kits that you would partner with them if you had a yard. You would register your plot with them and you could go to one of the partner organizations like Mahoney's out in Chelmsford and they would provide you with the kit to start a pollinator garden on your own property. So I'm glad to see this is coming forward. And again, that's MNLA.com. And it's Growing Wild Massachusetts at the state. It's an initiative that they are really pushing and helping residents to pick up pollinator kits. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.13, Councilor McDonough, Councilor Noon, request the City Manager work with the appropriate department to request the installation of a crosswalk on Chelmsford Street, Route 110, between Park Street and Waite Street. No second if needed. We have a registered speaker.

Valerie Sekina.

Hi, my name is Valerie Sakina. I'm 31 Way Street. The street that, the Chelmsford Street, I've just noticed that there's a lot of like, there's schools, there's bus stops on each side, and then there's like a bunch of fast food places. And so I drive there every day and I always see people, kids like crossing, and it's just not like very far away from each crosswalk. So I'm just worried if it's like safe for them. That's what.

Paul here. That's it.

Yeah, that's you, Dallas. He probably butchered his name.

All right. Paul Hire, also. I'm from 190 Perry Street. But can you? OK, sorry. I also notice a lot at Way Street that In order to cross, it's a far distance between the crosswalk at the end of the street and one far to the left. So it really is very unsafe for a lot of the kids who are living on Wade Street and H Street or around the area who are trying to cross, I feel like. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilor McDonough or Councilor Noon? Who wants to go first? Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, people from the internet who came to speak. This motion, I don't live, I assume, because that's where I got this. I do not live in this section of the city. I do play a good bit of tennis at Calgary Park, and I run down that way, and I drive home from the grocery store on Chelmsford Street. But there was a post I saw online by a resident in that area that had kind of expressed substantial difference between the crosswalks, and you do have a whole neighborhood on one side of the street, and then you got Wendy's, you got the school, you got bus stops. I did it out, I went to see if I still had the note on my phone for how far it is, but it was well over half a mile between the crosswalks, and just given the frequency of pedestrian traffic, the complication is that this is not our street. I don't think it's Route 110. So I'm assuming this is not as easy as having Ms. Oldman do a trial and put some paint down and that we actually have to talk to the state and see if they're amenable. But I'm hoping that they will be. So thank you.

Thank you, Councilor McDonough. Councilor Chau.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank the speakers for coming to speak on that area. I want to thank the maker of the motions. This is a good motion. I live in that area. I drive and walk in that area almost every day. And there are multiple small businesses in that area. A lot of vehicles pull in and out, making left turn, making right turn, very, very confusing area. So I think like a crosswalk will bring more attention to pedestrians, make sure that it's visible and safe for everyone to walk. As Councilor McDonough mentioned, maybe we would have to contact MassDOT, but anything that we can do in the meantime to make that area safer for pedestrians, that would be great, thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Chau. If no one has an objection, I just would like to make a comment from up here that that side on the Burger King side has no sidewalk. It's all driveway aprons. There's no place to put a sidewalk, so that would all have to be redone in a major renovation piece, which is coming, but we would have to design it in because there is really no... sidewalk it's all driveway aprons either into the tire shop or the liquor store or it's a wendy's i said liquor store again it's a wendy's or it's a jimmy's two or one of them i just want you to understand it's not as simple as just dropping that council mercy and thank you mr mayor and also let me just say that i think the rules are

when you put a crosswalk in, you have to have the sidewalk with no curb cut. You have to have a curb cut because you have to look at ADA, the handicapped people that are on wheelchairs, motorized wheelchairs, and they look for the crosswalk. And if they go and it has to be on both sides because you have to be able to allow the handicapped people to go through that. and be — and it has to be no curbing. It's very difficult. But that's an — they — you did make your point, and you were very good. I'm impressed. Thank you so much. Mr.

Thank you, Counsel Marcia. Manager Golden.

Thank you very much, Mr. Maitreyi, to the council, to the two folks that are here today. I want to say thank you very much. We're currently right now looking from Plain Street up towards Chumset Center. So I just want you to know, if this doesn't happen tomorrow, we're not listening. This is a very difficult area. I think a lot of liberties may have been taken with a lot of the sidewalks or the driveways and things of that nature. But we have been thinking about this. I would hope that we would be able to bring this back to the to the consular for an update. But I just don't want you to think that we're not listening. This is an absolute area that we know Chelmsford Street needs to be redeveloped and reimagined. But I thank you for being here and having this discussion.

All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered and go back to the regular portion of the meeting 4.6 Council in new request to city may have the proper department explore the elimination of the daily school basketball courts and work with the neighborhood to discuss thoughts and concerns seconded by Council Scott Council of noon.

thank you mr mayor a number of residents reach out to me they walk their dog but they notice that you know young people playing at that park at the you know the basketball court and it's getting dark and there's no light you know so um and I was told that this is one of the very few baseball court in the city that have no light. And giving that this is, you know, sit between the daily and the daily. I think what we can, whatever we can do to help them I would rather having those young people at a basketball court than having a lot of time under their belt, or they go do something that's not good. So those residents looked out for the kid, I guess, you know, as they walk their dog and think of those kids as if that was their grandchildren or their kid. So they want light at that park. At the same time, we also want to to hear from the resident to the neighborhood as to what's their thought about, you know, putting the light there. There may be reason that they don't want light there or no light there in the first place, right? So we also want to hear from the resident, those who live with butter, there's not many resident liver butter closer to that basketball court anyway but regardless you want to hear what their what their thought about putting the light there to help out those young people who play in basketball at that court thank you thank you councillor new in council dakota thank you mr mayor excellent motion by councillor noon i've seen an increased number of youngsters playing it over there and i think this would be an excellent addition to the daily school thank you

Thank you, Councilor Del Cotto. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.7, Councilor Noon, request the City Manager explore alternative contracts besides the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Group Insurance Commission, seconded by Councilor Rourke. Councilor Noon.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know the contract with the GIC is, you know, right around the corner. What I'm asking is not to, you know, switch or to change from GIC, but to look other option, other company. Maybe there's other company that provide same coverage and give us some savings. Because as of now, every year, the increase in the GIC is close to $1 million every year. So if you can get a company like Blue Cross Blue Shield or MERA that will provide the same coverage and cost less to the city, we should do that. Just to look into it.

That's all. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Noon. Councilor Dakota.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Another good motion by Councilor Noon. Through you to the CFO, once this contract has been fulfilled, is it through the city or is it through the state that you then go through basically an RFP of other insurance companies within the state? Or does this go through a municipal level?

CFO Baldwin.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for the question. So we are in a current agreement with the Public Employee Committee, the PEC, which is a group made up of all of the collective bargaining units in the city. They all have representation. It's like a union supergroup. uh and we negotiate with them for healthcare design that's something that the city did in 2011 when we left uh blue cross blue shield when we were self-insured and moved to the gic we are in an agreement with the pec to stay in the gic and i apologize for all the acronyms through the end of fiscal year 2028. But in order to leave the GIC, you have to give them notice by December of the year prior, so December of 2027. And all of this is fresh in my mind because this is something that we've had preliminary discussions with the PEC on. We did, once prior to this, we did do an RFP process. It is a very complicated and protracted process, but it's something we can do. The rub in all of that is getting the accurate claims data from the GIC, which is tricky. because you need that in order to put together a good proposal for health insurance companies to bid on. But we are in the very early stages of such a discussion with the PEC in good faith, and we will, you know, determine whether it is a good financial move for the city and report back to the council any progress we're able to make. The last time it would have been too, it was cost prohibitive last time. And so we stayed with the GIC and we are there now and under the way that we left

uh the blue cross blue shield before uh the pec agreement is what um keeps us out or keeps us with the the gic if that i hope that answers your question thank you council dakota all in favor of the motion signified by saying aye any opposed so ordered 4.9 council robinson requests city manager of the property department address overgrowth at various intersections throughout the city creating unsafe conditions seconded by council rook council robinson

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I've gotten quite a bit of calls on this. It's just that time of year. I know it's tough. And I have to say, our green spaces have been very well maintained to date. And I don't want to jinx anything, but I mean, it's amazing what a year has made for a difference on that. And so kudos to the team doing that. If we can get, because they are starting to, the overgrowth is starting to creep out at intersections and corners and creating unsafe pedestrian and vehicle conditions. So If we can kind of start addressing some of that. I know other communities, some are bringing in additional support to work a week and just go through all their main intersections with like the tractor and the flail mower attachment. I don't know what our staffing levels and all that looks like right now, but anything we could do to try to get that whacked back, I think, especially ahead of folk festival and other things coming up this summer.

Thank you.

Thank you Council Robinson all in favor of the motion signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered. 4.10 Council Robinson may get your Council of McDonough because the city may have the proper department take the necessary steps to place the low fire chief position back into civil service prior to filling this in just anticipated vacancy no second it needed. Council rounds.

Thank you. I remember when this was pulled out of civil service and it was kind of a nightmare headache situation. We've had great staff in there for the past X amount of years since. I think with the anticipated vacancy coming up in September, it would be the right time to look at putting this back in and that way have civil service provide us with a qualifying list. of candidates applicants and and allow the manager and his team to go through the vetting process and um hire based off the civil service list and especially I mean the layoffs too a lot of our language still is governed that uh benefits and everything with civil service so I think this timing is perfect for this thank you thank you Council Robinson Council McDonough

Oh, thank you, Mr. Mayor. I am happy to join with my colleague on this motion. I think that this is more just a happenstance of convenient timing. There was an announcement about an anticipated vacancy. This is something that happened I believe two city managers ago is when it moved from civil service to non civil service I think that in opportunity to kind of maintain professional standards or objective kind of professional review and to have this I think public safety is a position where it's good to have administrative input, but it's also nice to have an objective, or I think it's very important to have a set of objective metrics that both we and other communities are using to evaluate these potential candidates and just I actually don't have all that much to say. I think it's a good idea. I support civil service. I have to take a test for a job. I guess I will, actually. It's not civil service, but I have to take a test for my job. I have to maintain a license for my job. School administrators have to maintain this. The system is in place for fire chiefs, for firefighters, for police officers, for police chiefs. i didn't understand the argument moving away from civil service when it was made i guess this is just an opportunity to either have that conversation but hopefully to move back to it so thank you thank you council mcdonough council jurian

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. So I'm not that familiar with civil service, so I have some questions, but I've done a tiny bit of research. So first of all, besides the fire chief position, are there other key positions that are currently outside of civil service that would normally, or that would be proposed to be inside it?

Manager Golden?

Thank you very much, Ms. May, through to the council. Currently, right now, the superintendent of police and the deputies.

And so I'd be curious before supporting a motion about taking necessary steps to actually understand the pros and cons of doing this action and not just for one position because it happens to be in play maybe right now, but for others also. I also did look up and it looks like for 2026, the civil service fire chief exam was held on June 6th. So if that is accurate, we have just missed the window for folks to prepare and apply for and all to take that exam. it doesn't i i don't know how they set things up but it looks like there may not be another one in this calendar year and i guess um again thinking about the pros and cons here i would not want um folks who are currently firefighters in lowell to be not considered for the position because of the of the timing issue that is if they didn't take the exam because they didn't think they needed to and now it's you know too late and we're only looking at folks outside lowell i think we should just have the best people who whether they're from lowell or not applying for positions so i just think that I think this is sort of a bigger question for us than something we need to try to do in the next three months. It may mean that we need an interim chief until this gets worked out. I don't know what the right answer is, but I just think it's something where I need to at least understand this more fully than just sort of saying, here's an opportunity, let's go down this path. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Druyan, Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That's why I was going to wait to put my hand up. I think that I actually support most of what my colleague just said. If I had it my way, I think I would have asked that we take a look to see about putting as vacancies appear or whatever we think that the administration thinks is the best step towards implementing if there were to be a policy shift. absolutely support if if it is the will of the council and if that is the direction we were going i i don't necessarily think you need to single out a single position i can understand why i know why we did it's because that's the one that there's a vacancy in and i don't think anyone wants anyone to feel like you know we think any i don't i don't personally think anyone currently in a position shouldn't be in that position i just think that as we move towards vacancies it presents us an opportunity for the policy change i would also support to Councillor Duran's point, and again, this is an administrative thing, but there's a policy behind it before we get there. I would also fully support an interim chief, anything like that, if we were to go down the line towards reimplementing civil service and necessary steps there, I think could include things like an interim chief while we wait for the exam or so be it. So thank you.

Thank you, Councillor McDonough. Councillor Rook.

I think it was too bad. Yeah, the part about to fill this anticipated vacancy, I don't think is actually doable, only because I think the process that would be in place, as Councilor Duran had stated, you know, you got to take an exam. And even if, say, there's an exam on August 1st and it passed, You know, you got to give the people time to study and to prepare for it. I think, you know, I mean, I could be wrong, but it would have to go to a home petition to the statehouse, I think, if we did do this. You know, similar to the other motion that we heard earlier this evening. So, now that's taking time as well. You know, it's something that the council wants to address going forward. You know, it wouldn't be adverse to hearing that. But I think to do it for this vacancy, you know, you want to put a temporary chief in for two years, you know, just that's something that I think if the anticipated vacancy for this one, I think August is when our chief is retiring. you know, the timeline really doesn't line up, you know, and because of that, I couldn't support the motion, but there's something that we want to come back to, you know, in the fall, the winter and to discuss going forward. If that test is offered once a year or twice a year, maybe somebody knows what that answer is, but, I can't support it as it is here, only because I don't think it's a fair opportunity for Lowell Fire to, if the will of the manager and the fire department is to keep it within the department, I think it's just difficult to do that with this motion the way it's worded, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor Rook. Councilor Marcia.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you to the city manager. Mr. Manager, if we had civil service and we hired, let's say, a police chief or a fire chief, and they weren't doing their job up to par, would you have any say in that removal?

Solicitor Williams.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So in that scenario where the chief, if the chief were to be in civil service, they would be afforded the same protections as any other law enforcement, police officer or firefighter. So the the idea of an employment contract wouldn't be there. It would be it would be separate. Now they would be on. like everyone else, like a pay grade. They would have a pay scale. Just cause, progressive discipline, all of those things. And you'd have to work through all of those stages as issues may or may not come up. Whereas the Chiefs now, they have employment contracts, granted, but they're at-will employees.

At-will employees they are now, right?

Yes, with an employment contract. So it's...

Slightly different but being in civil service There's a there are a lot more procedures and different aspects of chapter 31 that you have time to get a person out if they were not up to standard if they were on civil service hired by civil service and

Yeah, there is certainly less freedom, I guess, maybe you'd look at it from the administrative side when an individual is in civil service.

But the way that it is now, we have, it's not as difficult, right?

Correct. Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Council Marcia. Council Robinson.

Thank you. First, I'd like to be clear. Civil service is no different than a unionized position or an ordinance position for the most part. Yes, you have protections, but ultimately, any employee, all civil service does is administers an impartial exam. People test. The administers furnish a test ranked by scores of the applicants that took the exam. then it's furnished, so you have to select your choice of location. I take the civil service exam, I pick the city of Lowell as my first choice.

I don't think that's true.

IT'S ABSOLUTELY TRUE. I'VE BEEN WORKING IN CIVIL SERVICE FOR 23 YEARS IN AND AROUND CIVIL SERVICE WITH MUNICIPALITIES. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT INFORMATION YOU'RE GETTING, BUT I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY TO YOU. I SELECT MY FIRST CHOICE BY LOCATION. OKAY. NOW THAT LIST IS FURNISHED. IF I SCORED ON THE TOP OF THAT EXAM THAT CAME OUT WITH EVERYONE ELSE THAT CHOSE LOWELL AS THE PRIMARY LOCATION, WE GO THROUGH THE HIRING PROCESS AS NORMAL. THE CITY MANAGER GETS THAT LIST. THE HIRING PANEL GOES THROUGH THAT LIST. THEY INTERVIEW THOSE CANDIDATES. IT COMES OFF OF CIVIL SERVICE there's no other difference if if i don't perform my job i get disciplined by my boss who would then be the city manager if i if i don't live up to my end of that job description whatever i was hired into i'm again let go and disciplined if it's egregious enough to warrant termination and it's all carved out it's no different civil service is pretty much providing you the list of applicants and candidates that are qualified in a certain order based on exams they do have regulations around the process that has to be followed with layoffs and all those other procedures but we're talking about a chief position where it's not multiple positions so it's it's not like this bumping rights or any of that would they come into play with A DEPARTMENT HEAD POSITION LIKE THAT BECAUSE THERE'S NO ONE TO BUMP IT'S NOT A LAYOFF SITUATION THROUGH CIVIL SERVICE CITIES AND TOWNS CAN REQUEST TO HOST AN EXAM ESPECIALLY IN THE INSTANCE WHEN IF WE JUST ADDED THIS POSITION BACK TO THE CIVIL SERVICE LIST WE CAN REQUEST THE STATE OFFER an exam for that as well as if this position was to go back into civil service there's also deputy chiefs that are on a current civil service because everybody below the chief has already been on civil service lists there's currently firefighters on civil service lists just waiting for their number and name to get called for an employment opportunity same thing with those below the chief so in a crunch if this position went to civil service they would be able to furnish a list that would include deputies that were eligible for that promotional opportunity. To sit here and say, well, timing is not going to line up, we as the community make it line up. We put this back in, we hire an interim until that list is furnished at that point, and then we go through the hiring process. It's not that difficult. There's not any special treatment. This person isn't untouchable or bulletproof. it's no different than hiring except the list and the qualifications basically it's best practice for the industry standard when it comes to that exam that exam is administered all 11 of us would receive that same exam just worded differently and whoever scored the best that would be the breakdown for the for the community as far as oh counselor x scored a 95 counselor Z did 93. So when they go to hire, they interview all your top candidates and whoever is the best fit, the manager has the hiring ability based on that civil service list. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Robinson. Council Scott.

Thank you, Mayor Kutcher. I guess I'd be hesitant, I guess, to move forward with the motion as it's worded, mostly. And I am curious as to why, and I think it was 2015, why the council at that time took the time to go through a home rule petition to move forward with this other direction to have a little bit more flexibility for management, I believe was the answer at the time. I am curious through our solicitor, I guess, is there like a minimum number of people that have to test, like a pool that has to show up to take the test so that we have a good array of candidates to choose from? Are you able to have any input on whether or not they have experience around handling overtime or personnel issues, maybe things that you would want as part of your criteria for hiring a chief? So these are the kind of things that I do worry about moving to the civil service side that you don't get to put that criteria in So maybe if the solicitor could just give us a little insight into how the process does happen Solicitor Williams. Thank you

Thank you, Ms. Mayor. So in this particular scenario with civil service, when you're talking about a promotion to the position of chief, how it works under Chapter 31 is you go to the, it's kind of almost like a double negative, but you go to the next lowest, highest rank. They are the ones that would be eligible in this scenario, which would be the deputy chiefs. and there's a max of three individuals that would be interviewed for this and it's based off of their position like i just said they would be the next senior below the chief so it would be the deputy chief's years of service and an exam that's how hrd through the state that's how they administer it from there on the local level typically you'll have a background check in an interview and so those three candidates through that criteria those are who are interviewed and that's sort of it there is no other requirements in terms of how many people have to or don't have to but under the statute those are the individuals that are qualified through their position highest use of service and their scoring on the exam

So no minimum number that have to test, like you don't have to have the three, even though there could be three.

Right, and part of it too is, you know, there has to be a willing individual on the other side of it that wants to take the exam or wants to accept a promotion. Those are, that's more on the individual that's, you know. I suspect most, if they were in that position, would want to participate in this. But they certainly don't have to, which could further limit the applicant pool. Not necessarily, but.

Thank you.

Yeah.

Thank you, Councillor Scott. Councillor Moreci.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you to the city solicitor, is there anything that you heard that you'd like to correct? Do you want me not to put you on the spot?

No, no, that's fine. I think the overall discussion right now is good. It is certainly a significant decision. I think it was discussed, but back in 2015, in order to remove this position from civil service, it required a home rule petition. It also requires a home rule petition to go back into civil service. So that is just, and I think that was already discussed. It's just something else to consider. And in terms of civil service and HRD and that entire process, Yes, they have the statutory qualifications as to who would be a part of the process. That's just part of what civil service does. Civil service also governs through the commissioners, and we deal with them quite a bit for things like bypasses, discipline, all things like that. So, the initial part of who is qualified to sit or not sit for an exam, that's just one piece of civil service. We deal with them more on our end with the officers and firefighters at the lower levels. Like I said, things like bypasses, promotions, discipline, things like that. So it's very involved, but it certainly is an option.

Thank you. Thank you, Solicitor Williams. Consul Liang.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. While we're at this, let me ask Mr. Solicitor a question. This motion says that take the necessary step to place the fire chief. What are some of the sort of like basic steps that you need to go to to sort of get into this position in time of retirement for the current chief right now, how long would it take, the basic time frame?

Solicitor Williamson.

Thank you, Mister Mayor. I'll probably say the thing that everyone says, you know, refer to the city manager on this because he knows it better than I do, and that is true. But the first step, no matter what, if it were the will of the body to go in this direction, would be to file special legislation placing the position back into civil service. In the timeline on that, again, I always refer to the manager. I couldn't, I'm not, six months, yeah, I really don't know.

Manager Golden?

Thank you very much, Ms. May, through the council. We're in the second part of the biennium, which means that the legislature will be wrapping up. Does that mean they won't come back in before the end of December on a formal vote? I can't say. I can't even say that. Sometimes they do. Sometimes they don't. But you get into what's referred to as an informal session. Trying to move legislation through an informal session would require everyone to agree. uh and one person could actually stop it now does that mean we'll come back the legislature will come back in in november and december i've seen it where they do come in for one day to come in specifically for something um and i've seen where they don't come in so that's uh sorry for not giving you the answer but i i really actually don't know at this point thank you well i mean

While we're at this, I mean, I need to know also why it was pulled many, many years ago. And also, in addition to just the fire chief, I like to see additional position being included in this civil serving as well. And so that while we're at it, we should be just you know, do them all instead of one single post if we are heading that direction. So that's my opinion on this.

Councillor Dakota, first.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. Understanding Councillor Duran's ask for more information, and I'm sure for a lot of my colleagues, I'm kind of leaning to what Councillor Rourke was going with was maybe we go with a two-year interim and then get all the information we need and then go down that road. In the interim, I think a two-year type of thing would work. I know Mayor Gitche is going to speak, but I would definitely put that forth if the makers of the motion would be amendable to that. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Dakota. Councillor Rook.

Yeah, so we have no control of that. We cannot do that. It's highly illegal to tell a manager to put interim in for any period of time. So I'll let the mayor speak. But, you know, again, we just got to be careful of what the motion is. And as I stated, thank you.

Mayor, good cheer. Thank you, Vice Mayor Noon. I think that this is brought forward because, you know, even back in 2015, this vote was a five to four. Let's not kid anybody that it wasn't. So it was a point back then that was very close and it was pushed. because there's a lot of issues as we've seen over the last few years. When we had a fire chief stand up here three years ago, we asked about the overtime. We all knew that it was going to be over $2 million, but they came in under that number so that it didn't look so bad. And when asked at the mic, we basically told And the control issues that we've just had in the fire department with six people being laid off, and we had a fire chief who came and went, Okay. So, at some point, you have to have some stability in decision-making, and we need to understand, okay, and I understand that, you know, there are points where there's differences between administrations and fire chiefs and police chiefs and stuff like that, and if you get to pick the people that you want, they're going to go your direction, hopefully, and they're going to do what's said from an administration. I think civil service is important. We understand that a person is there that represents a skill set that took an exam that says, here we are, as Council, I think McDonough had said from what he said. And I don't disagree with Councilor Duran's point of the test is passed right now and we have to figure out a way and home rule petitions it's just another home petition that we have to put forward if this is the will of the body i think that it's important that we have people who have stability to love their job and when we're told and this is hearsay that a fire chief is now being asked to leave and retire who still wants to do their position who there may be issues i don't know i don't know the background of a lot of it but People worked in their positions for many, many years, got to the top of their game, and at the end, for the love, they get sent to say, hey, look, it's time to retire. We're going in a different direction. If that's true or not, I don't know. But I want to make sure that the security is there, that if we have employees here who are here 30 years and they're respected in their position and they're doing their job, that it's their will, that you went up in the ladder, not to just be cut the ladder below you, but you have an opportunity to stay in that ladder where you are. That's fairness in government. You worked hard to get there. You're there. And I just think it's fairness. And if we don't like the way someone's doing their job as management, it's our job to write them up and make sure that they understand the direction we're going in. I think that's fair. But to just have all the hearsay stuff that goes on and we don't know. And I think the security is that I want people to understand I want you to be promoted in the system. I want you to be the next level. I want you to achieve that. I want you to work hard to be in the next job, not just stay stagnant in a job because you're in fear that if you take the job that you wanted your entire life, that depends on who the manager is. If the manager leaves, then you know what? You could be gone the next week. I don't think that's fair with people who spend a long time in. And maybe it's my union side speaking out. I don't know. Most of us here have union security in our jobs. Most of us. And we rely on if we work hard, we give a good day's work. It doesn't matter who the city manager is going forward or the assistant city manager, anybody like that. But we have an opportunity to keep the position that we feel as though we worked hard for. That's why civil service is there. That's why, of course, management does not like civil service, because as the solicitor highlighted, it's a tougher thing to navigate for management to hold people accountable, they believe. It's a lot easier not to go through it. I think that's a fair statement to say to everybody, and we all, I would hope, agree on that. But at the end of the day, when we're looking at a city and treating our employees the way they need and somebody moves up the ladder and gets to there, if they're not meeting their qualifications or what your demand is, then you write them up and hold people accountable in a just way that will hold its water at civil service or to an arbitrator. Or I think that's fair. We all want that. Even management wants that type of security. They want it from us, the city council. That's just my take on civil service. I think it's a fairness. I don't know how Council of Mercy voted back in 2015 on this issue, but I can tell you we can all look it up. It was five to four. Was it 6-3? I'm sorry. It was 6-3? 6-3. And there were three people who said no. So it wasn't as cut and dry as what we're saying. And it was a push by a management team at the time that said they didn't have control over a position. So they wanted more control and sent this position out of civil service. That's what happened. Because they wanted to pick who they want and they wanted to go in their direction, which any manager should want. I would agree with any manager that way. That's what you should want. But our job is also to look at the employees and see if they're being treated fairly also. And that's just my opinion on the thing. And I thank you for all listening. Councilor Durand, then Councilor Rook.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is very clearly a very complex issue. I am looking at the minutes from 2015, and that doesn't help me a lot, but your insights and everybody else's have been. I don't feel that I'm ready to support the motion as written. because it makes assumptions about what is best for our city and i just don't know the answer to that i think it's important to explore this and to explore it not just for the next position that happens to be vacant and then sort of scramble again when another one is vacant i think we need to understand this better and this is um mostly a different body i think there were two uh folks on the council then maybe a few more but i think only two um back then who are still on it so i think a lot of us need more education and so i was trying to think about whether they should go to the public safety subcommittee but i'm not sure a subcommittee is really the right place for this i think that a motion to get a report on the pros and cons and really have a detailed discussion at this body about whether to proceed is certainly something I need. And again, I'm not I don't have a preconceived notion about the pros and cons. That's why I need to understand it better rather than feeling either that we're rushed into something or that we're somehow tying the city's hands about what we do because we don't have a viable path in the short term. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Drieman, Councilor Rook.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In my recollection of the vote back in 15, and for the record, I voted to keep it in civil service under the premise of we've always done it, right? You know, but in learning, I think the major issue incident, however you want to say it, at the time was You know, when you do take a chief's exam, you have to sign up for it. You know, there's scoring and there's, you know, dates of the release. And what happened in Lowell was, I think there was four or five deputies that registered for the exam. And one deputy showed up to the exam, basically taking any type of option away. And basically, you know, four or five people decided who the fire chief was going to be within the deputy ranks. And, you know, that's a fact. In seeing how it's worked, you know, since 2016, you know, I think it's been fine. You know, I think you do want to have some oversight with none whatsoever. You know, that can lead to issues. And again, if you want to talk about a dotted line, that's fine as well. But that's what did happen, not just that one time in 15, but it happened many times previously within the City of Lowell's fire department, where you had, you know, a very small group of people to decide who was going to be the next chief, based upon nothing other than just showing up and putting it on a piece of paper and checking off a couple of A, B, or Cs. So, and again, the timeline that Councilor Geron talked about, and I'll just speak to Councilor Robinson about it, you know, they're not even through this process yet. They haven't released scores yet, they haven't done appeals, they haven't established a list. You know, none of that stuff has been done yet, and this process started back in March of 26, for this round. so again if it's something we want to look at down the line uh that's fine but i think to um you know putting a interim um without having a clear defined you know way of of choosing the next uh fire chief i think really puts that position uh person whoever it is a very difficult position uh knowing that they're just there for a short period of time or maybe a longer period of time to pace on how it's going to last i mean If we go to a home petition, that takes two or three or four months. You're talking, you know, and this test is offered once a year, as it says here. You know, you're talking a long period of time. So, you know, for this round, I would like to keep it the way it is, but open to discussion down the line. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Noon.

Well, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, you know, I know we're all concerned with regard to our fire department, the overtime. I mean, you know, the now chief been around for three years. The overtime every year is going up. And that we cannot sustain that. Really, we want the next chief to be somebody who can really rain down that overtime and sick leave. I know that we're not in the position of hiring and firing the department head. That is his responsibility, the manager. You know, talking about civil service with contract employees, I don't understand that well in term of, you know, what civil service entail. You know, hearing the city solicitor and then hearing about the contract employment or the now chief is under the contract. I don't want to see a difficulty in term of rid of a chief that can't perform or doesn't perform because we can, with regard to our fire department, we cannot going forward having the overtime increases, couple million dollar every year, cannot do that. Absolutely not. If you have a business, you go bankrupt. here to change from what it is now and looking to do, or to go into home rule petition and whatnot. I know it take time, but before we get there, before we go there, I kind of share Councillor Duran thought of, give me more. Give me the pro and con of that civil service and contract employee. Without it, I'm not comfortable to vote on this tonight.

Thank you, Councillor Noon. Roll call.

Councilor Chau? No. Councilor Decoto? No. Mayor Gitche?

Yes.

Councilor Duran? No. Councilor Liang? Yes. Councilor McDonough?

Yes.

Councilor Murcia? No. Councilor Noon? No. Councilor Robinson?

Yes.

Council Rourke. No. Council Scott. No. Motion fails.

Motion fails. 4.11. Councilor McDonough, request the City Code Ordinance, Article 9, 266-21. 121, 266-122, 266-123, 266-124, 266-125, and 266-125.1 be amended by removing From each subsection, the CPI adjustment, all parking rates in this section shall be adjusted upward but not downward annually based on the consumer price index plus 1% each July 1st, effective July 1st, 2025. Adjustments shall be rounded to the nearest quarter and inserted in its place. All parking rates in this section shall only increase by a majority vote of the City Council. Seconded by Council Leang. Council McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Sorry, I had no idea how to word this one, so I wanted to make sure I didn't miss anything. I acknowledge that it's a silly mouthful. This is something that is incredibly contentious in my neighborhood. Actually, it's not contentious in my neighborhood. I think my neighborhood feels one way and the rest of the city might feel another. I am not looking through this motion to stop anyone. I'm not saying you can never raise parking fees again. I'm not asking for rate cuts. All I am asking is that people that park in the garages downtown Sorry. All I'm asking is that people that are utilizing the parking service are subject to the same council review that the council has for our other enterprise funds and our other fees throughout the city. The trash fee is a council vote. The water rate's a council vote. The clerk's office is a council vote. The vast majority of these fee increases do come before us. This year, the proposal was over 5% rate hike. Just to try and put it in context for people on how much money that is, because I know it doesn't always sound like a lot. I have one car. My wife and I have one car. Our house has one car. We paid $97 a month last year, so 97 times 12. Under the next proposal with the resident rate, it would be just over $1,200. So it's just under, now just over on the year for parking, and that's at one car. I understand that there's an enterprise fund. I understand the need for balanced books. I understand all of that. The issue that I am taking here is just the automatic nature of the increase and that it does not reflect or have any room for changes in the funding of the enterprise account. So in the last fiscal year, we were not. So two years ago, I understand there was money moved because there was a deficit. We did pretty well last year. I think we're going to continue. The enterprise fund seems to be continuing to improve. I think we need room that if we don't need a rate increase, I think we should be able to have that conversation. And if you need to have the conversation, we can have the conversation and take a vote. Very rarely has an administration, any administration, come in front of the council looking for a rate increase and not gotten that rate increase. Just lastly, I'm sorry. Because I know there's going to be, I have a feeling there's going to be conversation around the. the enterprise account and how much money is in or isn't in, where the money comes from, did it come from the city, did it not, that we have talked about, and we've talked about this on the floor a couple of times, that there is about $900,000 of school department parking that is not compensated for, that's not reflected in the enterprise account, which is okay, but I do that as parking for the... the school system and the city uses. City employee parking also isn't reflected there. And in the fiscal year 27 budget, and part of the reason that I didn't really comment that much on it in the fiscal 27 budget, I was under the impression that we weren't going to be seeing a 5% raise, and that's my error, but is that the city is charging $2.1 million in indirect services to the enterprise fund this year. How do you say, oh, we look at this group of people that are utilizing the parking, and we say, you need to pay for use. And then this is the first year that I'm seeing a $2.1 million in indirect. There's also a number of trial programs that the parking department and the administration have implemented, including some discounted business parking that I personally thought could be a good idea, but I don't. if if as part of the conversation I knew that there might also be a over five percent rate increase to to my neighbors I don't know that I would have supported further subsidies I guess is what I'm trying to get at so I just think that this is something that should have been voted on by the whole council and I and I hope that going forward it it will be so thank you thank you council mcdonough council jurian

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate hearing that from Councilor McDonough and the comparison to the other fees. I did look at the minutes from how these provisions were enacted after many meetings, it looks like in 2023 and 2024. And the provisions there with respect to CPI increases impact not only the monthly rates, but also the transient rates. So this would get rid of all of those. This proposal would get rid of the automatic increases for both the hourly rates and the monthly rates for all the garages, but not the Davidson Street lot. so um and these rates impact not just residents but also other people i mean i appreciate the residents are the folks who are most likely vocal about this but other people do park at these garages either as visitors like i do um and i am willing to pay for parking in our city um but also businesses you know have um spaces in those lots and pay either an hourly or a monthly rate. Looking back at the minutes, I saw that our current mayor, then Councillor Gitchier, noted concerns about the Enterprise Fund and making sure that that needs to be kept solvent. And that is our responsibility as councillors. So I, and actually the mayor, the councillor at the time, had requested a projection on the loss of revenue. So Here we are one day before the end of the year when this is being brought forward. The increases are to go into effect tomorrow. First, I would like to understand the rates that are posted on the city website to go into effect tomorrow are just the monthly rates. the hourly rates are not mentioned on the website so but the the ordinance provides that both are to go up by the same amount by the same percentage so first i guess i'd like to understand what the plans are so so i understand how we are at least currently keeping within the ordinance and that might be a question for the city manager or mr ryan

CFO Baldwin, do you want to?

Or CFO Baldwin.

Mr. Mayor, I'd ask the parking director to help us on that one.

So the rates were going up on the pass cards only. We have not raised the transient rates.

Okay, so I am confused because the ordinance clearly provides that both sets are supposed to go up as of July 1st of each year. So by the same CPI plus one percentage point. So I'm a little confused about what we're, I'm just confused. I think today is my day to be confused about a lot of things, I think.

Definitely take a look at that. Yeah, we'll do it if it's in the ordinance. Yes.

Well, so that brings me back to the question of I don't know how we're dealing with the enterprise fund for parking. And I was I think we need to make sure that it is funded. I think we need to make sure it's solvent. I have no idea right now how we're managing that, given we weren't necessarily going to increase those rates for the hourly fees. And we didn't give anybody notice about that. But if we don't increase these rates tomorrow if we take this vote today we will automatically be shutting off unless somebody and you know revises the emotion perhaps that there will be no increase tomorrow and so the question is how will that impact the um enterprise fund so this is really the question our current mayor city councilor had asked back in 2023

So the rates, we're notifying people that the rates will go up January 1st. Somebody new walking in the door tomorrow will pay the new rates. The current people will get, their bill will be affected in August.

I think the question was, how would this affect the budget piece if this didn't go in place? So CFO Baldwin. Thank you.

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the and we haven't analyzed this in great detail. This is a new motion. So I want to disclaim that I'll take stab here at what it approximately will cost but i i'd like an opportunity to crunch the numbers and give you a real report on that uh with mr ryan but the the cpi the the value of the cpi is somewhere in orders of magnitude 150 to 200 000 per year in additional revenue and While the performance of the fund has been improving, the long-term prognosis is not good, and that's because of the debt service on the Hamilton Canal garage. And we've talked about this many times in the past. Until we are fully paid off on the Middlesex Street garage, we will continue to struggle for the fund to balance each year. Financially, we need all the revenue that we can get for the fund. I am certainly empathetic to the spirit of this motion. I hope that provides some context, but I would like an opportunity to give you the real numbers so that we can have a discussion about that.

I think at least my, yeah, I don't have any other questions at the moment.

I'm just concerned on one thing that Councillor Duran just brought up. The CPI index, you said $150,000. Is that including the transient or without the transient? Because we just raised only the residential, so it seems like the $150,000 is just for the transient. Just for the resident.

Mr. Mayor, $150,000 would be for the pass card holders. That's an approximate value for just that classification. Transient is a little harder to pin down because, you know, they are transient. It fluctuates. But that is an analysis we would be happy to perform for the council.

Okay. Because we weren't ready to raise it from what the parking director just said before Councilor Duran just said that. So, I don't know that we have that analysis, but it's not my position up here to say that. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So my understanding at the time when we had the discussion around this was that, you know, things like the water enterprise account that comes before us every year, 5%, 15%, whatever the percentage that is that we decide. This was something that was in a lot of residents' budgets downtown, and I think the point was, you know, this inflation is happening, and we were trying to make it kind of like a streamlined, instead of every year, all of those residents having to come out against fee increases, kind of saying they are going to happen because the cost of inflation is happening. So I think we're trying to take away from some of that for you. I think you might have a harder time if we go, OK, we're going to do 15% this year. So that was just part of the discussion. I do have a little concern, though, over what just transpired as far as not knowing about fee increases that was supposed to happen that were voted on. How was that audited to make sure that anything that we've increased for fees happens at the time that it's supposed to happen? Thank you.

Mr. Manager? CFO Baldwin?

The comments that were made before, as the ordinance is written, it does call for an automatic CPI increase. We have had discussion about not implementing the increase due to some of the repairs that are happening at the garage. So, that is something we've been discussing. This is news to me that we're not going to increase the fee.

We've also had issues with, if we do the transient, the equipment doesn't take change. It only takes dollar bills, credit cards. It doesn't take quarters. It doesn't take nickels, dimes, quarters. So on the transient rates, we typically have to raise things so that they equal they're flat, they jump by a dollar. That's why we adjusted and we gave 15 or 30 minutes free at each garage so that we could make the math work. So we can definitely look at the numbers and take a tick up while we keep the 30 minutes and the 15 minute free at the garages. We'll just have to see how that number rounds up. And that's something I can do pretty quickly.

just in response to that. I guess what I'm asking though is how are we auditing? I don't know if it's through our auditor to make sure that all the departments are doing what they're supposed to be doing and charging what they're supposed to be charging. So I think that's a more of a, I guess a discussion that we still have to have at this point. So thank you.

Council rook, I think it's the mayor and the first of all I just want to see the motion filed by Councilman done of on behalf of his constituents is a tremendous one it's you know it's he's listening to what his people are telling me he's bringing forward. The only question we have, and getting back to, I think, what the mayor and I just had talked about on the floor over the past six years, is how long until the parking fund is solvent? How long before we know that what we're taking in is meeting the pricing? Or the expense, I'm sorry.

I think I had said three or four years. It may be longer than that.

IN ANOTHER EXAMPLE ANOTHER THING I WAS TO SAY IS YOU KNOW AND ACCORDING TO THE MOTION IT'S YOU KNOW WE THE COUNCIL WOULD VOTE YEARLY ON YOU KNOW ON THE ON THE RATE INCREASE UM AND I THINK THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD BECAUSE YOU KNOW DO YOU WANT TO HAVE YOU KNOW THE RESIDENTS COME OUT EVERY SINGLE TIME AND YOU KNOW THE NEXT TIME A RESIDENT SAYS YES I AGREE WITH THE INCREASES AND PROBABLY THE FIRST RIGHT SO UM I THINK WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IN THE MOST FAIR WAY POSSIBLE UM IS TO YOU KNOW get to the point to where water, sewer and parking is all, again, it pays for itself and we don't have to worry about anything going forward. And then maybe when we do go forward, when it does become square, then we want to raise rates for hopefully a longer period of time. And again, I give all the credit in the world to Councilman Dunham for filing the motion on behalf of his constituents, but I think it's very difficult. You know, if the motion passes, do we take a vote right away on this year's 1%? You know, so, you know, it's just one of the, you know, it's just, or is this one already implemented for this year? And then we'll go forward for next year. You know, I mean, we're all in favor of keeping things as low as possible, but we also want to make sure that, you know, the revenues coming in is paying for the expenses going up. Thank you, Senator.

Just for a point of clarification, a change in ordinance, it has to go to public hearing. But CFO Baldwin.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I try to take a step back and provide some context to the financial components of this discussion. So, as was presented in the budget, the forecast for the parking enterprise, looking forward five years, in each of those next five years, we project the parking enterprise will generate annual operating deficit. And so even, and that includes, so baked into those projections is the CPI increase, but no other increase to the rates. And so in 2027, the fiscal year we're about to enter, the projected operating deficit for the year is $2.5 million. And so there is a positive fund balance. So the parking enterprise generated a, has positive retained earnings that it can draw from next year. That's why we didn't need an increase to the rates. It's why we didn't ask for an increase to the rates. An increase to the rates would help down the line, but our projection for 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32 is about, well, not in every year, so it's about $2.5 million, 27, 28, 29, it would be less than a million, and it will maintain under a million dollars until we reach that point, which is, not necessarily in the coming years when the debt service on the other garages comes down. So again, that includes in it, baked into it, the consumer price index increase to each of the garages. So I hope that provides some context. What happens as an additional sort of logistical point, if the fund ends the year in a deficit, it has to be raised on the tax rate the next year. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I just wanted to try and provide a little bit of clarification, at least from me, as someone who gets the emails about the rate increases, because I parked there. My understanding, one, on the way the council works, this doesn't do anything to stop a rate increase that would happen tomorrow, because we have to, even if this passed, we'd have to actually get an amendment drawn up. We'd have to have a public hearing. We'd have to this one. The ship has sailed. It's pertinent, because everyone got the email about the fee increase. The other piece is not on that. Just to reiterate, $900,000 in school department parking, which is mostly, I think, in the Roy garage, where the school department, the 100 and something employees at central office take almost the whole first floor of the Roy garage Monday through Friday. And everyone who lives and uses that garage can't park there because there's someone parking in it. And when I ask the question, well, does the city or the school department, is anybody moving money from either the school department's account or the city's general fund into this enterprise account where the school is getting their $900,000 of parking, the answer was no. Now, $900,000 doesn't get us to the 2.5, would you say 2.5 million? OK. There's also, in next year's budget, $2.1 million in indirect services that's being charged from the general fund to the city. So we'll pay you $2.1 million. And then, oh, it looks like you are at a deficit of 2.5. But there's also 900. I guess that's fuzzy to me. The other piece, and it's okay if I'm wrong. I'm a special education teacher. I don't have a municipal finance background. I'm not going to be upset, Mr. Baldwin, if you tell me that I just completely bumbled that. I just want to be clear. I'm not a... But the other piece and the piece that I do think I understand quite clearly is... that the fees have increased on pass holders. The fees have increased on me and my neighbors. They've increased on business owners. They've increased on their employee. Anyone who is parking on a monthly basis, their fees have gone up. What hasn't happened is an increase on the transient parking meters, despite the ordinance saying that. We also don't have a number on... Does the resident rate need to go up by 5.2% if the transient rate went up by a quarter? I don't know. I don't know. We've asked. We don't have that number. That's OK that we don't have that number. But we're looking and asking downtown. We're asking residents and we're asking businesses and their employees to take this cost. And we still don't know what the number the necessary cost actually is if this was spread, at least as the existing ordinance seems to mandate. The last point, I think, is I am not asking for us to stop this rate increase. I'm also not asking. I think that the feeling of the people who have to, this is not my last point, I lied. The feeling of the people who have to pay the rate is that they would rather see us talk about it. And if that means they come in, and just like it happens on the water rates, that they come in and say, don't raise my water rate. And then the council votes to pass it anyway, because at the end of the day, an argument has been made by the administration and by the water utility that this is necessary for the financial health of the city. And we all determine that. You vote for it. And those are all people that vote for the rest of you, including me. And you vote for it, because it's the right thing to do. And an argument was made. I think what residents are looking for and what business owners are looking for is the public discussion so that even if they still don't like it, they're able to understand why that rate increase is is is there in the last thing that I would ask, because I believe this came in front of the council a couple of weeks ago. I know if it didn't. But how much how much There's a trial program right now for businesses downtown, and I know, Mr. Manager, we had talked about this before it happened, but there's a trial program for some businesses downtown that is providing discounted parking. Can we just summarize that program, please, Mr. Vice Mayor, through you to the manager?

Mr. Manager. Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Vice Mayor, through you to the council. It's something that this council had looked for us to do. So what we're trying to do right now, Mr. Ryan could actually expand upon this, but we're giving an opportunity for businesses to acquire a pass card at 50% off at this time.

50% off the transient rate.

The transient rate during... their business hours, so there's no overnight parking. And that's something that we've been looking to try to give some assistance to it, because what we really were having were a lot of employees were parking on the street and getting tickets and complaining over every two hours. Per the discussion we've had, we tried to entertain an area that the employees, during a set time frame, they can utilize parking spots in available garages.

Thank you. And thank you to the manager for that. And I actually, and we've talked about this, I don't have a huge problem with the existence of that program. I think it was an innovative approach by you and your team. My issue, I guess, now, right now with the program is that I don't think I account to it. I did not account. It's on me on the misunderstanding. I didn't account for the automatic 5.2% that's coming this year. And so thinking through, OK, we have the money. We have the money for this new innovative 50% off subsidized parking program. That's great. But then to find out that everyone who lives down there who also is I guess we've already subsidized the transient rate on the street because we haven't raised that in two years. And so I guess I'm just looking for the balance here of like, I'm happy that we're doing that. I get it. I think that it's the broader conversation that I would look for the council to have on where the subsidies go and who's paying and when. So when it's the resident rate that needs to go up versus a subsidy for a business and vice versa. It's not a knock on the program. I think the program is a good idea. I just think it's about having the discussion. So thank you.

Mayor Kutcher. Mayor Kutcher. Thank you, Vice Mayor Noon. Through you to CFO Baldwin. In your projection, the out years, is the transient increases included in that so we would know where we're going to be in the future? I would think that that is, right? Mr. Baldwin.

Thank you. It is included. The way that we show the forecast is just by garage. That certainly is something we can provide a separate report if that's something like transient versus pass card holders. And to be clear, that is information we have. It's not something I brought with me to this meeting. No, I understand. It is something we know, and we'd be happy to provide a report. But in the forecast, as it's displayed in the 27 budget, it's just early garage, Roy garage, and then the total revenue by garage, which is how we classify it in Munis.

So, within those numbers, obviously, you included what the transient increases would have been to get those numbers, the projected numbers. This is the first I ever heard of, we can't raise the rate because it's pennies. You know, we're talking about pennies can't be taken. And I think, Councilor Duran, I thank you for this because it was important during all those discussions. And you were there as the CFO, and so was Austin during those times. And we really wanted to make sure the transients paid their fair share at the same time, because it's more important for them to pay than it would be the residents, because the residents should be the ones that are backed out of this. And it should, the cost increases should go more so to other areas. I'd never heard that we couldn't increase it because pennies were being, because I would have just asked at that time when we did the ordinance that we increase it by the CIP, right? And plus whatever got to the point where we needed to make sure that it could be charged. it would have been a plus add to it to the nearest, whatever it was, quarter or half a dollar or whatever it was. So it would be whatever the CIP was plus the adjustment to get to the place where the charge was. I think that's fair, but not charging it all is very, just heartening to all of us, because that was the point of all of those meetings. And I think Councilor Scott would agree with that, was we were trying to make sure that we weren't taking millions of dollars out of the general fund, offsetting these garages, trying to make sure that we were giving people a fair shake at this, and to say that now we're just arbitrarily not charging it because there's pennies that were off. Even if you charge something and went down the two pennies to get to where you are, that's more than what we were getting by not charging and i think that it's disheartening to see that this is before us and and i'm hoping that we can get this corrected really quick like in the next week or two and we can get that charged and we can do the cip plus to get to the number we want But we got to get a number out of this. That makes sense to get to all of the projections that we have in place. If we don't, then we're already down and we're losing more money in that account. If that makes any sense, Mr. CFO. Mr. Baldwin.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. And I'm sure that I can talk to Mr. Ryan and we can find a resolution. I suspect maybe it has to do with some of the new technology, but in the way that the ordinance was written, and I've been here for a long time, so I've been through this parking discussion, and rate increases a number of different times, and it's always very, difficult but it was written into the ordinance that adjustments shall be rounded to the nearest quarter for that very reason and so if it's I I just need I'm finding this out in real time I'll I'm sure we can find a solution to that so you're finding out in real time like we're fine yeah but we we did have the foresight at the time to put in the language to round for that very reason

i thought we did that's why i keep looking over at um mr ball because we had these discussions and we kept going and i thought back and forth but it's been two years since those discussions took place so thank you again come to scott thank you mr mayor i actually was going to read the motion that actually said that in in the motion it talks about the nearest quarter in council mcdonough's motion

So this was, as Council Gitche mentioned, a long time that we worked through this in the Finance Subcommittee. And some of the things that you mentioned that had been brought up were also around the budgeting for condo associations as a way to be able to budget it. So that was another consideration that we brought forward when we did this. I hope, again, that we are able to move forward and make this right. So thank you.

Absolutely.

Mr. Mayor, so are we waiting for a report then and then come back two weeks to make a vote on this?

Councilor McDonough, is that the wish?

I would be OK with taking this. And if you want to send it to a subcommittee for a report, if you want to have the proposal drawn up with what the CFO thinks it will do or not do, I'm OK with any of that. We can't, as the mayor said earlier, a yes vote tonight still doesn't do anything because we still have to get an actual draft of the amended ordinance before what we're voting on would go into effect.

Yeah, I don't think a subcommittee is needed. I would just like to have a little bit more information before I make a vote on this. That's all.

Okay. So a motion by Councilor DeCotto to send it to the Economic Subcommittee, seconded by Councilor McDonough.

I don't need to go to the subcommittee, Mr. Mayor.

Well, if you're going to get reports and you want to follow it, it's up to you, whatever you want. But right here, it doesn't say in here to have.

As long as the maker of the motion is comfortable.

Do you want to send it to us? I can. No, I was offering that as kind of an option here. If you would like, if it's the will of the body here, this is not an amendment. I would have had to go to the solicitor's office, I think, two weeks ago and give him a copy. This is an ask for the administration to do the part that I didn't do, which is actually right. And so I guess if we want to add language, I'm happy to amend and add language.

council mcdonough i think that this should go to the finance subcommittee just because of the things that have been brought to light at this stage that's actually happening so i think a motion to send the parking second fees to the um finance subcommittee by council rook seconded by councillor scott mr mr quick last statement please so i you know go to the committee is great but i think we need and deserve an answer on the concerns that are brought up tonight

as soon as possible, whether that's July 14th or earlier than that. But not only us, but the public as well. So I would hope that, you know, the mayor was probably nicer than I would have been giving it a week or two. But I would hope by tomorrow, like this is this is, you know, maybe being on the site wise guy, but just something that should not have happened. And we hopefully to get this rectified. Thank you.

All in favor of sending it to the Finance Subcommittee? Any opposed? So ordered. 4.12, Councilor McDonough requests the City Manager provide a report of all enforcement actions taken over the last 24 months at 105 Market Street. The report should include building and sanitary code violations, liquor license violations, and all other communications between the City and the property owner regarding the premises and the business operated at the address. Seconded by Councilor Rourke. Councilor McDonough.

Thank you. The reason I left the business off is actually just because I wanted to make sure I captured everything happening at the property. I know that commonly it's the blue shamrock. I also know that, I don't know if I'm supposed to say it or not, but I did. This motion comes out of a Actually, more resident concerns, and my own concern, more resident concerns than the parking rate. And I thought the parking rate really animated downtown residents. This property, any number of things between broken windows to trash on the side. And I understand that the sidewalk is the sidewalk, but then we have an outdoor dining thing that is allowing addition. So just to be able to take a full look at what has happened over the last two years, what we are doing, which is a question I'm often asked, And then also so that we might be able to consider that information as we continue to think about outdoor dining in the city and other enforcement in the city. I do not enjoy walking on broken beer bottles. I don't appreciate the sheer number of Red Solo cups. I understand that it's a downtown. It's a business area. There's going to be bars. There's going to be restaurants. There are a lot of them. There is really only one and a half We might have one more later tonight. The vast majority of businesses downtown, including those that serve as late night venues, do not generate the kind of impact as this one. And outside of a neighborhood angle, sorry, outside of the neighborhood angle from an economic development standpoint and thinking about what is the image that we're presenting to the city, the Leroy Garage is one of the most parked in garages for events, unless they're going directly to the Songha Center. And when you are parking on a Saturday or a Sunday morning, and you're there for a history walk, or you're going to a national park, you're going to a show, you're going to a baseball, whatever it is that you're going at the dinner, I don't care. And you walk out of the garage, and what you're greeted with is at 10 o'clock in the morning, beer bottles all over the sidewalk, the broken windows. There was a That's all I got. Honestly, I could have said it speaks for itself, but I didn't. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor McDermott. Councilor Decoto.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Although I understand the intent of my colleague's motion, I do not believe this falls under the purview of this council. This should absolutely go to the License Commission. If there's violations with the liquor license, the Chief of Police will send a correspondence to the Chairman of the License Commission, and they'll do what they need to do sanitary. Senate sanitary issues and that spring to the building department, but I don't think in any shape or form. This should be in the city council chamber should be in front of those license Commission.

Thank you, Council to go to Council rock.

I think it was the mayor and you know, I'm for one. I'm glad that comes with the use the business name. The shamrock And I would ask that they include police reports and incidences as well. I mean, as a licensed commission, I understand that. But this business has continuously broken the rules, not followed direction. They've been given guidelines to follow. That has not happened as well. You know, there's a reason why they're appealing to the state. You know, and it's becoming a huge negative effect on the downtown. And that's not even going inside and, you know, try to go into a bathroom at that joint. So, you know, I think the city council should be aware of what's going on there. And I know that they tried to work over the years with this business. and you know the constant reports that when you watch a license commission meeting um of serving underage um patrons uh happens time and time again and you know they've been in front of this commission i understand it but you know we have a vote on later on tonight um to allow outdoor seating at another downtown um business Now, do we have the ability to take away outdoor seating at a business, Mr. Manager, if continued violations happen, regardless of what the Legislative Commission does or says?

Manager Golan?

I thank you very much was made through the council that would be something that would send over to dpd and there were violations of something we could we could actually and again, you know we're going tonight on another downtown business a lot of the city so we had a land now.

We have the ability to to say to business know you can do it that's that be correct. If I could I'll wait for the report to come back in we'll go from there, thank you.

Council Dakota.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just for the edification of my colleagues here, so we understand what's going on at that establishment. And they've had numerous violations. I understand that. And the reason they're able to go to the ABCC and appeal They can do that. The only thing that the License Commission can do is they can curb their hours of operation, and they cannot appeal that to the ABCC. So if their license is to 2 o'clock, which it is, and the License Commission said, we will bring you down to 12 o'clock, they cannot appeal that to the ABCC. It is done, and that would be it. They could say it, we could do it for six months, we could do it for a year, but that is not an appealable offense. appealable to the ABCC. Anytime the license commission says, all right, we're going to suspend your license for six days, the owner has the opportunity to appeal that. And usually what happens, and it happened for the 10 years I was on the commission, most times a six-day suspension will go down to two days and the other four will be held in abeyance. It happens with every establishment, and that's on the ABCC for not doing their job. So it's just something that I wanted my colleagues to know about that. In fact, this happens again at any establishment that's had numerous infractions, that there should be people at the License Commission meeting saying, listen, we need to roll back their hours. If we don't do that, then they have the option of appealing to the ABCC. So I wanted my colleagues to understand that. Thank you.

Thank you, and I just want to clarify, this is just asking for a report, so it is within the purview of the City Council. Councilor Mercier.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you to the City Manager, I am concerned about the businesses downtown, and I haven't been there within a little while. And I noticed that coming down Merrimack Street to the City Council subcommittee meeting tonight, that there were two windows boarded up at Subway. Was there vandalism there? Are they working on the windows? Manager Golan.

I've noticed that myself. That's been the last couple of weeks. I think they're actually doing work on the inside. Oh, they're doing work on the inside. I meant to stop in the other day, but that has not come across. Oh, that's a good thing. I'll check with LPD, but that has not come across.

Oh, that's good, because I thought vandalism.

No, yeah. Oh, thank you. That wasn't, to my knowledge, right now.

Oh, thank you for saying that.

I should have stopped in to say hello to them, but to me, it looks like there's a lot going on.

I was feeling awful bad for them, because that's a good business. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Mercier. On the motion, all in favor signify by saying aye.

Any opposed? I apologize. So can we add the police stuff too to it?

I think the manager can do that without even adding to that. Thank you. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.14 council robinson may get your request the city manager how the proper department provide the council with a detailed comparison report on commercial price per square foot in downtown business districts in lowell mcthuan haverill and lawrence no second needed council robinson thank you mr mayor um again going through some of the the largest cities in the merrimack valley and just looking at what the downtown's doing and then looking here in our backyard

We have a lot of vacant storefronts, and I know we've done everything so far we can for like, say, the old hook slides. The other one down on Market Street, they're sitting vacant. And I'm not sure exactly what the issue is. i have a sneaking suspicion it's it's price per square foot what they're looking for for rentals compared to other communities around us so i think this is at least a good price or data point to get so we can start looking at what can we do to encourage or incentivize or or Again, I see we do have a report also about the commercial vacancy coming up. One of my colleagues has a motion response. Motion response B. So I think that it kind of ties in with this motion, but I think this data point is something for this council to get back and digest. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Robinson. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.15. May I get your request? The City Manager update the City Council on the status of the creation of the Treat Committee. Second. Seconded by Councilor Noon. Mr. Manager, I just would ask just that we would try to get this done as fast as possible so that the committee that we select can be part of the regulations process. That's just more or less my thought processes. The quicker we get this done, the more they can be part of the process of creating the regulations that they would have to work with. Anyone else on the motion? All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 4.16, may I get your request the city manager have the traffic engineer look at adding active crosswalk signals on Gorham Street at Manchester Street along with school zone signage. Seconded by Councilor Scott. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is an excellent motion. I would say the traffic engineer is not here right now, but I did speak to her back on June 12th after the incident that happened there with the students. And she did say that she had identified the location as a good location to put rapid flashing beacons. and that she was working on an invitation for bids that would go out after the start of the new fiscal year. So just for residents out there that are looking to see what's going to be done about this, I know there's a lot of parents that were concerned, this is something that the traffic engineer is already working on. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Scott. Councillor Dakota?

Thank you, Mister Mayor. If I remember correctly, wasn't the I know we had an incident there, but then we have a crossing guide. That's at the end of the school day over there.

Yes.

And as I taken away or was nobody there at that day and should accrues have been there. I guess to the city manager.

Council Scott would know the answer.

It's my understanding that there is a crossing guide there for the middle school, but not the elementary. Correct. At the Butler, there's a crossing guard at the Shaughnessy for the elementary.

There's one for the Shaughnessy Elementary.

At the crosswalk at the Shaughnessy.

Right. But in the afternoon at dismissal times, there was one. For the Butler. At the Butler.

For the crosswalk by the Butler at Manchester Street.

Correct. So what happened to that crossing guide?

It was elementary students that had left the school and had crossed it.

Oh, okay, all right, fine.

It did different times.

Very good, thank you.

Manager Golden, I just think when you look at this, as Councilor Scott outlined, the signage is really poor up there and there's really no indication that there's a school zone in that area as much as it should be. And I'm sure the traffic engineer will take care of this. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 4.17, may I get your request the City Manager update the City Council on the status of the audit of the Lowell High School building project, seconded by Councillor Brooke. Mr. Manager, this is just something that I'm sure speaks for itself. You'll get right back to us. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Five, 5.1, motion responses. Motion response, parking placket update, Councillor Duran.

thank you mr mayor and thank you to mr ryan for this report um i also appreciated the link in the report to the city's website about uh about the um dwelling parking programs um one thing in the report uh that was particularly helpful to the uh resident who had originally sort of raised some of these questions was the discussion about if a sticker or sign is lost stolen or damaged then the resident is supposed to contact the parking department for a replacement and that the fee could be uh would be waived in effect if a police report is filed and presented to the parking department um if that provision could be added to the website with about the resident parking the green and white signs so that people understand that a police report is a necessary step to avoid a replacement charge i think that would have probably solved the original question that came to mind and I think if there are any other concepts in the menu memo that are in captured on the web page that would be a good way to make sure you know that information is distributed to everybody and they know where to find it so they understand the process thank you Thank You councillor Duran motion except in place on file by council Robinson seconded by councillor McDonough all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered

Motion response. It's a B commercial vacancy. Councilor known.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you to the city. Um, particularly Giovanni by roses and, um, Ali Carter report is detailed. I appreciate the report. I appreciated the enforcement had been taking place. and those property owners who have taken step to address the issues and those who received waiver from the city. I want to ask though that I learned that recently Ali Carter who's in charge of this and the downtown, she's leaving. for school, I guess. So I know that I want to, you know, want us to making sure that we keep the momentum on this, whoever come on to do what they need to do. But not only on this, but also on the bid as well, the business improvement district that Ali Carter is working on this as well. So keep on at, on this is making sure that those who need help, property owner who need help and support, We do support them and help them as best as we can. Those who are not doing what they're supposed to do, let's fine them. I know that this is a daily fine per unit. I think it's $100, something like that. The idea is not to fine them, basically. The idea is to work with them to get them to renovate it and fix up the upper floor so that we can create some foot traffic in the downtown, as Councillor Robinson indicated, looking at square feet and whatnot. The whole idea for the downtown is making sure that the businesses are coming to downtown, stay in downtown, and do well in downtown. So thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Noon. Councilor Durant.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you for this report. I did notice that the ordinance, it was my time to read ordinances, I think, indicated that the Economic Development Department would maintain a registration list that posted publicly and updated on a quarterly basis. So I'm wondering if there is a page on the city website that includes this information. And if not, I think it would be helpful so that we all know where it is and can see it. But it is in the ordinance. to the there were a number of properties that had been subject to the ordinance, but steps have been taken to remedy the state of their properties. And so, for instance, you know, some are indicated that the property was listed for sale or that previously closed business signage was removed but to me that doesn't fill the space necessarily some it might be a step in that direction but it's not completion so I would like to understand like how long of a leeway you know do people get if they have listed the property for sale again still vacant it may take them a while to sell but if they take years that hasn't accomplished anything so curious about that manager golden I'm sorry assistant city manager bias Rose

So, yes, it depends on what the potential remedy is. So, we've had people ask for, like, more time. And in order for that to be sort of approved, we've asked for things, right? saying that you're selling, like, do you have a purchase and sale? Send that to us. If you're negotiating with a tenant, who is the tenant? What are your anticipated closing dates for signing that lease? So we have provided extensions to some folks on their registration, but we do limit it. Some folks will say, you know, that they're in the process of selling, so we'll revisit it in three months and sort of we make a collective decision, make a note of that, and then within three months expect them to provide us proof that that transaction has happened or that, you know, prove that there was a reason for a delay. For things like a project is in the process of doing construction where seeing that just because construction takes a long time might be a while, we do require people, for example, to pull a permit. submit plans and so that they can start the permitting process. So we have varied sort of extensions, but when we give them, it's not, nobody gets an indefinite extension. It's sort of like a very particular amount of time and then the staff is following up on those. And then we've had some where they say like, oh, we're trying to rent And we've been nice and have tried to give extensions. And then after multiple attempts of continuously failing to negotiate a lease, a pattern is developing. And so we have made the decision to no longer grant extensions and have required people to register their businesses. So I think we've done a decent job with that. with trying to use this program to create the kind of conversations that we wanted to try to allow for reasonable amounts of flexibility but still ensuring that nobody is just getting a blanket like you can figure it out and let us know we are we are giving very specific deadlines and doing the necessary follow-up thank you thank you council jurian council robinson

Thank you, Mister mayor. I'm glad to see that we are holding some of these owners, you know, accountable on their properties, but is the hook slides listed on this looks like Kelly's property.

This is the city manager is rose.

Off the top of my head. I don't know what that addresses, but I don't believe it is and I also believe that site has an active permit.

It has an active permit. Yes. So because I know that's one of the properties that we've been struggling to see, and they've had many offers from from surrounding businesses and other potential leases up.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. And this is not about any one particular building, but with the pressure and I do say pressure with the pressure that we're adding to these folks. that we had called once legacy buildings, we're getting people to respond. In some aspects, DPD, myself, we all look at this, and let's say if somebody was looking for hundreds of millions of dollars, we know that that's not true, and we're just not going to accept any type of excuse. I don't know how else to say this, but I believe that this is a loss. Let's be direct. Ms. Carter, Ali Carter, was great at what she was doing. I just had an opportunity to see her yesterday, and that will be a loss, but we'll pick back up on this. But with particular places, I've gotten involved with Ali and with the assistant city manager and spoke to these people directly that this is not going to be tolerated in the future. And I think that some people have come in with a whole bunch of different stories as to why and how and what. But I think that we've been pretty clear on the let's get to yes on this and let's start filling this. But in regards to the position that you were just asking the building, I know that there's a building permit that was out on it and I do there's some activity. So at least we're seeing activity in certain places. Without getting into the names, some places have closed due to families not wanting to continue them, and some other places have just opened. One of them that just comes to mind right now was Blue Tillet. Blue Tillet just opened, and that was something I'd spoken with Steve about, who is the owner. So I think it's the city really trying to stay engaged to make sure that We've had people that have ignored us. And unfortunately, I think, Councilor Noon, we find them. And we try to go every step we can not to find people, but to give them the tools to be successful. So we could probably go site by site. But in that particular matter, that would make it, if Allie were still here, we have to rehire for that position, I would think, we would know next month or two months from now whether that whether they've hit their goal of moving, hopefully, a new business in there. I know there's been a lot of discussion there.

And that's greatly appreciated, but that place has been sitting vacant in particular for years now. And every time it would come up, Alley would be told the same kind of thing. We have a potential lease. We're going to pull a permit. We're going to do work and this. It's just it's a vicious cycle. And again, that's one of the premier establishment or venues that we have in the downtown with a courtyard area, mind you. And it's just been sitting in disrepair. Again, the other one on Market Street at the end of market before the bank. uh Bridgewell or I I forget the name that's on the building there's another one that that's just been sitting in it vacant I mean in in compared to other communities we are definitely doing something wrong I I was in downtown Lawrence three weeks ago and every storefront is renovated every storefront is is bustling and thriving I mean, we're getting the runaround from people that are using these vacant properties as tax deductions. And I thought we gave the tools for our administration to kind of get a little bit aggressive on these situations because, I mean, compare us to any of the surrounding communities nearby. And we are way behind. And I think if there's a tool you need from the council to help kind of spark that fire, say the word. I think we're all game for that because enough is enough. I mean, they can pull a permit. They can have 18 different conversations with different potential businesses. But at the end of the day, they're still sitting empty. And so we really need to kind of ramp this up. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Robinson. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Mercier, seconded by Councilor Scott. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 5.1c, motion response, curb cuts. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm actually quite disappointed in the response on this motion. I brought it up at the time asking specifically whether or not we could look at frontage versus just looking what zone or what district the house, the property is located in. That did not get any response in this response. Um, I can't see it mentions it's dangerous for pedestrians having a larger curb cuts. I can't see how that only applies to certain districts and not all districts. Um, if that's the case, this is a three foot difference to make a double, a two car wide driveway instead of a single wide car driveway. And then it also talks about vehicles not having as much parking on the street. Instead, to me, this leads to more cars out on the sidewalks parked, worse for pedestrians having cars lining the street instead of in their own driveway. I don't think that was also looked at at all. um and the other issue i have is it talks about green space but yet the city has numerous illegal driveways and paved yards that have not been enforced by the district so that leaves residents that follow the rules at a disadvantage against those that do not follow the rules it also leaves local pavers at a disadvantage that also follow the city ordinances and it leaves it open for other people to come in and just do what they want when they do want a two-car driveway and then no one does anything about it anyways So I would ask that we move forward with the motion to have the legal department draft the necessary ordinance to make the change to allow the two-car wide driveway. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Scott.

That's a motion. Move forward with that.

Seconded by Councilor McDonough. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 5.1D, motion response, seasonal lights. Councilor McDonnell.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is great. Thank you. I'm being a little bit silly because it's getting late at night. But no, this is exactly what I was looking for. This is exactly what the people that had brought this to me and asked me to bring it up were looking for. I appreciate that the conversation has started. And I'm looking forward to seeing what comes forward so that we can create some kind of permit to let this happen. So yeah, no, thank you.

Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Mercier, seconded by Councilor Yang. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 5.3, communication and resignation of Tatiana Tambi from the Library Board of Trustees. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Decoto, seconded by Councilor Chau. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. Motion to bundle items 6.1 to item 6.6 and waive the full reading and second reading by title by Councilor McDonough. No. By Councilor Liang. Seconded by Councilor Chau.

Councilor McDonough. Mr. Mayor, I am objecting simply to the bundling of 6.2 with the rest of those, if we could. Okay. Yeah, thank you.

So if you guys would withdraw your motions for the second and the motion, and we'll just bundle 6.1, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, and 6.6. And waive the full reading and second reading by title. Motion to adopt by Councilor Mercy or seconded by Councilor Noon. Any comments? Councilor Duran.

Just a quick question on 6.1. The grant will fund two full-time co-response clinicians for two and a half months. But what happens after that money runs out? Is this just to sort of help with funding from the general fund? Otherwise, OK. It sounds like, so for the audience, it looks like the answer is yes from the head nodding.

The answer is yes. That is correct.

Thank you.

Thank you. Roll call.

Council Chau. Yes. Council Decoto. Yes. Mayor Gitche. Yes. Council Duran. Yes. Council Liang. Yes. Council McDonough. Yes. Council Murcia. Yes. Council Noon. Yes. Council Robinson. Council Rourke. Council Scott.

Yes. Thank you, Mister clerk. 6.2 vote approved the outdoor restaurant and retail permit for smokehouse tavern. Waveful reading and second reading by title vote authorizing the city manager. On behalf of the City of Lowell, to enter into an outdoor restaurant and retail permit with Middle Street Village Inc. DBA Smokehouse Tavern, 92-98 Middle Street to allow for outdoor dining and retail areas. Is there a motion on the floor to... Discussion. There's no discussion if there's no motion. We don't have any motion. There's no discussion, so we will.

It fails. Mr. Mayor. What? Go ahead. So before I make a motion, because I have something that I would really like to say.

There's no motion.

No, I'm saying, do you make a motion and second it just so I can say it? But I don't want to then vote against it, so whatever.

Motion by Councilor Decoto, seconded by Councilor Chau.

Just for the discussion. Councilor McDonough. Thank you. Sorry, I spent a long time looking at this and being upset, so I wanted to be able to say it on TV.

Me too.

Me too. I'd really like to thank... But just before, and I know it's late, this was egregious. I want to first, Mr. Mayor, through you to the manager and the entire team, say thank you very much for the additional information that was requested the last time this came in front of the council. I think the fact that nobody wanted to make the motion means everybody read it. But for those at home that didn't, I think it's really important just to call attention to in the memo that accompanied this application, and I thank the manager and the assistant manager, Bayez Rose, and anybody else who helped with this, just to note that It's the inspection staff's understanding that they don't actively serve food at this time, that they accumulated $3,000 in dumpster fines. I do have a question about this that I wanted to ask because I'm having a hard time. I understand there's limits to what we can charge, I'm curious about the appeal process because those dumpsters were certainly there for days on end. And so it's curious how that managed to get dropped to $100. Process is a process, but if you got to fix something just going forward, we had violations where we see that the manager was that restaurant manager, the bar manager was present, didn't take corrective action in the case of blocked doorways and assaults, or alleged assaults. Certainly nothing alleged about the blocked doorway. We see this over a period of years. We also see that, I mean, that $100 fine that should have been $3,000, the guy hasn't even paid, the establishment has not even paid that yet, according to this report. And so, I mean, I have a feeling that nobody wanted to make the motion, so I got the votes anyway, but I'm gonna say it, I do strongly urge my colleagues to vote no on this, and I hope that this business owner is able to take corrective action and maybe try again next time, or don't, but this is not the kind of establishment that we need going on the street until two o'clock in the morning, so thank you.

Thank you, Councilor McDonough, Councilor Marcia. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'm pro-business and I like to see the vacant buildings all filled on the floor level with good restaurants. This sounds like it could have been a good restaurant if only they serve food and had a menu that said that, but I don't see it. So they want outdoor seating to drink beer outside. I didn't think you could take a beer outside, but anyway, I guess you can. But LPD vice unit found five underage patrons there without being asked for ID. That floors me. Then at one point when they block the entrance to not let the detectives in, ooh, I don't know, I have, I'd like to give them a tool to be successful. It's called anger management classes because that is unbelievable. Fake IDs and all this stuff and then, They owe a balance, and it's outstanding as of today. And they want me to vote for them to have outdoor seating so they can serve drinks. I'm not supporting this. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Morrissey. Councilor DeCoto.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. My only question, maybe to Giovanni Rose, do they have a kitchen?

Assistant City Manager Baez-Rose.

So the site does have a kitchen, which is inspected and certified. They're just not using it.

They have a permit for that?

They get the inspections that they are required to in order to have that kitchen. They are just making a business decision not to use it.

So now they're going to make a business decision to use it if they get this permit. Is that what you're telling me?

No. So the language of the ordinance is written in such a way where as long as they are in compliance with an inspected sort of certified kitchen, then it would qualify for an outdoor street. So so allowing for this does not equal a decision to start serving food. It's just they have met the minimum requirement within the ordinance language.

I understand, but the whole intent here is to have this as a streetery type of thing, and that's not what they're planning on doing, so I will not be voting for this. Thank you.

Thank you, Council. Dakota Council, Robinson.

Thank you. This kind of seems like this is an example where we need to look at the way we're going to process for for street or is that think I think. Food should be a requirement definitely shouldn't be a minimum requirement to be eligible it should be part of the process. I also think if you're in violation, repeat violation, and I think we need to have that conversation as to what's reasonable and fair that you haven't had a violation in order to be eligible to apply. I don't even think this... APPLICATION SHOULD HAVE MADE IT THIS FAR BUT IT DID BECAUSE OF OUR OWN DOING WE DON'T HAVE STRONG ENOUGH LANGUAGE THAT WOULD BLOCK OUT THIS APPLICATION FROM EVEN OCCURRING I I THINK ANY BUSINESS YOU KNOW AS WE'VE SEEN ON THIS AGENDA TONIGHT I THINK EVERYBODY HERE IS LOOKING TO ENCOURAGE BUSINESSES TO COME TO THE CITY START UP OPERATE WE'LL WORK WITH YOU BUT WILL YOUR TEAM AT DPD HAS BENT OVER BACKWARDS REPEATEDLY FOR MANY ESTABLISHMENTS AS WELL AS THE ADMINISTRATION AND AND will continue to do so um but this is not that and and i just don't understand how on one hand we're struggling to fill prime real estate that that's it's it's a beautiful venue many of them in downtown that are sitting empty then we have another one that's looking to expand on bar fights and and everything else that's going on so i also will not be supporting this thank you thank you council robinson council mcdonough

Thank you. Councillor Robinson said it. I actually, all I was going to ask was that while this was a discussion and not to wait two weeks to remember to write it was just that, and I will, but that we, and I thank you in the motion response, you said you're doing it, but just to, that we reevaluate the street reordnance, not to get rid of it. I think it's a phenomenal program, but just to try and address a couple of years in now it came during the pandemic and it was, you know, passed with urgency because it was urgent. But I think now just taking the time to take a look and see how we could improve it is needed. So thank you.

Thank you, Councilor McDonough. Roll call. Roll call, Mr. Clerk. Thank you, Councilor Dicoto.

Councilor Chau? No. Councilor Dicoto? No. Mayor Gitche?

No.

Councilor Duran? No. Councilor Liang? No. Councilor McDonough? No. Councilor Mercier? Of course not. Councilor Noon? No. No. Council Robinson. No. Council Rourke. Council Scott. No.

Fails.

Motion fails. Seven ordinances from the city manager, 7.1 ordinance amend chapter 125 canvassing and solicitors give first reading motion to refer to a public hearing on July 14th, 2026 at 7 p.m. by Councilor Mercier, seconded by Council Leang. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 8 reports of subcommittees, 8.1 Technology and Utilities Subcommittee, May 26, 2026. Councilor Liang.

I think this item was probably reported mostly last time we spoke and it was more just about the presentation that it was given and it was attached into the that the packet last time so it's not nothing else report.

Perfect. Thank you, Council. The motion to accept the report is a report of progress by Councilor McDonough, seconded by Councilor DeCoto. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 8.2, Public Safety Subcommittee, June 16, 2026. Councilor Noon.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Subcommittee of Public Safety met. We have Councillor Scott, Councillor Chow, myself, Superintendent Houdon and his team, Mary Ann Manzi, the Chair of the Citizen Advisory Committee, George Prokop, and some of the members of the committee was there. Councilor Rourke and Councilor Mursi was also in attendance. The citizen advisory committee to the police department, a nine member, the idea was to create, was to strengthen the relationship between the LPD and community. and to ensure public safety policies and program reflecting the community need and perspective. They meet monthly every Thursday. Superintendent noticed that there's vacancies. The positions and the committees is very diverse. We have high school kid and MCC student. So there's three slot vacant right now. The superintendent has been reaching out to local public school, the high school and MCC. Superintendent Doudon also introduced the chair for the citizen advisory committee, Joy Prokop. Joy stated that the purpose of the committee is to assist with communication between the police and the community. He's also noticed that the committee helped with the relationship between the police and the community. Councilor Scott noticed that membership would look good for resumes, especially for the high school and MCC students. Councilor Scott commented on the success of LPD in the community. Councilor Chow talked about the importance of community policing. Second item on the agenda was giving to the petition. I provide histories of the petitions from a denied claim that the petitioner requests and appear before the council looking for information, general information. Councilor Scott inquired about the claim submissions. City Solicitor William outlined the process, notice that it is governed by the statute, National Law, Chapter 258. I note that information must not be specific to claim. It is just general information looking to understand the rule and expectations for emergency vehicle warning and when the police seek independent accident review of the police crash. procedures for evidence collection and public safety consideration in then urban area and campus area. Superintendent Houdon noticed the procedure involved the operation of emergency vehicle, noting that they were governed by law and LPD procedure. Superintendent Houdon stated the extensive training involved with the operation. He's also stated that the investigations are dependent on the type of crime committed and done by supervisors and many levels of review. Councilor Scott, notice that insurance companies are involved in many of these disputes. Superintendent Houdon reported a good relationship between UMass Lowell Police and the sharing of resource. Councilor Scott questions the use of body cam. Superintendent noticed that the current system used an operational protocol. Councilor Chau questions about the training of officers. Superintendent Houdon stated that all officers are trained and work on the same, and work of the same procedure and protocol. That's the summary of the meeting, Mr.

Thank you, Councilor Noon. Motion to accept the report as a report of progress by Councilor Robinson, seconded by Councilor McDonough. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 8.3, thank you, Councilor Liang, will be reported on in two weeks. So we'll remove that. motion to a bundle items 9.2 to 9.7 give first reading motion to refer to the public hearing on july 14 2026 it's 7 p.m Motion by Councilor Mercy, seconded by Councilor McDonough to bundle. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 9.2 National Grid requests installation of underground electric conduit from 240 Central Street to rear of 278 Central Street. 9.3 Boston Gas requests replacement of existing cast iron gas main with low pressure gas main at 31 to 52 Queen Street. 9.4. Boston Gas requests replacement of leak-prone gas main from Jackson Street to Central Street. 9.5. Boston Gas requests replacement of existing coated steel 3-inch gas main from 230 to 245 7th Ave. 9.6, Boston Gas requests replacement of existing 1 6th Ave. 9.7, Boston Gas requests replacement of existing gas main with plastic main at 190 to 261 7th Ave. Any questions on anything? All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Motion stands. 9.8 National Grid requests installation of utility pole at Westford Street and 15 Technology Drive. Give first reading. Motion to refer to a public hearing on July 28, 2026 at 7 p.m. by Council of Dakota, seconded by Council of Duran. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 9.9 National Grid requests installation of utility poles, one at 1270 West Street and one at 1299 West Street. Give first reading. Motion to refer to a public hearing on July 28th, 2026. It's 7 p.m. by Councilor Robinson, seconded by Councilor Scott. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Any announcements? Councilor Duran.

Thank you very much. Just to let the public know, there will be a detour associated with the Douglas flood relief tank project, which is going on at Colley Stadium. That's to facilitate the installation of six-foot diameter pipes, which are sitting there, so they're cool to look at. So traffic that would normally go along Douglas Road will be detoured using Village Street, Clark Road, and Hovey Street. The detour starts Monday, July 6th. There are signs up about that. And if you need to look at a detailed map of the motion response, 6.1 B from the June 16th meeting shows that I just want to also mention that, as mentioned earlier, July 7th at 530, if you want to take a tour of the Duck Island Wastewater Treatment Facility, reach out to Erin Fox, our Chief Utility Officer at afox.lolma.gov. You can see the treatment process in person and understand the odor capture system and speak with the staff. So I think it's a great opportunity for folks. And I wish everybody a happy 4th of July as we celebrate our 250th birthday as a country. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Duran, Councilor Marcia. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. On Wednesday, July 8th at 430 at 1170 Gorham Street, there will be a ribbon-cutting ceremony to celebrate the O'Donnell Park transformation. So everybody's welcome on Wednesday, July 8th at 430. Thank you. Mr. Manager.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, through to the council, council and to the public. We just want to remind everybody that we're having an unbelievable celebration over at LaLasha ballpark this Saturday for the 4th of July. So please come enjoy the bicentennial committee that we have has been working extremely hard to make sure that there's music that's fun and maybe just a couple of extra uh fireworks this year but barry manilow will not be there i just want everyone to know that i'm not i'm not happy about it but i'm not going to out the counselor who is also a fellow fanalo like myself so but fourth of july uh this saturday lasher ballpark very excited thank you all very much

Thank you, Manager Golden. Motion to adjourn by Councilor Robinson, seconded by Councilor Liang. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered.

That's okay. You still got here.