City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

on it. Did you notice?

july 14 2026 rural 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 our city we pray for direction which will lead 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 work to transform our city and make it a better place to live and work. Amen. I pledge allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Roll call, Mr. Clerk.

Council DeCoto. Here.

Here. Council Duran. Here. Council Liang.

Here. Council McDonough. Here. Council Murcia. Here. Council Noon. Here. Council Robinson. Here. Council Rourke. Here. Council Scott. Here. Council Chow.

Here.

11 present.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Moment of silence is Council Murcia.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'd like to offer a moment of silence and docking chamber for Sean Shanahan, born in Lowell, attended Lowell Technical High School, and was a familiar face behind the grill at the Owl Diner in Lowell. His true calling, however, was public service. Sean dedicated more than 13 years to the city of Lowell, serving in the Department of Public Works, solid waste management, and eventually as a building inspector. In October of 2014, he was appointed building commissioner, a role he cherished. While he earned numerous professional licenses and certifications, what people remember most was his willingness to listen, solve problems, and genuinely care for the residents of the city he loved. In 2018, He continued that work as building commissioner for the town of Chelmsford until a workplace accident in 2021 resulted in the loss of his leg and ultimately led to his retirement. He is survived by his daughter, Kaylee Moore, and her husband, Christopher, and by his son, Cody Shanahan, their mother, Shelly Shanahan. with whom he shared the greatest joy of his life, his children. His father, Thomas Shanahan, and his stepmother, Mary Beth Shanahan, his stepfather, Christopher Whalen, his brother, Jeffrey Shanahan, and his sister, Melissa. his step-siblings, Martha, Kelly, Scott, and Faith. He was pre-deceased by his beloved mother, Cheryl Whalen. We offer our condolences to his family. I'd also like to offer a moment of silence and docking chamber to all those that passed since our last City Council meeting. May they all rest in peace. Amen. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Mercia. Any other moment of silences? Seeing none, if we could dim the lights, please. Two, mayor's business. 2.1, communication, remote Zoom participation. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor McDonough, seconded by Councilor Marcia. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 3.1, minutes of the nonprofit organization subcommittee, June 30th, Little City Council regular meeting, June 30th, for acceptance. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Rourke. All in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Four and five are public hearings. They are scheduled for seven, so I'll skip those and go right to the motions.

Mr. Mayor?

Councilor Rook.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. If I could, could we take motion response, aye, out of order? I know there was a big meeting at 7 o'clock down at the Mass Hire Place, so I'm going to try to get these guys out of here.

Motion by Councillor Rourke to take 6.9 out of order, seconded by Councillor Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.9, Councillor Robinson requests the city manager have the proper department provide a copy of the St. Louis Park renovation project.

No, Mr. Mayor. It's a response. Motion response.

It's a response, aye, yeah. I thought you said nine. I'm sorry. Motion by Council of Roe. I'm sorry. To take 7.1 I out of order, seconded by Council Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Motion response, aye. GLWFB. Is there someone registered to speak? No. Okay. Does anybody want to speak from the council? Is that you want to suspend the rules for anyone to speak? Any questions by any councillors? Councillor Duran.

I did have a question. I saw the issues that had arisen and the responses to them, but I was curious if anybody from MassHire had any thoughts as to why they arose and whether they're typical kinds of things that happen or they're anomalous. I know with various audits, sometimes things are major, sometimes things are minor. It would be helpful to understand in this context. Thank you.

Assistant City Manager Machado.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This was the first time there were ever any findings on an audit. Gabriella and her finance team have done a great job. Some of this was miscommunication between the Workforce Board and Career Center, but all the findings that came out were resolved and we got a clean bill of health, I guess, from MCDS. And there's nothing lingering from that.

And is it likely that, you know, I mean, are there now procedures in place that these won't arise in the future and you feel comfortable that things are tight?

Yes, I feel very comfortable that we'll pass every audit moving forward.

Thank you.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Noon. I was the one who asked for this motion because I've seen these reports prior to, I saw the FY25 one. And some of the same things in the FY25 one, the March of 2025, reappeared in the FY26 that was given in December of 25. So nine months later, we had the same basic stuff that wasn't really rectified. What are our plans? I know that Councilor Duran and I don't know what they are, but what are our plans? Because when you see you have open meeting law violations, there is — and have we lost grants along the way during this?

Mr. Manager? Uh, thank you very much, Mr. May through to the council. Um, we also have assistant, uh, solicit here as well, but we've been working pretty closely with the, with the state, the deputy secretary, Alicia Woodway, Alicia Woodway, and, um, working to make sure that both of these boards, um, work, uh, uh, like hand in glove. So I just didn't know if there was any, anything else you had to, had to, uh, add to that.

So in terms of the changes that have been made, that we've changed several of the bylaws, the open meeting law, for instance, has been formally adopted, even though they're required to follow it. I think there was a misunderstanding amongst the board members that the, how the open meeting law was affected and how they had to follow it. And then there were just some minor changes in terms of the how we spend the money, taxes, things like that. Those were minor concerns, but the major ones, with bylaw changes, everything was corrected.

my concern is that and I'm hoping that with new leadership over there things have changed because I think that's an important thing because this was a revolving thing that kept happening year after year and then a city council has to come out and ask for these reports to even know that it's happening and I think that that's the hard part and when you look at this I'm hoping going forward that this will be provided to us next year's the FY 27 reports that are done And we see the correction because I think this should be given to us yearly because as we look at this stuff, I am extremely worried about losing grants because the workforce does a ton of work for these kids in our city. And it's important that we don't lose grants because right now more than ever, We need these grants to keep kids working and to keep adults working and watch this program build. And if we're losing grants and the state loses their interest in us, I would hate to see these grants go in. And I was told that we did lose a couple of grants, but I don't know if we ended up getting them back. Did we lose any grants along the way?

So I think what you're referring to is the behavioral health grant. There was, we did lose that grant largely because the deliverables weren't, we were good on the training, but we weren't good on getting people jobs. So that was ultimately, we did lose that grant. In terms of the other grants that are, we don't have a lot of grants in the pipeline, but right now we're starting that. We're changing the way that, you know, obviously with Mr. Machado, we're changing the way we do, we pursue grants and we're changing the way we sit down, we bring in everyone to actually pursue all those grants. So there are grants in the pipeline that we're going after, but this is also early days. So we're not, so far we're healthy financially, but making sure that we stay that way.

Assistant City Manager Machado, anything to add to it?

Yeah, so we've been, thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor, we've been meeting regularly and I've been stressing the importance of going for grants. Nobody has been laid off from the Career Center. They're all grant funded, all the positions are. So we don't know what the future is for next year or the following year. So we're really stressing to apply for as many grants as we can to keep the train rolling, I guess.

And I wouldn't be questioning all these things if I saw the outcomes from them. There are extreme outcomes that we see in our city from all of these. And my concern is just the deliverables, as you stated. Do we have people who can deliver on these grants once we apply, or are we just applying and see if we get the grant and then looking for the deliverables?

Go ahead, Mr.

Senator. Mr. Vice Mayor, thank you. Yes, the Career Center is great at implementing all the programs. That's not the issue. The issue is bringing in the grants to keep everybody working and up to date.

So can you just explain to, I don't know if the councilors need the explanation or do the public need the explanation, between the workforce board and the career center and the separation and how it all gets put together to make this all work. And I think it's important when we look at it, we look at our rec in the city, the rec department, and how it works and it functions and it really gives inner city kids an opportunity to get their first jobs for the resumes. And if you could just explain to everyone so that we understand the difference between What the workforce is and what the career center is and how we merge together because I think some people may be confused about this whole thing.

So that's been one of the major issues that we've been sort of wrestling with. I think part of it is the career center is very successful at what they do. They implement the programs. They implement when the grant comes in, they're the ones doing the work. They're the ones doing the actual work. career finding and all the programs that the grants are being funded. The Workforce Board is supposed to be the administrative aspect, the financial aspect. They're supposed to pursue the grants. They're supposed to report on the grants. They're the ones that are supposed to be the background characters that make sure that everything is being reported up to the state, and they apply for the grants, and then the Career Center implements the grants. The Career Center is not the issue and has not been the issue at all. They are very successful. They are extremely well respected across the state. We've met with Comcor, which is the major grant provider for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. They speak very highly of the Career Center. The piece that's been missing has been that the Workforce Board making sure that the grants that we should be applying for, that we're going after those. That's now begun. We're in the process of making sure that we don't miss anything. But in terms of the Career Center, that's solid. So that has never dropped one iota. It's the workforce board. We just need to change some focuses to make sure that what we go after is the full amount and for everything.

So is one director over the other? Are they equal? And then who is above the two directors besides the board? Mr. Manager. Mr.

Manager, go ahead.

Yeah, this is where we get into the weeds. But neither of them are above or beneath. They're equal. So ideally, they work in tandem. They work on different aspects, but they work in tandem. Mr. Machado is sick of seeing me every single day, but I don't think there's been a single meeting we've attended that the two of us haven't been at. And then we both report to the city manager. whose job it is to make sure that we're doing the things we're supposed to do. Ultimately, the Workforce Board has a board that's supposed to oversee and make sure that we're pursuing and we're going to get those things. They also assist us with reaching out to businesses, things like that. And then the Career Center, they work with the individual providers and the trainers to make sure that people get what they need. So ideally, we're working hand in hand. And so far, I think we've done that. But that has been a little bit of a change as well.

that's a major change because at one point they were not working together and it was a battle back and forth and I can't thank Assistant City Manager Machado for his hard work over there trying to bring this back together and bring it to unity because the ultimate goal is getting people jobs and trying to help them and not about who's in charge and this power play that went on and um kids lost out and people lost out so I thank you Mr manager for putting him over there I think assistant city manager Machado you're doing the tough work is when you try to put things back together that sometimes were broken and every counselor in here has heard that along the way I am sure so

Quick question from here, Mr. Mayor. So those two boards under the direction of the manager, can we consolidate that? Go ahead, Mr. Mangia.

Thank you very much. So no, is, I guess, the direct answer. But so the LEO, the lead elected official, in this manner, in this matter here in the city of Lowell, is indeed the city of Lowell. As the mayor was talking about, so goes the LEO, lead elected official. And then you would expect it to go to a second and then to a third. That does not happen in this. And that's why we've been talking with the Deputy Secretary, Ms. Ordway, to figure this out, because how it broke down is it came from me and it went down to two. And Workforce Board wasn't always talking to Career Center appropriately. There are a couple of things that, quite frankly, I think this and the rest of the team thinks this, that we should be working on this, say, for kids throughout the year. We should have one crew of people working with all of our young adults to make sure they all have jobs. The Career Center had one area that they were working on. Workforce Board had another area that we're working on. So there was a lot of Just miscommunication or non-communication. People living in their own silo, I suppose. And what we're trying to push from this point forward is that the communication happens. And that's the easiest one I can think of is the connecting activities. And that's for the youth coordination. And under this situation, our connecting activities and our youth folks, they're now all talking. So that's a big move, to be honest with you. But can we all merge? No, because the state and federal funds stop it from happening. But in talking with the secretary, this has gone all the way through the lieutenant governor, the secretary, and the deputy secretary. They know things need to change. And we're offering the city of Lowell to be that play-doh, I guess, to see what could possibly happen for the remaining 26, 27, if I have that right, guys? 27 workforce boards? There's a lot. Another two dozen or so. So we're going to be looking here in the city to see if we can be that next generation of workforce boards. And I commend the gentleman for being down there and making this happen, making this change happen. And the staff that's been there. Nancy's here. Nancy Gagnon has been unbelievable. Thank you.

Any other questions? Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Rook. Seconded by Councilor Noon. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Thank you for coming down. Go back to the motions.

Mr. Mayor.

Councilor Rook.

Can I get a point of personal privilege? Through you to the solicitor, I noticed before we even get to it on motions on the agenda, I don't know the current status. I see Friday there's potential litigation regarding some of the stuff filed. Then I see the loss on yesterday where they're saying there may not be litigation. Are we fine, in your legal opinion, to discuss any of this stuff in public? Anything related to the Markley motions on here?

Solicitor Williams?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yes, we are. Anything on there, we can discuss today in the open floor.

Okay, thank you. And I was actually going to make a motion to bundle, if it's okay, 6.10 with 6.1, since we're starting the motions.

6.19. Yeah. 6.19, 6.10, and 6.1. Second.

Motion by Councilor Robinson to bundle 6.1, 6.10, and 6.19, seconded by Councilor Decoto. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 6.1, Councilor Marci requests the city manager have the city solicitor and license commission revisit the law concerning bar licenses. No bars allowed. not allow minors to be in set establishments and change this policy established to cut the cutoff time for minors look at curfew ordinances call in a bar and revert back to the way it was for the sake of our children 6.10 Council Robinson requests the city manager have the proper departments provide a draft of reclassifying establishments that serve alcohol and provide a pathway forward to regulating age requirements. 6.19. Council McDonough, Council DeCoto, request the city manager work with the appropriate department and license commission to, as quickly as possible, take all necessary steps to create separate licensing requirements for bars, taverns, nightclubs, and restaurants. Who would like to go first? I have the first motion. Oh, Council Mercy. Thank you.

Ladies first. Well, it's not so much that. I have the first motion. Wouldn't you think? Number one, I guess. First, let me preface my remarks by saying that I am in no way trying to hurt any bar in the city or any restaurant in any way. As of right now, they are following the rules. But in my opinion, the rules are flawed. In recent weeks, this council heard so much more about the facts that there are no bars in Lowell. Only establishments that serve food are classified as restaurants where age limits do not apply even though alcohol is sold and minors are allowed to visit and sometimes mistakenly get served alcohol. Well, these sometime minors being sold alcohol should not ever happen. Therefore, the no bars ordinance, in my opinion, is a loophole ordinance, and I do not support this ordinance or the loopholes that apply. We have a so-called restaurant with a kitchen that isn't even functioning as a kitchen, but it has plenty of booze. Is that fair to a minor to be exposed to? I think not. This motion asks to reverse this law into the way it used to be. This motion asks the city solicitor and the license commission to revisit the law concerning bar licenses and protect our minors, our children. Let's have our officials look at the curfew ordinance that establishes a reasonable cutoff time. Historically, local license guidelines heavily prioritize the common victual restaurant model, ensuring that establishments serving alcohol primarily function as a food serving sit down space. Today, loose oversight allows venues to pivot away from dining, generating a standard nightclub slash bar environment that attracts underage drinking. We need to mandate stricter enforceable food sales to alcohol sales percentage ratio for all standard restaurant liquor licenses. We also need to implement an automatic license suspension framework for any establishment caught serving alcohol to minors. We as a City Council need to help out also by establishing laws that protect our children. Implement the curfew ordinance law and reverse this loophole no bar ordinance and save our children. Thank you. Thank you, Council Mercia. Council Robinson.

Thank you. This for me came about with other discussions where we figured out that they were doing underage, I think it was 14 plus, events and still serving alcohol. I mean, I remember going to under 21 nightclubs when I was a kid and then there was no alcohol sold. I don't know what's changed since. BUT THEN I'VE ALSO HEARD SOME QUESTIONING, DOES THE COUNCIL HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO CERTAIN THINGS? Digging a little bit under Mass General Law Chapter 138, Section 1 and Section 12, state law already explicitly defines restaurants, taverns, and general on-premise bars as separate legal entities, allowing local boards to license them differently based on whether they focus on food or drinks. Furthermore, local licensing commissions hold broad regulatory powers to protect public safety. and they can legally change city policy to prohibit minors from bar-only spaces, also enforce a nighttime curfew cutoff for minors in hybrid venues, and adjust local juvenile ordinances under Mass General Law Chapter 40, Section 21. So it seems like we do have some ability to regulate. And again, as my colleague explained, this isn't intended to harm the 99.9% of businesses that are operating good. I don't want to, and it gets tricky because a wedding reception or a function space, there's going to be children in there, but those children are with an adult. I mean, I think that's some language we need to really start with is a child or a minor should be accompanied by a guardian or adult. I THINK THAT'S A GREAT WAY TO START BECAUSE IT APPLIES ACROSS THE BOARD, WHETHER YOU'RE AT A FUNCTION SPACE, A RESTAURANT. I DON'T SEE PARENTS AND CHILDREN INSIDE NIGHT CLUBS AND BARS, BUT WHO KNOWS NOWADAYS, BUT REALISTICALLY, I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY LOOK AT finding a path to make sure that we don't unintentionally impact the 99.9% of the businesses that are doing the right thing and look for language that we need to add to strengthen and prevent those kind of functions from happening where you are targeted minors with even the musical act and you're planning on selling alcohol in the same venue and IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A RESTAURANT SPACE WHERE A FAMILY IS SITTING DOWN EATING. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A PRETTY MUCH UNDERAGE SLASH ABOVE AGE ENTERTAINMENT CONCERT. SO I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING BACK FROM THE SOLICITOR'S OFFICE AFTER YOU TAKE A LOOK AT THIS. THANK YOU.

Thank you. I would just add, I actually got a phone call from a downtown business owner who is sometimes at the center of some of the focus. And this business owner was also supportive of the move here to try and tighten up the language in the city ordinance and to get some more objectivity. Thinking through, and I agree with both my colleagues, I'm not looking to hurt any business or detract from revenue, except the revenue, I guess, that may or may not be coming from underage patrons. I think if we're able to close this loophole and to consider other options, like Councillor Robinson mentioned, such as a curfew for underage patrons, I think this helps create objectivity for the bar owner, for the bar staff, and for LPD, so that when there is a violation, there is no question that there was a violation. And just so that everyone knows, it brings us closer to a black and white rulebook, and we're relying less on um you know LPD at one o'clock in the morning trying to decide if someone's eating a slice of pizza or if they're getting a drink I don't think that's a position we need to put anybody in so thank you thank you Council McDonald Council of Dakota

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I want to thank my colleague, Councillor Robinson, bringing up the statute. He's right on the money. We do have a local board. The Lowell License Commission is in charge of this. However, I think we should begin the process of having the city solicitor's office in concert with the Alcohol Beverage Control Commission. and and finding exactly what these i put a call into the abcc uh yesterday and i didn't get a return call but i'm wondering um you know what what different scenarios are we really looking at here can we add a bar license to to the scrolls i'm not sure if we can do that but i think the alcohol beverage control commission would be an asset to us at this point um Do we look at the possibility Councilor Mercy brought up was, do we look at gross sales and maybe 20% of the gross sales of food? Well, those foods are reported to the state each month in the meals tax. So maybe that's a different way of looking at it. But I think there's different scenarios to look at, and I think all that should be through the city solicitor's office with the ABCC, in concert with the local license commission as well, and then bring forth to the council some scenarios that might behoove us. As it pertains to curfews, I'm totally against curfews. As a former bar owner, I tell you, the onus of responsibility is on me. If you can't run your business the way it's supposed to be, then shame on you. But to just say out flat that we're going to bring 18-year-olders to 20-year-olders down to 12 o'clock, I think it's just causing more of a headache more than anything else. But I'm looking forward to this, and I'd like to hear actually from Mr. Williams what his thoughts are at this moment and how he would like to go forward with this.

Solicitor Williams.

Thank you, Ms. Mayor. Basically, everything that was discussed up here today is all very possible. Again, as Councillor Decoto mentioned, this would all run through the License Commission. I know that this conversation and debate has gone on for many, many, many years with different License Commissions as to whether or not there should be a separate bar or pub license. versus how it is now in the city where it's all alcoholic beverages like a restaurant license. Um, we, uh, you know, up in my office, we obviously work, um, with the license commission with some frequency and we do have, um, a number of, um, different rules and regs that the license commission, um, is, we certainly could put in front of them for review. Um, it's done in a lot of other communities, a lot of other municipalities. Um, things like, uh, council of Dakota said there are municipalities that, um, If there only were to be the all-alcoholic restaurant license that you have to show a certain percentage of your sales is made through food. You have to show a menu. You have to show your facilities. Basically, you have to show that you're actually serving food. There are a lot of municipalities that do that. There are some that will break apart and have the two separate licenses, which, you know, LIKELY THAT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION TO THE LICENSE COMMISSION WHERE THERE IS ONE FOR 21 PLUS BAR PUB LICENSE AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE THE RESTAURANT LICENSE THAT WOULD STILL BE IN EFFECT. ULTIMATELY IT WOULD COME DOWN TO THE LICENSE COMMISSION WHERE MOVING FORWARD ONCE THERE WERE THE TWO OPTIONS WITH THE LICENSES, we would have to stop issuing the restaurant license to everyone, only to places that qualified, that actually serve food. And then those that don't, they can be 21 plus, They could be and only serve alcohol with no food. Those are all options that are available. You can tweak with the hours if you need to. These are all things that the License Commission could do. So this is something we've talked about a lot over the last few years. And I know there is definitely some interest from the License Commission to get this in front of them to start talking about it. So I think, ultimately, that's a good thing.

All set, Council Dakota? Seeing no one else, all in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. It is now 7 o'clock. We're going to go to the general public hearing scheduled for 7, 4.1 ordinance, amend chapter 125 canvases and solicitors. Give second reading. In Ordinance Amending Code of the City of Lowell, Massachusetts, with respect to Chapter 125, therefore entitled canvassers and solicitors by adding the amended various sections. We're going to open the public hearing to those in favor. In favor? In favor. That portion of the hearing is closed. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition? Opposition? Opposition? That portion of the meeting is closed. What's the wish of the body? Motion to adopt by Councilor Duran. Seconded by, I'm sorry, motion to adopt by Councilor Rourke. Seconded by Councilor Robinson. Any questions? Councilor Duran.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think for folks who haven't read the proposed amendment of Chapter 125 on canvassers and solicitors, I think it's important for them to be aware of Section 125-3, that if this amendment Motion passes that it will it says it and I think this is just important for folks to be aware of that It shall be unlawful for any person to go in or upon private residences I'm going to quickly paraphrase for the purpose of distributing advertising material of a commercial nature not having been requested in writing to do so by the owner or occupant of such private residence and But that won't apply to distributing advertising material by any charitable organization, newspaper, nonprofit organization, or the US Postal Service. So I think there are a lot of times that people bring advertising, and I think that's sort of one of the key things for people to be aware of. beyond that there are there the rules will provide require the name of the applicant a it looks like a date of birth a description of the applicant i'm not sure what the description might entail so i don't know if that's a question i think for either the city solicitor this is section 125-4.a1 um I don't know if it's a description because I think it's an individual that has to apply. So I'm not sure what the description would be. I'll have to pull it up for you. Let's see.

Solicitor Williams.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So the conversations, you know, when we were putting all this together, it was myself, it was the clerk's office, Captain Damaris, and, you know, what he pulled back from the neighborhood groups. My understanding is one of the important elements of that description is people's vehicles, because oftentimes, you know, LPD will get a phone call saying, hey, we have this Toyota Corolla parked on the street here that nobody knows who it belongs to, where they can quickly look it up in their system. Oh, no, we have a registered canvasser and solicitor that has a black Toyota Camry that's in that neighborhood. And I think we put a 7 to 7, perhaps, or 8 to 8 on the time frame, AM and PM. So it allows them to quickly identify a lot of these calls that do come in. So my understanding was, and Mike, if I miss anything, please feel free. I think that was the main focus. So it was easy for people to be kind of put at ease when they call into LPD.

Yeah, Mr. Mayor.

Clerk Geary. Yeah, Council, that's basically, it was kind of a tightening of the ordinance, so there could be more of an enforcement element on the street from the police officers, and there's more of a sharing of information with the clerk's office and the department in terms of out there, because it's just people out there mostly selling so whatever it is they're selling they're just out there just doing it you know so we've we took an approach to tighten it with um inspector damaris and uh we just tightened it there's information that's easy to get between the clerk's office and the police department for the street enforcement and i think it's going to tighten them up there's an issue with time people are showing up at doors at nine o'clock at night so we put a time on them i think it's going to be really beneficial in terms of um easing residents minds and and the residents are able to um interact with the officer easier because there'll be some information that will be provided on our website as well.

OK, thank you. That's helpful. And just to confirm, I assume political canvassing is not restricted by this ordinance.

Solicitor Williams.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. No, it's not. The definition of a canvasser and solicitors on there and what you described would not apply here.

Thank you. I just thought it would be helpful for the public to understand that so they don't get upset.

Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Rook. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So if any solicitors or canvassers have to go to the police department and notify them first before they actually go out and do so, why can't we have a a non-arc list where residents can can email or send in something and say don't you know don't come in there one two three Main Street so when they go to the police department and say hey we're knocking in Centerville Pawtucket of all the Highlands great this is the this is the 01851 that you can't go to like is there any reason why we can't do that solicitor Williams

So I would have to look into that.

The motion may have been filed about this last year, but I don't see why that can't happen. And again, if the law says you have to go to the pizza parlor first and state the date, time, and location of where you're going to do your business, I think it would be helpful if we had something like that in play. Thank you. Sure.

Thank you, Council Rourke. Any other questions? Roll call, Mr. Clerk.

Councillor Cotto. Yes. Mayor Gitche.

Yes.

Councillor Duran. Yes.

Sorry.

Councillor Liang. Yes. Councillor McDonough.

Yes.

Councillor Mercier. Yes. Councillor Noonan.

Yes.

Councillor Robinson.

Yes.

Councillor Rourke. Yes. Councillor Scott. Yes. Councillor Chow. Yes. Eleven years.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Motion to bundle items 5.1 to 5.11 by Councilor Mercier, seconded by Councilor Robinson. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 5.1 National Grid requests permission to relocate one JO pole on Meadowcroft Street across from Exchange Place. 5.2, National Grid requests installation of a recloser at 88 Wood Street. 5.3, National Grid requests installation of sidewalk guide wire on Richardson Street at McPherson's Park. 5.4, National Grid requests installation of a heavy-duty hand hole and conduit on metal craft street at the entrance to 52.1 bolt street 5.5 boston gas request replacement existing gas main on sanders ave saunders ave 5.6 national grid request installation of underground electric conduit from 240 central street to the rear of 270 5.7, Boston Gas requests replacement of existing cast iron gas main with low pressure gas main at 31 to 52 Queen Street. 5.8, Boston Gas requests replacement of leaked prone gas main from Jackson Street to Central Street. 5.9, Boston Gas requests replacement of existing coated steel three inch gas main from 230 to 245 Seventh Ave. 5.10, Boston Gas requests replacement of existing leak-prone gas main from 214 to 221 6th Ave. 5.11, Boston Gas requests replacement from existing steel gas main with plastic main at 190 to 261 7th Ave. We're going to open the hearing up to all of them. If somebody was wishing to speak on multiple ones, just state which ones you want to speak on. If you want to speak on one of them, just please state which one you want to speak on. With that being said, anyone wishing to speak in favor of any of them?

Hi, Diana Cuddy, National Grid 170 Data Drive, Walton, Massachusetts. I'm in favor of all of them.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor? In favor, you can come right up to the mic.

Hello, everyone. I happen to own the old Saab building, 135 to about 189 Central Street. I am in favor of the gas line being replaced. Definitely aging gas infrastructure, something that I'm very much in favor of. That building is a historic building. It's about 100 years old. So this gas line is going right in the alley. That is my emergency egress. My trash, that's where I put it twice a week, gets picked up. Deliveries, vendors, they use that alley to be able to access that building. I just want to be mindful of the fact that the building is old. And it looks like we're about a feet, maybe two, away from the building. So any excavation, drilling, I just want to make sure that that's something that will be considered. And also access to that alley, because it's trash. Emergency egress I want to make sure that we all have access if we can work together to make sure that My tenants are able to use that space So I request is that we take those things in consideration that be in favor that being said

Could you just state your name and address for the record? Franklin Veloz. And then building is 137 to 189 Central Street. And you're speaking on 5.6? Excuse me? Are you speaking on 5.6, National Grid's request installation of underground electric conduit from 240 Central Street to the rear of 278?

This is gas. All right. I guess I'll be back. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Please just state your name and address for the record and which one you're speaking on.

My name is Brian Sattler. I'm here representing National Grid for all the National Grid designs here. We're located at 1101 Turnpike Street in North Andover. I'm here to answer any questions if the public has any.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor? In favor? In favor? That portion of the meeting is closed. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition? Please just state your name and address for the record and which one you're speaking on or multiple ones you're speaking on.

Hi, Christine Crutcher, 1975 Middlesex Street, number 7. I just wanted to speak. I'm a volunteer with 350 Mass of Greater Lowell, local climate justice group. We would like to oppose the six requests from National Grid on today's agenda for gas expansion of up to 1,400 feet in Lowell. Numerous times, 350 massive grader Lowell has come before the council saying that gas pipe replacement is very expensive. In Lowell in 2025, we spent about $3.4 million per mile. And these current requests tonight for the six gas replacements would cost about a million dollars. That is million dollars that us as customers and rate payers are paying for a system that we're supposed to be moving away from. When National Grid came and did a presentation to the council, they presented a list of 29 factors that go into Department of Public Utilities in consideration when they assess conducting risk ranking. There's supposed to be a review of the various alternatives to replacement versus repairs. We appreciate the engineering information that was submitted with the petitions to the council for these items tonight. Unless you can point us to it, though, we couldn't find any records that the assessments were done by National Grid of those 29 GPU factors or the alternatives reviewing. Since we're paying for it as rate payers, it's in the public interest to know if these assessments and reviews were in fact completed, how the conclusion was reached that the replacement versus the repairs are necessary. and we um the counselors actually here have also made motions um to this effect as well so we just want to know as the public were the assessments and reviews done and how are the conclusions reached thank you thank you anyone else wishing to speak in opposition opposition

Opposition that portion of the meeting is closed. What's the wish of the body will to approve motion to refer to the wire inspector for important recommendation by Council of Rock seconded by Council Robinson. Anybody have any questions Council.

Sorry, the one with questions today. um actually so two questions one is for 5.8 the material we received said that Jackson Street is under a paving moratorium I understand that the reason for replacing the pipe is that it is leak prone but I'm trying to understand how they're how things are balanced in terms of the paving moratorium or no excavation moratorium and the goal of replacing the leaky pipe I'm not sure if that's a question for National Grid or do we have a Boston gas representative or request a replacement

Diana Cuddy, National Grid, Boston Gas. I think half of the gas replacement ones on the agenda tonight are because our gas line's being encroached by some city sewer work, so we need to move them out of the way. Regarding the leak-prone pipe, that's typically ahead of city paving, because if the pipe is leak-prone and the street has just been paved, then for us to go back and fix a leak, it involves a lot of extra paving, curb to curb, several feet in each direction, which adds to the rate payer's cost of repairing that leak instead of just replacing the pipe ahead of city paving.

And I did sort of get that with some of the proposals, but 5.8 in particular, which was, and I think this might relate to the gentleman's property on Central Street, said that Jackson Street was micro, sorry, micro surfaced in 2023 and is under a no excavation moratorium until the end of 2026. So that's... uh that's what I'm trying to understand how that really micro servicing doesn't cause a moratorium uh I'm just saying it is under according to what we received it is under a no excavation moratorium I didn't like come up with that manager Golden can you explain that

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, through to the council. That may be a typo on our part. Councilor, I will check into that, and I will ensure that I talk to Ms. Altman. We'll be in contact with that because Boston Gas, National Grid, sorry, I'm thinking of all the names, wouldn't be able to get into that with the engineers. So maybe that was a typo on our part, but I'll check into that.

okay thank you um and then the other question is the question that was raised by the person from 350 mass as to how are we assured that the analysis that was set forth in the presentation a few weeks ago is conducted by national grid and that the conclusions warrant the need for a replacement

So as I mentioned, the encroachments, which are the ones where we have to get out of the way for safety reasons for sewer, we really have to as a safety measure. But for the leak-prone pipe, when we get a notice of a street being paved, we will look at the leak history and do an analysis on whether it's best. As we see the leak occurrence increasing, we will do an assessment. And I can make that a little more elaborate in future submissions, absolutely, because they do do an analysis on that. And then I did want to also mention that after the grant is received, we do have to go to the engineering department for a permit. And part of the permit application is a traffic management plan, which would address the alley that is impacted by any construction. And I can certainly speak to the city engineer to keep an eye out for that and keep that in mind when they do their review and their analysis. And we have worked around numerous historic buildings. We have Boston as part of our territory and other historic buildings in Lowell. So that has never been an issue before. So I just want to mention that as well. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Durant. Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just wanted to quickly reiterate the Saab building owner's point and just to consider we haven't had a lot of this in downtown since I've been. We have occasionally some, but not usually that bisects an alley. And so just if the city National Grid is investing gas for them, but if the city could just be mindful of trying to make arrangements with i know that property owner uses some trash storage back there but if there's any other property owners that are using that alley and they're going to need access just to make sure that we know where the trash is going to go before we have a either a trash pile or something that's on a sidewalk or thank you thank you council mcdonough council unknown

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. To the Boston Gas representative, you mentioned on the question by Councillor Durrance that the review and assessments that was done by your company and the conclusion is to replace instead of repair based on there's a leak. Does that leak happen in all these requests, the five requests that you have here? 5.7, 5.8, 5.9, 5.10, and 5.11.

So I believe two or three of them are encroachments, and none of the items on the agenda tonight are growth mains. Everything is replacement main, and it's either there's a monitoring leak or several, or the leak history is accelerating on that section of pipe that's in the area that's going to be paved and so that's why we feel it's best and in the long in the interest of the repairs long term to replace it now instead of coming back you know every time there's a leak and then having to pave curb to curb and whatever the extent is in the lateral direction thank you um could I have the representative for National we had to come up and maybe answer the same question

So I am on the electrical side. So I don't have anything I can say about the gas side of things. Was your question on the electrical side? Yeah, so unfortunately, I can't answer any questions.

So he's the electric council in noon. So the gas was just there at the mic. She does all the gas. He does electric. Thank you. You all set, Councilman?

Councilor O'Rourke. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I know you and I have talked about this numerous times on the council floor when these replacement repairs come up. But just once again for the public to know why we're doing this after the assessments are made. When we had the gas explosions in Lawrence and North Andover back in 2018, the cost of all that repair was $1.6 billion. So, you know, when we hear the word leak, you know, we should be concerned. And I think we should also be very happy that they're doing a replacement and not just a repair. So we're not dealing with this three years from now, five years from now, or God forbid, what they went through, not even a decade ago. Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The electrical man from National Grid. Actually, I have a question for him. For 5-1 and 5-4, for the relocation of a J.O. pole on Meadowcroft and a hand hole and conduits on Meadowcroft, are those, you know, their new installations, relocations, are those at the request of customers, current customers on the street?

So for 5.1, essentially the wire is near a roof. Oh, sorry. Can you hear me now? Yeah. All right. So for 5.1, this is to remove a wire that's currently kind of hanging over a rooftop. We want to eliminate that. And that's why we want to relocate the JO pole to line it up better and to essentially not have a wire hanging over someone's roof.

So it was a business, the business requested it there?

Yeah, but also regulation just for safety in general.

And the other one, the hand hole?

Yeah, so 454, yes, that would be to serve a customer. Okay.

Okay, thank you.

Council Scott, would you like to separate 5.4 and 5.1 from the roll call?

No. Thank you.

All right. Any other questions? Roll call, Mr. Clerk.

Council Dakota. Yes. Bear Gitche. Yes. Council Duran. Yes. Council Lee.

No.

Council McDonough.

Yes.

Council Mercy. Yes. Council Noon. No. Councillor Robinson?

Yes.

Councillor Rook? Yes. Councillor Scott? Yes. Councillor Chow? Yes. Nine yeas.

Ninety-eighths motion passes. Going back to the motions. 6.2, Councilor Marcia, Councilor Scott, Councilor Duran request City Manager have the appropriate department look into creating a passive bicentennial park in the area of Middlesex and Jackson Street that would be a salute to women marking the 200th anniversary of the City of Lowell. No second needed. Councilor Marcia, you are first up.

Yes, thank you, Mr. Mayor. This motion is a tribute to the women of Lowell, the heartbeat of the spindle city. Lowell doesn't just tell a story of industry, it tells a story of human grit, brilliance, and unstoppable female leadership. Lowell's very foundation was built on the backs, minds, and voices of women. With and through this motion, we salute the women who shaped and continue to shape this historic city. Women have consistently been the anchors of Lowell's diverse neighborhoods. They are the entrepreneurs, opening storefronts on Merrimack Street, Market Street, etc. the activists fighting for environmental justice, and the educators guiding the next generation of Lowell's school students. This motion is about women and their contributions to shape the city into a welcoming city. This being this 200th bicentennial anniversary of Lowell, we, the women of the City Council, are asking for a patch of land to honor our female predecessors by remembering their contributions to our great city of Lowell. Thank you.

Thank you, Council of Mercy. Council Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I'd like to thank Councilor Mercier for including me on this motion. It's an excellent motion to celebrate the contributions of women through history in the history of Lowell. I did get the opportunity to hear Paul Georges speak downstairs about his retirement, and he brought up his mother and the work that she did at the, I believe it was the Atlantic Parachute Company during World War II and the thousands of parachutes that they built. and um how he would like to see a tribute to to the women of world war ii that contributed and i think part of this could include that i would assume um and also you know the work people like edith north rogers and other incredible women in the city of lowell that did so much so i am thankful to be part of this motion council marcia thank you council scott council duran

um i just want to thank um both counselors mercier and scott for including me on this motion and i think it's a wonderful idea to honor women in whatever form and if it's the form of a passive park in a particular location that's maybe picked out already there seems to be some specificity then that sounds great thank you

Thank you. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.3, Councilor Noon requests the City Manager to provide an update on the ICC status. Seconded by Councilor Chau. Councilor Noon.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So, we all know that the shelters, the state shelters just move out. I know that at some point this year, maybe November or October of this year, the UMass building authority is going to vote to authorize UMass Lowell in conjunction working with the city to put this on the market, sell this. About year over year ago, when this ICC was vacant, I was asking the managers to work with MCC and UMass Lowell to try to bring something there. Work with MCC. MCC has some of their program, the culinary program, hospitality program. Some of those program can be housed at that location. And in addition to that, you have 230 rooms. You don't need all those rooms. So some of those rooms may be reserved for a hotel, you know, bring back the hotel, function hall there. You have the venue in the city, the Low Auditorium, you know, the Songka's Arenas and all that. People have no place to go who come to the city of Low. They end up going to the nearby city and town to stay for a night or two. So we should have places for them. If they stay in downtown, they're going to spend money in downtown. I think we need to, I would ask the managers to work with those entity, MCC, UMass Lowell, Chancellor Chan, and the government administrations to try to see what we can do to bring a developer that believe in what we are talking about. Because going forward, you're gonna have the old courthouse, the district court, The heritage properties is going to put 200 units somewhat in that place, right there. You don't need more housings in that location except that, yes, you have the heritage properties is going to do that, 200 units, and maybe the parking lot at that ICC. So going forward, we need to rethink in how we're going to use all those spaces that we have now that the shelters is gone. And that's going to help the Roy crash, the revenues coming to the Roy crash. You know what I mean? So this is a good thing. We've been in the deficit with the parking enterprise. So we need to do something, you know, to bring revenue to the city because no different than this year. Next year is going to be tough in the budget for the city. So I'm asking the managers to give us an update, the plans forward with the ICC. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Noon. Councilor Robinson.

Thank you was to me. I think it's a good motion to to kind of have the conversation. A couple things stand out to me though I mean clearly one we don't know that. Last I was aware through you to the city manager. Do you know if there's still because I know what a year ago we were told there's a 6 sizable debt service still on this property. Do you know is that still most likely the case as far as you're aware.

MANAGER GOLDEN? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MAYOR, THROUGH TO THE COUNCIL. COUNCIL, THIS IS SOMETHING WE HAVE BEEN IN VERY CLOSE CONTACT WITH CHANCELLOR CHEN, PRESIDENT MEEHAN, LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR, AS WELL AS THE GOVERNOR. THIS COUNCIL HAS MOVED FORWARD WITH THE HERD STREET PROPERTY THAT HAS JUST BEEN SOMEWHAT ANNOUNCED, AND I WILL SAY A LITTLE BIT EARLY, WE'RE UNDER MOU WITH THEM RIGHT NOW, PER THE COUNCIL. WE STILL HAVE TO GO INTO AN LDA TO GET TO OUR FINAL. The potential housing as council noon had, had alluded to earlier. Um, all of that is very, very possible. The Lieutenant Governor, the Governor, there is a dollar figure that is known, not by me, but by them, what could be on the sale of the property. And that is something that we've been working on. It's nothing from the city side, but it's more so from the state side. So there's been discussion. So to answer your question directly, yes, they know about it. Would it typically, in a real estate transaction, you know, you sell it for a dollar and you owe 50 cents, well, you get 50 cents. In this manner, you might sell it for a dollar and it's, you know, the debt's $2. So, in speaking with Governor Healey and Lieutenant Governor Driscoll, as well as the Chancellor, President, And actually, the chairwoman from UMBA, UMass Building Authority, were all in, I'll just say, discussions about how that could happen. And it would be coming from the state's perspective if there were to be a loss on that building. It wouldn't be coming from the city, if that's really the question you're getting.

And so it sounds like you have an active conversations and communications with everyone that's pretty much responsible for this property arm. Do you think they will take into consideration kind of like the city's wish list on this or do you think this is kind of like with superior it's first right of refusal and then it's off to the races, but whoever comes in and wants it.

Thank you, Mr. May, through to the council. Council, I believe we have a very good working relationship of what this council has tried to charge the administration with in that area, and that is housing, bringing up the Lower Locks Canal. We have plenty of parking. And as anyone knows, within our parking enterprise account, we could use that additional revenue. We employ people to maybe think of an idea of what the new area of downtown could be. We're trying to think of different types of names for it. But the partnership right now that exists on Heard Street, which was with DCAM, which the council we entered into, if you recall, DCAM, the city of Lowell, went out and found a company and organization that is into an MOU that still has to go to an LDA. We could share in that revenue. uh it's still possible that we would come back to you with special legislation but i just don't know if that would happen because of the debt that is currently on the icc the in conference center itself so i'm not so sure there would be any additional revenue there and just as a reminder for the council when the council wanted us to get into this i think this is this worked out with our friends at dcam i don't know if provided we end up selling this to heritage which has been announced as most of you know provided that happens uh because they still are doing their due diligence getting into an lda This would be one of the best deals, quite frankly, that we've gotten into. We have an ownership interest or financial interest that if this were sold, then finances would come to the city. I just don't know if that will happen in the ICC, given the fact that I truly believe it's owed a little bit more than what it might be worth. And that's just my opinion, not anything I've done.

Thank you very much.

Thank you, Council Robinson. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Council of Dakota.

Mr. Mayor, if we could suspend the rules and take 8.5 out of order.

Motion by Council of Dakota to take 8.5 out of order. Seconded by Council of Mercer. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 8.5 vote. Confirm executive session. Vote for the Smith-Baker Center. Wave full reading and second reading by title. Confirm a vote taken in executive session to enter into and execute an LDA and purchase and sales agreement with the Smith-Baker Preservation Corporation for the Smith-Baker Center. Motion to adopt by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor Mercier. Any questions?

OK, I just speakers. Cameron the Costa. Not here, not here. Good Dennis McCarthy.

Thank you very much. My name is Dennis McCarthy. My address is 216 Foster Street. This is an exciting night for us. We've been waiting a long time and we're very excited about it. I want to thank you all for all the hard work that the city's done to help us get here. And we really feel that in the roughly two and a half years since the vote was first taken to not demolish the building, we've done a lot of work on our side to come up with a plan and financing and a team. We have permits in place right now, and we're very, very excited for this next chapter of this exciting building. And we want to thank you for your faith in our group. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. McCarthy. One more.

Owen Kelly.

Hello, good evening. Owen Kelly, 1005 Westford Street. Thank you Mr. Mayor, Mr. Manager, City Council and staff for having us. I know last time I was here I gave you a really brief overview of kind of our plans for the Lowell Center for the Arts, the Smith-Baker Center. We actually have our first rendering of the first floor that I'd like to share with you all this evening. So I'm gonna pull up the video I can share with you all as well. And I'll also reiterate what Dennis said. Thank you so much for your commitment and help through all this. It's been a pleasure doing all this work, and we look forward to our continued work together. So you can see we have our main entrance here, entering on Merrimack Street. This is an abridged version of our longer form that I'm happy to share as well. Entering into our main lobby, you'll see the refurbished historical staircase on the left, an entrance to the restaurant space, as well as a box office. Something to note through this too, a lot of the historical elements and interior design choices haven't quite been made yet. These are things that we'll make down the line. This really is just an idea of kind of the bones of what the space is gonna look like. We have some lounge space here, a really kind of open public space during the day that's able to transition to a more intimate space at night. We have our dining room space here, similarly something that's open to the public during the day for co-working, just to be and exist in the city and have this third space to use, and that can transition to a more intimate space in the evening. Some new exterior doors leading to outdoor seating areas. and then transitioning back across the hall into our first floor, about 100 seat performance space. This would be chairs that are able to be removed so we can use the space for anything from a chorus rehearsal to a small reception, a gathering, a arts market, whatever you might want it to be. As we continue back down through this hallway, we'll enter into where the commercial kitchen space will be. This will house our culinary incubator program, designed to support food entrepreneurs, caterers, folks that are looking for a commercial kitchen space, as well as the back office support on that as well, having shared buying power through the organization, having storage space as we enter this storage corridor. That'll be rentable, usable. They can start their food businesses in this space. Then takes you down to the exterior, the rear entrance as well with a new elevator. Then you'll come back around the corner and see the second rehabilitated staircase, so originally preserved staircase there. And that back corridor there just leads you into the new restroom core that'll be in place. We come back around. As you can see, we try to incorporate as many of the historical elements in, and that's the goal and name of the game with this whole design process is honoring the history of the building, bringing in all the historical elements that we can while modernizing it and bringing it to the community. I see some art gallery spaces, some refurbished pews from the upstairs sanctuary. and then coming back down to the main entrance. We don't have our second floor renderings yet. As I've mentioned before, the second floor, the original sanctuary space, will be mostly a preservation project, so bringing it back to what it was previously. So thank you. I thank you for your time. I look forward to our continued work together.

Thank you again.

And also happy to answer any questions, too, that come up.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Duran.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. MAYOR. SO NOT HAVING BEEN ON THE COUNCIL WHEN THE INITIAL VOTE WAS TAKEN IN EXECUTIVE SESSION, I DID LOOK BACK AT THE MINUTES WHICH WERE MADE PUBLIC AND NOTED AND SOLICITOR WILLIAMS AND I CONFIRMED THAT THE VOTE WAS ACTUALLY TAKEN ON NOVEMBER 18th AND NOT NOVEMBER 10th. SO IF WE CAN, YOU KNOW, AMEND documentation to reflect that. I don't know if we need, we probably need to make a motion to do that, I guess. Solicitor Williams.

I don't actually need a vote. I'm happy to just make that, it's such, you know, it's an immaterial type change, so it's something I can do administratively on my end.

Great. OK, thank you. So in order to confirm the vote, as I said, I read through the minutes, but it didn't give enough context. So the loan, sorry, the land disposition agreement and the deed were shared with the city council yesterday, and the RFP response by the Smith Baker Preservation Corporation was shared today. I THINK THOSE MATERIALS SHOULD BE ADDED TO THE MINUTES OF THIS MEETING BECAUSE THEY ARE IRRELEVANT TO THE CONSIDERATION OF THE COUNCIL PARTICULARLY THE NEW COUNCILORS WHO WERE NOT INVOLVED IN THE EXECUTIVE SESSION MINUTE OR MEETINGS TO MAKE THEIR DETERMINATION TO CONFIRM A VOTE AGAIN THAT WE WEREN'T A PART OF And so I think that's relevant. And then I only had a few minutes to read the RFP response today. I appreciate both the video and the passion from the Smith Baker Preservation Corporation about the vision for the space, but I am worried about the timeframe and the funding needed to achieve stabilizing and enhancing the building. The loan disposition agreement says it is subject to the RFP that the city issued and the buyer's response. And I see in the RFP response that there are timelines and associated dollar figures, but timelines for stabilizing the building, shoring it up, making it ready in a phased way to have it open to the public. My question is what happens if those timelines are not met? Because we have been sitting with this building having troubles for decades, and I worry that we will have that problem going forward, especially when I see the dollar figures. um so this is not an affront to anybody on the corporation many of whom i know and like but i really do worry about the future of that building so this really is a question for the administration if you're asking me to confirm this disposition i need to understand how this is going to play out solicitor williams

Thank you, Ms. Mayor. I'll try to answer the portion of the question that probably falls into my realm.

Thank you.

No, of course. So section 21 of the LDA would be the relevant section as it relates to, you know, not satisfying any of the requirements and milestones in the agreement itself. And in that section, there is a title reversion where the city would be able to You know, there are certain, you know, time cure periods that are in there 60 days, I believe. Yeah, 60 days. So if we were to find ourselves in a situation where, you know, the the other party were not holding up their end of the bargain with the LDA, we certainly would be able to to commence the title reversion process, in which case the title would come back to the city after a certain amount of time if it was not cured. And the city were able to show that the requirements of the contract were not upheld, the agreement rather.

And thank you for pointing that out. So that would exist if prior to the certificate of occupancy, because I'm looking at it right now, there were a default and it wasn't cured, then title could revert. But it's subject to any mortgages that are on the property. And the certificate of occupancy, I guess one question is, what is the time frame planned for that? Again, without having had enough time to read through the documents thoroughly, I'm not sure I could tie that together.

If we can invite Mr. Kelly back up, if you could answer that question.

If you don't mind just repeating kind of that.

Yes. When do you expect the certificate of occupancy to be issued?

So, I don't have an exact date to answer that question. We're looking at about two years for our first phase of work, so that first floor, so that video that you just saw. So, prior to that, about the summer of 2029 is when we'd be looking for that at the latest.

and um okay so and maybe this is then a question for the city solicitor so there were time frames put forth in the proposal um from the buyer um so i am assuming i'm not sure actually if time is of the essence in this contract so if those time frames are not met Does the right, you know, is that a default that is subject to Section 21? SPEAKER 2. Solicitor Williams?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Which specific timeline? Is there a specific part of the process?

Well, so, I mean, there are, again, there are many timeframes set forth on a couple of pages in the RFP response about what will happen in the next, like on month one, month two, but basically where by the end of the second year, occupancy of the first phase will, the first phase will be open. So the question is, if things are delayed, is that a default under the contract?

I suppose it would depend on what the delay was, what the circumstances were, if it were straightforward and there wasn't a great deal of gray area as to what may or may not have led to a delay, then sure. All of these things are incorporated from the RFP into the LDA, which Section 11 of the LDA also has additional milestones that are set in there to kind of clarify some of it. So between the two of them, All, you know, anything like that, certainly not that I'm anticipating that, but if it were to happen, there would be, you know, provisions of the LDA that the city would be able to use.

OKAY. THAT'S HELPFUL AGAIN WITHOUT SORT OF HAVING HAD TIME TO REALLY GO THROUGH IT. I'M NOT SURE I CAN TILE THAT TOGETHER BUT THANK YOU. I GUESS THE LAST QUESTION IS SO THERE IS A PURCHASE PRICE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROPERTY WHICH I THINK IS $470,000. DOES THAT MONEY ALL COME TO THE CITY OR HOW DOES THIS RELATE TO THE HUD REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE KIND OF ONE OF THE CHALLENGES IN PRIOR POTENTIAL SALES OF THE PROPERTY?

Solicitor, Yvonne Baez Rose.

So in the past, what we've had to do is the proceeds or grant repayment, but in this case it would be the sales proceeds, would come to the city. And then the city would be responsible for sending that essentially back to HUD. We have already, knowing that this conversation was coming, have initiated outreach with our HUD reps to confirm. But yeah, we essentially get the money, deposit it, cut a check, and send it back to HUD.

So there is no money to the city? The city will retain no portion of the purchase price?

No, because the HUD's interpretation is that we need to pay them not just the funds that they invested back in the 70s, but it's actually the fair market value of the property. And so it's based on the appraised value, which is, so we went into it knowing that these funds were essentially going to be a wash In and out straight to HUD and then they would then not have any ability to claim That certain uses needed to happen so there is no longer the restriction for example that the building would have to serve like Predominantly low mod income individuals that like HUD's Purview over the entirety of the property essentially completely goes away once they are paid back the fair market value So it's a an in-and-out

OK, that's disappointing. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Duran, Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just in the line of questioning from Councilor Duran, I now have, I guess, one question. I'm understanding that if there's a default and it can revert back, it provided no question there. The question, I guess, is in the event of a default, if it were to revert back to, so if we could just walk with me for a second, there's a default. It does revert back to the city. We've cut a check to HUD. We're out that money. Now we're back with a building. Is there any financial recovery? I'm working through it. Sorry. Is there any financial recovery for the city here? Or do we wind up out money and now holding a bag on a broken building?

We're not out money. The $470 just clears a title so that you don't have to give it back to HUD. So we're not out anything. We just we don't have any.

We don't have any money yet, but there's no investment.

It was a gift. It was you take the 470 from this group, pay off the condition, and now they get a free clear title to do what they want. If it reverts back to the city, there was no dollar transferred from the city in the event of any.

Sorry. So I guess to put a finer point on my question, and thank you, is that if the building reverts to the city it is presumably in a worse condition than it right we've had another however many years for the building to sit and deteriorate if we don't meet the timeline so i i guess my that it's fine i would say i would say the building would be in better condition than we're giving it to them hopefully that i get that that's why i had the question yeah council scott

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was going to say the same thing, that they're putting value into the building. And then also, if we did tear it down, back when we had the choice to tear it down or not, we were going to pay for the demolition. And then we also, at that point, would still have to pay back HUD, correct? So, yeah. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Scott. Councilor Duran.

I think just to follow up, though, on Councillor McDonough's point, the building will be subject to the mortgage if there is a reversion. So that is something to consider.

And it would never be able to come to the city. It would go to the holder of the mortgage. That's what was written after a certain point. And I'm sure the solicitor can state it better than I would, but I believe that they would be the holder of the mortgage and they would hold the property, not the city at that point.

It's the solicitor.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Yeah, I'm not really sure how else to word it than that. I mean, I do think that kind of encompasses how this would work. Of course, in that situation, it wouldn't be simple. It would be complicated at certain points. But yeah, the city would be able to use the property. It would be subject to the mortgage. We would have to work through all those different things. But the city would... be able to uh move forward and we would sort of we would have some control over um what our next steps would be uh hopefully it doesn't come to that but if it does it's not as though the city is without recourse of any kind i'll set roll call elsa dakoto yes uh may i get you yes council duran abstain

Council Leang.

Yes.

Council McDonough.

Yes.

Council Mercier. Yes. Council Noon.

Yes.

Council Robinson.

Yes.

Council Roy. Yes. Council Scott. Yes. Council Chau. Yes.

10 years. Thank you guys for coming out tonight. Going back to the motions. 6.4, Council and Noon request the city manager work with DPD to identify a plot of land for the Cambodian American Club. Seconded by Council Yang. Councilor Noon.

Motion speaks for itself.

Councilor Robinson.

Thank you. I have some questions about this motion because I received some calls. how are we asking the city to utilize public resources and funds to look for a private club i had groups plenty of groups from puerto rican dominican african-american people have been looking for locations throughout the city for a membership club based on culture So I don't understand how this is even to you to the solicitor. Is this even something that we as a council can ask is request the city to utilize public resources to kind of hunt land for a private organization?

Solicitor Williams.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. It's not a very long motion. There's not a ton there. So I think a response would likely spell out any implications the anti-8 amendment might have with things like this. We've run into that before. But at the same time, sometimes it's possible where in our response, we can It's not my department that would do that, but other departments could make suggestions as to other ways in which different organizations could go in different directions. That I'm not sure of, but to your point, at least based off of what you just asked me, yeah, I think there would likely be some anti-aid considerations that I would make sure was mentioned in a response.

I could help.

Councilor Noon.

I could help.

Councilor Noon.

It's not a lengthy motion. The ask here is not to have the city pay for the lot. The group of Cambodian Americans seen what had happened, what Portuguese American club has had. We've been here long, 43 years. The group want to have their own place, just someone to help them identify location. They the one who responsible for finance and everything, not the city, not the city.

Councillor Robinson, you have the floor.

Thank you. Let me just be clear. When we're asking the city or any entity that's employed by the city to utilize employees that are paid with public funds to do work for a private organization, that's using public funds for a private organization, whether it's two hours at whatever their cost is hourly rate. I mean, that's what real estate brokers do. I don't think the Lafayette Club members, CAME TO DPD TO FIND THEM A PLOT OF LAND. I DON'T THINK THE CLUB CAME TO THE CITY OF LOWELL TO FIND THEM A PLOT OF LAND. I'VE NEVER SEEN IT YET AND I RECEIVED A COUPLE CALLS. AND I JUST THINK I UNDERSTAND I THINK EVERY GROUP SHOULD BE ABLE TO GET A CLUB. and and i'd encourage that um but the thing is is we have real estate brokers that work throughout the community that this is what they do and we have an economic development department that that is in regular contact with real estate owners and developers and and they have a running list of available commercial properties so i just think requesting the city to look for a plot of land is is using public resources to for a private organization Thank you.

Council Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I don't see the harm in the motion, honestly. I mean, it's not asking for the city to pay. Thank you for clarifying that because I wasn't sure with the motion. It is just asking for help identifying, as you said, the Economic Development Department is very familiar with properties around the city, and that's basically what they're asking for is for help in identifying a location, just like any business, nonprofit, anyone else that the city would gladly help when they can. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilor Duran.

And I do appreciate the clarification because they had exactly the same concerns about the use of city resources. In my view, to the extent that the city would do this kind of work for any other nonprofit, then I think it's appropriate, but not to hold one you know, group or one nonprofit above others. And I'm not sure this is economic development in the same way as a new commercial, you know, taxpaying entity coming into the city. So it really comes down to what is typical for our administration to do. And if this fits into that, great. And if not, I wouldn't support it. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Joann and Councilor Noon.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. One last comment on this. We all work for the citizens of Lowell, the voters of Lowell, right? We ask all the time in various forms of motion, requests on behalf of our constituents, right? This is a group of constituent voters. Our boss asked me to ask for help. That's what I do. That's what I did tonight. It's no different. That said, it's not to exclude any resident, any citizen of the city of Lowell, organization and whatnot to ask for help when they need help to identify certain things. So that's simply the request. I know when I should have do it in lengthy, A lengthy motion. I'm glad Councillor Robinson asked question on that part of, you know, city pay for it. No way do I think that is appropriate at all. Not for this group, not for any group for that matter. Especially when we have a difficult time in budget year this year and coming year. I understand that. I'm not naive.

thank you thank you councillor noon councillor yang thank you mr mayor it's very short motion and i i don't see any problem of it we require a response we have no idea what kind of response that is it's a request we do that all the time so I I THINK WE'RE READING WAY WAY WAY TOO MUCH INTO A VERY SIMPLE REQUEST UH SO THAT'S MY POINT I MEAN WE CAN WAIT UNTIL THE RESPOND COME IN AND SAY HEY THE CITY RESOURCES CANNOT BE USED FOR PRIVATE WHATEVER BUT THIS IS JUST A VERY SIMPLE RESPOND I MEAN MOTION THAT SHOULD REQUIRE I MEAN I don't know. It doesn't take long to do this. And I don't see any problem with this. I mean, we are not picking any particular population over another. We're not using Siri resources. We just ask. And whether it is, you know, really something that's doable or not. If not, that's it.

I think just read the motion as it is. Is there a group that's out right now looking for to establish a kid boarding American club? Is there someone that we can reach out to economic development or to a DPD director to start the process? A motion response, are we just going to get 15 plots of land to say, yeah, these are available if you want it? It seems like we should have somebody, like with the boxing gym, we had a group of people out, right? The Smith-Bacon Center, we had a group of people with the VFW, we had the veterans were here. So if this is a group of people that are looking to do something, fantastic. Can we just put them in touch with DPD and see what happens? i think we normally do that normally like if raytheon wants to come in here they reach out to dpd but this is a group that's available that's ready to go just please give them just by rose's number council robinson

Thank you. Since it's such a short motion, would the maker of the motion be okay with amending it to pretty much can the DPD work to identify a plot of land available for any type of American club? Because I've received calls from different cultural groups of if we're just looking for plots of lands available that would satisfy the need for a club can we just get a motion response back about these available plots of land for that type of club

I guess my question to DPD would be how many people reach out to you looking for land without motion? That's my point. And I think that's the way it normally goes is they, but you could, yeah. Do people reach out to you for plots of land looking to come to the city and looking for a place to be? And why do we need a motion if they can just reach out to you?

Yeah, I mean, we are happy to respond to a motion if the council would like that. People often do ask us for, you know, what's available. Either we keep track, we have an active list of city-owned properties. And so if we know what size people are looking at for city-owned properties, we can filter our list down. We also have a membership to CoStar, which is like a real estate listing like entity or website that we can put some metrics in. They're looking for this much space kind of thing. And it'll give us the available commercial properties. So it's something that people ask us for all the time. We could absolutely easily do it. a general sort of here's what the city owns is a little harder because the requests are usually filtered by like what people are looking for as far as square footage but but it is something that if if this group just wants to call dpd uh we absolutely could do it and i would also be happy to kind of explain that in more detail in a motion response if that would also be helpful council adjourn

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And I appreciate Councillor Noon's explanation and realizing that this shouldn't sort of promote or disincentivize any particular group, whether they are a cultural group or any other kind of organization. And I appreciate his explanation of that. I think the fact that it is short, but it is worded such that it is to work with DPD to identify a plot of land, to me, made it sound like the goal is to come up with a specific plot as opposed to you know doing the same kind of work that would be done for any non-profit and i think as we each think about putting our motions forward we should think about the color that our language gives to the guidance that we're what we're asking from the city administration we often aren't just asking for it and this is not about this specifically but it it raises the point that often we're not asking for information we're asking for a particular outcome when often really we should be asking for information. So I would ask all of us to take that into account as we're putting our motions together. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Duran. Councillor Marcia. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. In keeping with this, on another topic which is similar to this, I understand where Councillor Noon is coming from. Over the years, I've had calls from numerous groups asking me if I could help them find a building so they could put their religious service in. So what would I do? I would refer them to the DPD. Sorry about that, because I felt that they knew the empty buildings and the landlords that perhaps they could rent out to this religious group of Baptists or whatever and have their rent and have their services there. No different than that, this particular issue.

thank you thank you council marcia council mcdonough all set i'll go um i was just going to say that i i think that counselor i think the motion and i also think that some of the discussion around it now seems to kind of speak to and i've gotten caught and people have asked me as well about you know how do i uh I think I had texted the assistant city manager about a church downtown that needed help with something that would have gone through DPD. I think there's a various number of cultural groups and et cetera that are sitting around wondering, And I don't know why they're sitting around and why they won't just email your department. This is not like a why aren't you. This is, I guess, I think there is a need for some level, just kind of in thinking how we might be able to pick up some of these smaller groups that don't necessarily know how to initiate the process, regardless of who they are. And I guess that's all I had to add, is I think that's something we could work on. So thank you.

Thank you, Council McDonough. Council Chau.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think the lesson from all of this is that if you are going to make a short motion, Don't say the motion speaks for itself.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

Move the question.

Thank you, Councilor Chau. Councilor Noon, do you want to remove this and have the person just go through DPD, just call them and say, call DPD?

I can do that.

You want to do that? Councilor Noon removes the motion. And who's seconded it? Councilor? Lee Yang. Councilor Lee Yang, are you okay with that? Thank you. Councilor Chau.

Mr. Mayor, could I suspend the rule and take item 8.2 and 8.3 out of order, please?

Motion by Councilor Chow to take 8.2 and 8.3 out of order, seconded by Councilor Decoto. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 8.2, vote, transfer $1,026,000 various year end. Wave full reading and second reading by title. Vote to transfer funds to balance various projects. Projected deficits in certain accounts using projected surpluses appropriations and other accounts per the statutory procedure M GL 40 chapter 44 section 33 B Any questions roll call a Motion to adopt by a council of noon seconded by a council of Robinson roll call Yes

Mayor Gitche.

Yes.

Councilor Duran. Yes. Councilor Liang.

Yes.

Councilor McDonough.

Yes.

Councilor Marcia. Yes. Councilor Noon. Yes. Councilor Robinson.

Yes.

Councilor Rourke.

Yes.

Councilor Scott. Yes.

Councilor Chau. Yes. 11 years. 11 years. Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. 8.3, vote transfer 172,000 wastewater energy. Wave full reading and second reading by title. Vote to transfer funds to balance various projected deficits in the sewer enterprise energy accounts using projected surplus appropriations and other accounts per the statutory procedure MGL Chapter 44, Section 33B. Motion to adopt by Council Leang, seconded by Council DeCotto. Any questions? Roll call.

Council DeCotto. Yes.

uh may i get you yes council duran yes council liang yes council mcdonough yes council mercia yes council noon yes council robinson yes council rook yes council scott yes council chow yes it's 11 years thank you mr clerk 11 years motion passes 6.5 council liang requests that the city manager and irrelevant department conduct a walk audit of one columbus ave and two samuel street regarding street safety Provide approximate timelines in both immediate and long-term solutions to address any identified issues. Seconded by Councilor McDonough. Councilor Liang.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I think this motion is, I want outcome instead of information. So yeah, I'd like to see some outcome on these. If you're on the Columbus Avenue, you just walk by and you have this two big bin in the middle. And it's been there, I guess, around two years or so now. And I wanted to see if there's a, some sort of solution in terms of moving it forward. While at the same time, the Samuel Street, I met a lady there while we were at the park and the The street there is not, this is more like a low hanging fruit. Even though it's sort of flooded while it's raining or even it's a little rainy, but at the same time, it's really easily fixed just because it's just down slope a little bit and broken potholes and whatnot, but it just needs a little bit of spotlight into that little dead end street on Samuel. So this attention should be more on the Columbus Avenue when I walk down from Wilder to a PV and Walker Street. It just just just need a little bit of attention on it. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Yang. See no one else with questions. Is there any way to get the traffic engineer up here, Mr. Manager? Liz, could you come up for one second? No. Just a quick question. Columbus Ave is a 39 on the RSR online. Where would that fall in the repaving list?

That's a question for the engineering department. I don't know where they have it on their list for repaving yet.

Because it's really, 39 is very low, and it's in red on the map on the engineering department's thing. So that must be one that must be very close. The other one, Samuel, is a 60, so I'm not sure where that lies, but maybe DPW can fix something like that. But the RSR, we can all look that up online and then.

Correct. The RSR can be looked up online, and that's.

Mr. Manager.

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. We can include that for Columbus Avenue 39, if it's okay with the maker of the motion, and figure out if the utilities are in good order for that, if the maker of the motion wishes.

I know today I drove down Columbus Avenue. They were doing sewer work on it, so I'm not sure if that plays in why they haven't done the road over, but they had a barrel and a plate in front of it, and they were working on it today. Menino's Excavator is over there, so I'm not sure if that plays in it, Councilor Young. Councilor Geronimo.

Yes, I just wanted to remind everybody that back on March 24th, we got a report from DPW and DPD on paving over the last five years, which included a flow chart as to how the DPD makes the city makes its decisions about where to pave and road surface rating is only one of the criteria. So you should look at that report. It was a great report.

Thank you, Councilor Duran. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.6, Councilor Yang, request that the City Manager have the appropriate departments provide a comprehensive list of advertisement vendors, including news outlets, news media organizations, and social media platforms that have been contracted by the City for various programs and services. How they were selected?

along with the total expenditure associated with each agency or company over the past 24 months seconded by council mcdonough council yang thank you mr mayor um this motion is just to look at the audience um are we reaching out to all the targeted audience within the city uh the different venues that should be reaching RIGHT NOW WHO ARE SOME OF THE VENDORS THAT WE HAVE AND MAYBE THEIR ADDITIONAL ADVERTISEMENT AGENCY OR GROUPS THAT MIGHT BE INCLUSIVE INTO THIS ADVERTISEMENT AGENCY AND LINE ITEM OF THE CITY AND I THINK JUST BECAUSE OF THE diversity in the city. And I think we should look at some more and see who we are and how are we going to reach more into the different places of the city. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Yang. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.7, Council Yang, request that the city manager and the relevant department conduct an investigation into the complaints regarding the use of dirt bikes in all-terrain vehicles, quad bikes, from Swan Street to Boston Road, particularly in the vicinity of Edson Cemetery and Ventura Fields. Seconded by Councilor Marcia, Council Yang.

Thank you, Ms. May. This motion came about from a resident that's living on Swan Street. And while it's not as often, they've been seeing these dirt bikes and quads coming through the street, and sometimes at a higher speed. And I just want to make sure, bring this to attention of the administration. uh I'm not sure what the solution may be but and they're not there often but at the same time they're they're speeding through the neighborhood uh quite loudly and also sometimes dangerous especially when their kids and um people are at the cemeteries and whatnot thank you

All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.8, Council Yang, request the city manager work with the appropriate department to clear debris and dirt from the sidewalk at 230 Mount Vernon and 498 Broadway, the former Muldoon gas station, to ensure pedestrian safety. Additionally, conduct a thorough inspection of the property for any violations, including fence issues, parking concerns, or sanitary problems that could adversely affect the neighborhood of the

THE VALUE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES PARTICULARLY THE CORONA STORE AND STAR CLOSER MIDDLE SCHOOL SECONDED BY COUNCILOR NOON COUNCILOR LIANG THANK YOU MR. MAY UM AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK AGAIN TO THE COMPANY AND I KNOW THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO FIX IT NOW AND I'M LOOKING AT IT IT'S PRETTY GOOD UM THE WORK'S BEING DONE SO THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT UH I THINK FOR ME FOR THIS MOTION ALONE IS THAT THROUGHOUT THE WINTER, SPRINGS, AND NOW IN THE SUMMER, WHEN THE SNOW STORM, WE'VE SEEN PEOPLE WALKING ON THE STREET TRYING TO GO TO STOCKLOSER SCHOOL. THE FENCE THERE HAS BEEN THERE FOR QUITE A BIT. THAT'S BEEN BROKEN, AND THE WHOLE THING WAS REALLY BAD. THIS IS NOT BLAMING, BUT I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE THE CULTURE OR NORMALITY OF HOW WE AS PARENTS, TEACHERS, CITY STAFF, RESIDENTS WALK AND DROVE BY AND SEEING THIS BROKEN FENCE, SEEING THIS AREA, THE SIDEWALK You've got a car parking there, but nobody's saying anything. And I just don't want this to become a norm, that we see broken stuff and we're not reporting it. And that's why I want to bring it up where people should be able to say these things. And so I might be bringing tough love, but please do go through the neighborhoods if they're parking the wrong way please uh you know because it become where for example you're looking at cross street and adam you have this truck parking there that it's right there and people are really hard to turn it's become the norm where when you go there and they get angry and the same thing I have teachers residents and people are going to the neighborhood and these broken fence or sidewalk being parked you know closer to the fence nobody can walk there and I think we just need to bring light into some of this NORMS THAT'S BEING IN THERE AND SOMETIMES CREATE HAZARDOUS FOR THE RESIDENT COMMUNITY AND ESPECIALLY THE STUDENTS WHO ARE WALKING. THANK YOU.

Thank you, Council Leang. Councilor Marcia.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. That is an excellent motion. I brought it up before you were on the council because it was an eyesore then, and it's an eyesore now. It's trouble. It's a bad area. What Councilor Leang said is absolutely true. I hope something is done because it is troubling, yes.

Thank you, Councilor Marcia. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.9, Councilor Robinson requests the City Manager have the proper department provide a copy of the St. Louis Park renovation project contracts to the Council as well as update on opening. Seconded by Councilor Marcia. Councilor Robinson.

Thank you. Again, everyone's left scratching their head as to why such a delayed opening. I mean, usually we're closing splash pads when? Second week of August? Third week of August due to staffing or whatever? I mean, here we are pretty much midway through July and still nothing. I was told right up until May, June that everything was on schedule and it's still. And I see people, I drive home from work and I see people playing on the playground with fencing still around it. So I don't understand what the hold up with this is. And if it is a contractor or vendor situation, I'd like to see a copy of the contract. And I hope we have a clawback clause in there where we're not paying the full fare because I don't know. I'm sure you get asked questions too, the administration on this. So can we get some input as to what is this holdback?

Thank you, Councillor Robinson. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.11. Councillor Robinson requests the City Manager have the proper department provide an update on swapping out volleyball surface material at gauge as well as potential pathways to install a seasonal restroom facility. Seconded by Councillor O'Rourke. Councillor Robinson. Thank you.

Thank you. We've talked about this. Again, we had the event at Gage over the past weekend, and the neighborhood would be happy just with stone dust. Remove the sand, put in the stone dust, and have it rolled, and it compacts it down, and it makes it a hard enough playable surface, low cost. And as far as that restroom, again, if we have crews in that area doing CSO work, I would hope that we could kind of take a look at it and see if we can coordinate with any open space money, if possible, that we might have earmarked for that area. And where that green shed is, that's a short run, as we discussed. So to trench right through and put it in, I think that's something that desperately needed over there. Thank you.

Thank you Council. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered. 6.1 to Council rock Robinson request the city manager have the proper department provide a detailed report on reasons for denying opening delayed openings of McPherson pool seconded by Council. Council Robinson.

Thank you. We're all aware of this this has been I still don't understand that if it's a matter of parts. EVERY YEAR IN THE PAST WE WOULD FIRE THAT SYSTEM UP AND MAKE SURE EVERYTHING WAS EVERYTHING IN THE SPRING AND IF SOMETHING WAS BROKEN WE'D PUT THE REPLACEMENT ORDER IN TO GET THAT SAME THING WITH THE SPLASH PARKS AGAIN WE'RE MIDWAY THROUGH JULY AND IT'S MOLD AND MILDEW IN THE POOL SO THE KIDS ARE LOOKING AT IT FROM OUTSIDE THE FENCE DO WE EVER THROUGH YOU TO THE CITY MANAGER DO WE EVER ANTICIPATED TIMELINE ON ON THESE PARKS OR WHATEVER THIS HOLDUP IS ON MCPHERSON

Thank you very much, Mr. May, through to the council. The estimated update coming in from California is this Thursday, and we're hoping it's only going to take a couple of hours to do, but the pool has been pressure washed, et cetera, so it'll be ready to go once it's filled and these pieces come in. My understanding is the piece that we needed, it was in good order, then it wasn't in good order, had to order it, had to find it. We had a couple of POs that went out there that were out of order. Let's just say less than what some people trying to rebuild the whole thing and we went. We went and ordered a piece that hopefully will be in by Thursday of this week that does not mean will be open Thursday.

Is there a reason that this wasn't done in the spring.

Yeah, my understanding is everything was in good order and then when they started to run it because they painted it now they cleaned it again. But something broke down this I think in the future we're probably looking at re rebuilding the entire system there, but this will hopefully get us through for the remainder of this summer.

OK, thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Robinson. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.13, Councilor Duran, request the City Manager have the proper departments describe what happened to the yard waste materials and how residents can ensure that they're not spreading invasive plants through yard waste. Seconded by Councilor Liang. Councilor Duran.

thank you very much this is a follow-up to the discussion at last week's or last city council meeting about pollinators and native plants at the lowell loves wildlife presentation on native plants on june 27th at the library there was a discussion of the challenge of getting rid of invasive plants and that putting them into the yard waste pickup could actually spread them depending on what happens to the waste And so residents who care about pollinators and native plants should understand what should and shouldn't be put into yard waste from that perspective so that invasive plants aren't spread. That's it. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Duran. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.14. Councilor Scott requests the City Manager have the appropriate department install mobile surveillance cameras at the Lundberg Street Bridge to deter illegal dumping. Seconded by Councilor Marcia. Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The Lundberg Street Bridge has been a chronic issue. I went back in my emails, unfortunately, to Assistant Manager Machado. I think there's been over seven of them for dumping over that bridge. Another probably five on the Lincoln Street Bridge. I just did this one because this one continues to be an issue. I don't know whether or not we purchased the mobile cameras, if that's something that we can, if you can respond to that. A couple years ago, I made a motion about purchasing them. I haven't seen them in action. Is that something that we can presently do, have the capability? Manager Golden.

Thank you, Mr. May, through to the council. Yes, we do have them, and they've been in action. As a matter of fact, we're looking right now at re-upping their contract. So it may take us a few, I don't know, a week or so to get these back into action. But it is a contractual piece. But they have been out there. They've been pretty successful at finding people, getting people, and getting their attention.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor Scott. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.15, Council SCAR requests the City Manager provide a report on the feasibility of using Community Preservation Act funds for improvements, including the completion of the original O'Donnell Park renovation plan, the renovation of the restroom facilities, and the installation of shade structures for the splash pad at O'Donnell's Benches in basketball court improvements, as well as the installation of new playground equipment and other eligible park upgrades, including at Olivera Park, which has no equipment. Seconded by Councilor McDonough, Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I probably could have made that a little bit shorter. It's everything pretty much in my district that has been in disrepair still at this point in time. I just want to make sure that we take full advantage of CPC funding, and these are some things I just wanted to put on the list. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Scott. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 6.16, Councilor Scott requests the City Manager provide the City Council with an update on the flooding issues on Bourne Street. Seconded by Councillor O'Rourke. Councillor Scott.

The motion really speaks for itself, but I went by two weeks ago and some residents had pointed out to me that we had really bad rain. It was worse than it had been in a long time. Half the street was flooded out. So if we could just get an update on the work that's going to happen there, I hope.

All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Six point one seven councillor Scott councillor McDonough request the city manager of the appropriate to provide a report explaining Why demolition and hydrant permits have been issued for the property located to Tana Street? Well city's data center moratorium remains in effect. No second needed counsel Scott

Thank you. So I was reached out to by many residents that have noticed the work that has been happening on Tiana Street. They want to know why there was a moratorium voted on, so why the work is happening. The section on our moratorium says it imposes an immediate 360-day moratorium on any new construction and development of data centers. My question is whether or not demolishing a building that has the sole intent to clear the land for a data center is considered a phase of the overall development of that property. I mean, they have come forward. They've sued the city now saying that this is the suit was dropped, but they are saying that their plans now were to build a data center. So my question is why that is allowed under our moratorium. So if we can get a report on why that's happening, I'd appreciate it.

Thank you, Counsel Scott. Counsel McDonough.

Counselor Scott just said just about everything there is to say. So I got nothing to add.

Thank you, Counsel McDonough. Mr. Solicitor, just a quick question. When lawsuits come like this, how quickly do they get sent to the counselors? Is it something that gets done quickly or is it something that takes time? Because we read it in social media before anything was even sent to us. Normally, is that a judgment call? Because normally you don't send them over, and I don't know.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So obviously there is the, you know, that's prescribed in the charter, there is the annual litigation review where, you know, everything that has occurred over the previous year gets brought up and discussed. Typically, most lawsuits, they come up to my office, you know, obviously I discuss it with the city manager and my team proceeds with the case. If there are things that I need or bigger questions I need to put in front of the council, I'll request an executive session. That's typically how we approach these things as they come in. It's usually case, it's more case dependent, truthfully.

Thank you. All in favor of the motion signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 6.188, Councilor McDonough. Councilor Skar, request the City Manager have the appropriate department draft regulation to prohibit the construction and or installation of new diesel generators at any site or enterprise with a production capacity of 30 or more megawatt hours. No second needed. Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is not to start with what it is not. This is not an attempt to regulate air quality or kind of things that are, I think, very clearly with masked up in the EPA. What it is, is an attempt to look at the intensity of land use in the city. So I did some digging. I looked at how much fuel is stored around various industrial and institutional zones, which would include the university and the hospital as well. And I think A big part of both my motivation in kind of offering the motion and in listening to residents predominantly around Sacred Heart, but at this point throughout the city, is an acknowledgment that there is a difference, I think, in an industrial or institutional use that has three generators versus 30 generators. If it's not between 3 and 30, is it between 30 and 50? Is it 100? At some point, I think, and I think this is the first time that any municipality is, and it's not just us, but that municipalities are having to try and think through what this looks like. For reference, only because I've been reading now, the US Energy Info Agency in May 2006 I quoted them at, so this would be specifically on data centers, which is not the target specifically, but so data center floor space are as much as 2.9 times as energy intensive as other industrial use. right so i i guess just trying to think through what does it look like an emergency backup plan i pulled it uh little general unless i'm missing something the the most recent number i could get for a little general said that they have a 10 a 10 megawatt capacity which is not that that's that's our next biggest that i could find in the city for for production um and so just I think it's not just data centers, but as the city continues, and it's that there are modern industries capable of incredibly intensive resource use on a given parcel of land. And I think it's not unlikely that we see that intensity continue to concentrate and I'm just trying to think of ways and if this you know winds up not being one of them but I think it could be I think it's trying to think through how do we quantify that that intensity of use in our industrial or our heavy industry what's the difference between heavy industry and light industry when we're talking about backup power that's all I have right now

Thank you, Councilor McDonough. Councilor Scott?

Thank you, Mr. Ayyai. Yeah, way to start with this. You just mentioned so much. But I would just say that the use is excessive. I think that we've seen a lot of different towns right now limiting 12 megawatts for whole yoke. Northboro just capped it at 5 megawatts. This is what we heard from residents. This is what they're looking for. They want us to control the noise, the diesel emissions. um and i would just say again i think this is exactly what residents in the city want us to do and that's why we brought it forward if it can't be you know if the wording isn't perfect you know come back from the solicitor's office you know meeting the intention of what this is whether or not that's you know an overlay district or something that's you know further away from residents or just banning them completely but again the intention is to uh diminish the the um Nuisance, I guess for the city and the residents. Thank you.

Thank you councillor Scott councillor Thank You mr. Mayor, you know any attempt, you know, once again to you know, stop markedly at all costs, you know assassination attempts wherever you want to say You know, I think this motion is you know, slightly respectfully foolhardy we looked at the future of not just Lowell or for the state or for the country or for the world and It's AI, and AI runs on electricity that we get off the grid, but in order to back up those grids, you need diesel. That's the way it works, unless we're going to go nuclear 100%, which I don't think is going to happen either. If you look at healthcare, transportation, education, business, computer software, within the next three to five years, it's all going to be done by AI. So for Lowell to adopt this or take this vote now, I think really hurts us for the future. If you want to make the amendment to make it just for data centers, I'd probably still vote no, but that would make a little bit more sense. Diesel generators are allowed to run 70 hours per year. That's a state law. So, you know, if we have the opportunity in the next two or three years to cure cancer, to cure diabetes, to, you know, have transportation that is, you know, multimodal, that can run under the AI premise, which is all not just uh perspective it's it's going to happen uh i think you know we need to take everything into account again before you know we just largely continue to attack against you know one business in the city so you know i would i would um again um stress that it's not just um about one business even though i think that's the intent of the motion uh that we have to look into everything of the future of what we're looking at uh and i think we want to make sure that you know we don't promote low as a anti development and I business place especially have all general the use in 10. Now diesel generators now in 5 years from now again if those medical breakthroughs come through as predicted they may need. You know diesel generators not just at that site we other states as well so just caution with that thank you so much.

Thank you council or council to go.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Through you to the city manager. We're now in the fourth month of this moratorium. Are we any further in discussions between Mark Lee and the residents at this point with any community benefit agreement at all?

Can we just stick to the motion itself? It isn't about Markley. It's about generators. So if we could just stay within the motion, I think the city solicitor probably would agree at this point.

I'll file a motion then. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I was just going to say, actually, that this is not about a particular company. It's not targeting any company. It's about what the neighbors are coming forward and asking us to do. We can be pro-development. We can be pro-I, pro all of that. But if we totally abandon the neighbors that live in these communities, then we're just doing a disservice. A big corporation, they're going to take what they can get. That's what's going to happen. We can't leave us vulnerable like that. It's an environmental justice neighborhood right now that it's in. We need to make sure if we're going to do it, like I said, again, maybe an overlay district, heavy industrial, you know, large setbacks, buffers away from houses. So these are the type of things that we're looking for. I don't think it's anything unreasonable. I don't think it's anything that you wouldn't want in your neighborhood if it was going to come in your backyard, Pawtucketville, wherever else. It's the same thing. So I do think we should look at the scale and what we really want, and I'd like to see a response.

Thank you.

Councilor Chau, thank you.

Councilor Scott.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and I'm reading the motion as written. I'm not thinking of any particular company, but it's, you know, I'm thinking about how this could impact, as Councilor Rourke was alluding to, it impacts the whole economic development and so forth, and especially, maybe this is more of like a question through you, Mr. Mayor, to the city manager, especially with the development or the potential development in the Hamilton Canal District with the Link project, Frontrunner City, et cetera, the development coming in, could something like this, if this were to go forward, could that affect any type of project in the future?

Manager Golden?

Do you see any company that could really require this? If it's in a certain area of the city, would this be OK?

Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, through you to the council. Council, at this time, the moratorium is only on data centers. Could it, if there were an organization such as Draper that needed this type of power, it possibly could, sure. But I'm not aware that they're looking for this type of power at this time. I don't think they have the same needs, but I don't wanna be definitive on that. They'd end up coming to us about backup generators at some point in time.

Okay, thank you. Councilman McDonald.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Mayor. And I understand I was perhaps a bit jumbled at the beginning. To try and put a finer point on this, Lowell General doesn't have 10 generators. Lowell General, to the best of my knowledge, Lowell General has a peak capacity from their generators of 10 megawatts, which is the report that I was reading from the people that installed their generators that it was spread across four and a half, call it, generators. They have four main ones, then a smaller one. The average industrial generator is capable of producing, looking through the charts that are available and what The date that Markley had provided the city and then going off that industrial generators are producing between a thousand and three thousand Kilowatt hours and then so it's the metric system so just drop all the zeros and then you get the one to the three so each generator is is capable of producing between one and three of these megawatt hour capacity windows. So this 30 number, and if the city administration says we need to go a little bit higher, you know, okay, but I'm not really seeing any, I could not find anyone in the city, I couldn't find anyone in the state, I could not find in industrial use that is getting anywhere close to this level of backup power. Hospitals weren't. And if I'm wrong, I'm wrong. I only have so much time in the day between when my child goes to sleep and I fall asleep to keep looking. I think there is a clear difference. And this is not about being anti-business. There are alternative technologies available. This is about giving developers a reason to be. And I get it. It's slightly more expensive. But natural gas is an option. Mark Lee, as one of them, had talked about battery storage sites and a contract with the spot in Tewksbury. There are some alternatives. I think there's a clear difference between three to four generators and 50. And we've got to be able to find out where that line is, and we should be able to define that line. So thank you. Mr. Mayor.

Thank you. I think that, you know, the motion is a good motion because if we're looking at 2050 and we're supposed to go green, it should be a push going towards green. I think this motion forces people to go to green energy. And that's what this whole council voted for, DPD pushed, everybody pushed the same thing, green energy. I don't think this is too far when you look at the amount that was put here to look as a regulation. I don't even think it goes far enough. I think it should be a lot less, but that's what was put there. You look at all these businesses, and I don't disagree with Council Rourke when he talks about hospitals and other things, but they don't come near this. And if we've looked at Massachusetts over the last few years, we certainly can see hospitals are going out of business. They're not building. So I think using certain things as leverage here is not what the will was of the environment and what we were looking for. So I don't think this is a bad motion. I think it's something that we should discuss, look into. And if somebody wants a waiver to it, then let them come before the bodies to be and look for a waiver with the neighborhood support. That's how government works. And it should work that way. The neighbors should be talked to and not mistreated because you're a certain segment of the population and you're needed. And that's just my thought on this is more so green energy. Here we are. If you're serious about it, do it. If you're not, don't. Thank you. Councilor McDonough.

Councilor Rook. Thank you, yeah. You know, I agree with maybe, you know, 90% of what, you know, Mick just said, but I think we should be going through boards and commissions beforehand. You know, if someone wants to come here and, you know, if we put this on the books, that just totally wipes out anything. If, you know, if someone wants to come and there's neighborhood outcry and you know, a planning board or a zoning board or, you know, a council at that point in time says, no, that's fine. But I think it's just, again, it's a precedent that I think will be far behind if we do do this in the next five to 10 years. You know, I don't think anybody's debating the future of, you know, of science and of AI and whatnot. But I think, you know, just use that as caution. know data sensors is not in here you know mark mark lee is not in here but a lot of what was said it definitely insinuates those two realms thank you i guess there's two sides to this coin you could be far ahead in the energy area for the environment um roll call mr clerk council dakota yes may i get you yes council jordan yes

Council Leang? Yes. Council McDonough?

Yes.

Council Murcia? Yes. Council Noon?

Yes.

Council Robinson? Yes. Council Rourke? No. Council Scott? Yes. Council Chow? Yes. Ten years. Ten years.

10 years motion passes 6.20 council mcdonough requests that the city manager work with the appropriate department to make all necessary changes to allow resident parking along richmond ave and hudson street on the perimeter of rotary park seconded by council of scott council mcdonough

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. This is something that has been sent to me now by multiple residents. There was a petitioner who came and spoke in front of the council several weeks ago, probably a couple months ago at this point. There used to be no, previously there were no parking signs, and so residents were parking along the park. These signs went up prohibiting parking. There have been what sounds like a couple of back and forth moments between different city departments and residents in the area some saying you can park some saying you can't park um and then every now and then everyone on the street seems to get a ticket so I think just any anything that we could do here to just clarify this and get us back to a spot where residents in that neighborhood do have a little bit of parking so thank you

none of us thank you council mcdonough all in favor of the motion signify by saying any opposed so ordered 6.21 council mcdonough requests the city manager work with the appropriate department to explore the installation of an e-bike sheer location at the leo roy's garage as a continuation of the partnership with a state-funded initiative in the lrta seconded by council liang council mcdonough

uh thank you mr mayor uh this is something that that's been brought to my attention a couple of times both by residents and by this company that's been working with the lrta i get emailed a lot um just looking to uh To kick it over, from the sounds of it, both personally and from some of my neighbors, and from all of these reports I'm getting about how great the program is, it sounds like it's a good program. It sounds like it's working. It sounds like it's going much better than the last time the city tried this experiment. So I'm just looking for an update or an indication on how this is going. And just in case my colleagues don't know, this is at no cost. you know my understanding is that this is at no cost to the city it's a state-funded program uh through the mass dot um and so and if that winds up if that's not true i you know can it and let me know but that my understanding was that they had funding for two sites they have one site they're looking for one more so thank you thank you council mcdonough council yang

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just have a little concern about the safety of using e-bike. When I saw this LRTA trying to have the program in our city, I worried about safety of our kids that they just rented or hop on the bike and just go and without any kind of helmet or support or any kind of, I guess it's, concerned in a way that in a simple flash in a minute they can hurt themselves. I remember I was the bike and pedestrian coordinator for the city and we brought the bike in. One of the reasons that we stopped the company from bringing the bike into the city was they were using the regular bike to get the e-bike into the city. That's why we stopped. We did not make that happen. But one of the concerns from most non-profits was that it's the safety. There's no helmet or there's no way of providing education or promotion about safety to the kids. right now if you go around there's a lot of them just weaving in between cars is there anything that we can do and also is there any kind of liabilities to the city if anything happened in terms of they're using the let's say the location or the facility

Solicitor Williams that I think the question is is there a liability to the city if e-bikes housed on their property Thank You mr. Mayor I

I'd say it depends. I'll give you the classic legal response. But normally when we put together contracts with vendors that maybe provide services like that, we would make sure that there were indemnification clauses that, especially for something like this, that might spell out more specific scenarios that could land the city in a position where we would be liable. So we would make sure that we took all of that into consideration if this were to happen and we were to engage a vendor before we finalize the contract with them.

Okay. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Leang. All in favor of the motion, signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Seven communications from the city manager. Motion response, 25 miles per hour. Councilor Duran.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And thank you to Ms. Zoltan, who's been waiting patiently for many hours, both for the report and for sharing data about real-time speeds on key roads. For folks who haven't read it, there are nice charts in there that show that we have made progress on most streets that were surveyed in terms of bringing the speed limits down. Although a few streets, people are going faster than they were a year ago, and on Rogers Street, they are going faster than they were in September of 2023. so there's still work to do by the community to for everybody to remember that our speed limit is 25 miles an hour citywide except for very very limited streets and there are maps that show that on the city website I appreciate that the memo and this is really for the audience indicated a number of factors about the roads that directly reflect or impact how quickly drivers, you know, how quickly people drive on them, and I think that's helpful insight into sort of road construction and things that can be done. I'm really grateful that Ms. Altman worked with the MassDOT to have them update their files to allow GPS-enabled vehicles to show the 25-mile-an-hour speed limit when using a mapping app like Google or Apple Maps. however on my car's dashboard more than a few streets show no speed limits still and at least in the past some had shown incorrect speed limits and less clear that that's still going on so perhaps a question through you Mr Mayor to Ms Altman is what is the best way for us as either residents and and counselors to help the U and the Transportation Department to identify locations where there are inconsistencies with the speed limit. Ms. Altman?

Hi, if I may. Well, I'm just kind of asking my staff and people in my department if they notice anything on their cars to let me know. If you notice something, please just send me an email, and I will put it in the list, and then I'll send something comprehensive to the state.

OK, no, that's helpful, because I think that's great advice. I also wonder whether having a few more of the 25 mile an hour signs around the city could be helpful. And I thought about that perhaps the counselors could consider where in the neighborhoods they interact with a lot might think about some strategic places where a sign here or there could help. I can think of a few off the top of my head. And I'm wondering if that would be potentially useful both to reset, because it does seem like the GPS is read the sign and then tell you that it's 25 there. So it's kind of a reminder to the car and to the driver. But again, we don't want to have to do it everywhere. I'm just curious if you think that would be useful.

We can, um, it's not necessary strictly speaking by law because we have the chapter 17 C enacted. Um, but we certainly can. Um, we have been, we'd had did put in five of the radar feedback signs and those seem to be helpful. Um, so we can look into more locations, um, for something like that, just to remind people as they come into the city.

mm-hmm or i think even sort of as they're driving through the city because you kind of forget over time okay so great that that's great i appreciate it thank you thank you councillor duran motion accept in place on file by councillor liang seconded by councillor chao all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered 7.1 b motion response east merrimack council joran uh thank you again uh for this report um from the map it looks like parking will be maintained on the what looks like the south side of east merrimack street across from the entrance to saints hospital there i think that's how i read it okay i see a nod so that's great um and when is this work expected to be done

I've been working with the engineering department on this. So my understanding is in the next few weeks before way before school starts.

Oh, great. Okay. Thank you very much.

Thank you, Councilor Duran. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Marisica, seconded by Councilor Noon. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 7.1C, motion response, prism. Councilor Duran or Councilor McDonough? Councilor McDonough.

Do you want to go first?

Sure. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you for the response. I guess my biggest question is, I guess, are we working? And we've talked about it before, but it's not in this motion response. So it's just also possible that there's just a lot of moving parts here. But was this not also part of the conversation with the relicensing for Boot Hydro and who owns the canals? No. No.

Manager Golden?

No. OK. I guess I get confused on who owns the canals. And if the problem, I guess, right, is with the canal walls structure. i'm working through here because i mean that's that's it's only a paragraph but like the paragraph seems to say that the the sinkhole is seemingly the problem is that the canal wall is broken and so i don't think i mean we i don't want the city to fall into the canal but i also don't want to be paying to fix somebody else's problem so that's all miss altman

so the concord river wall is the city's when it gets when it turns the corner and it sort of becomes the becomes the canal then it becomes a little trickier however where this is located we've determined a couple years ago that this is the city's jurisdiction this particular point of wall um okay

No, thank you. I mean, that is genuinely confusing. So both for me and for anyone still watching at home, thank you.

Thank you, Ms. Holtman. Councilor Duran.

I had the same question. I was hoping that this was part of the FERC relicensing process, because that's unfortunate. That's going to be pretty major.

Um, I, the problem is that we just don't know what the problem is. Um, so that's what the first step is to, we have the funding available to do a study, to kind of do some geotechnical work and figure out what the problem is and what some alternatives are. And then the next step is to determine how much it will be to fix it and where we can acquire that funding.

Mm-hmm. Yep. No, thank you. Thank you, Ms. Altman. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor DeCoto. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 7.1, motion response D, West Albert, Councilor Chau.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. And tonight I get to speak first before Councillor Rook. In seriousness, I want to thank the engineer for the report. I want to thank the PD for the work. We know that traffic calming device does work. The speed reduced dramatically. I also want to thank the residents and I don't know how the engineer did it. She got all the residents in the neighborhood to help out, putting together the islands to slow down traffic. As you know, some solutions work very well, some solutions doesn't. Because maybe the street, how it's located and so forth, but that has been resolved to make everything work. But all in all, the traffic calming study will work and I appreciate what the engineer and DPD have done.

Thank you, Councilor Chow, Councilor McDonough, I mean, Councilor DeCoto.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Once again, I want to thank Ms. Altman as well. Obviously, we've had a little rough go in the last week and a half. Waste management has had a difficult time getting through that neighborhood due to the calming measures and cars parked on both sides of the street, so it's made it quite difficult. So she's going to be working on some different scenarios just for the edification of the neighbors over there. Thank you.

Thank you, Council Dakota. Council Duran.

I was just excited to read that residents were able to help with the project. And I think if we can figure out ways collectively to get more of that kind of community engagement, I think that would be great because then everybody will feel part of the city, part of the solution rather than just part of, you know, the raising the problem. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Duran. Motion to accept in place on file by Councilor Rook, seconded by Councilor Chau. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 7.1 motion response E, Riverside. Councilor McDonough.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor, and thank you, Ms. Oltman. This is probably the thing I hear the most about from the Pawtucketville section of District 4. It might be one of the only things I hear consistently about from the Pawtucketville section of District 4. I do just note, so I saw that the ADA compliant curb ramps are not there. There's not a whole lot of sidewalk there, obviously. I appreciate that we're looking. I'm hoping that we can get in at least a ramp and get the flashers up. The only other thing that I would just note is that the the triangle of graph that it's so the the triangle intersection where it's like sparks and martin street and then there's a triangle at the university there is uh it according to neighbors um it's not like anything is fully fully up yet but there is some development going on on that parcel and so just trying to be mindful of, I guess, the impact on the driver's visibility and where that stop line, I'm glad there's paint going in, but where that stop line is going to go so we make sure people can see, I guess. Yeah, thank you. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor McDonough. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Yang, seconded by Councilor Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 7.1, motion response F, Concord Street. Councilor Marcia.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We don't always get the report that we're hoping for, but thanks anyway.

Motion to accept and place on file by Council Leang, seconded by Councilor Noon. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 7.1, motion response G, MBTA installation, fencing barriers, and other safety measures. Council Scott.

Thank you and thank you for the motion response. I'm looking forward to our legislators working some magic, hopefully for the for the Butler Middle School to get fencing behind for the safety of the students there. Thank you.

Motion accepting place on file by Council of Rooks, seconded by Council of Duran. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed so ordered 7.1 motion response H vacant lot Hildred St. Council Robinson.

Thank you. I'm glad to see that the city went in, cleaned it out, the neighbors reached out. They were thrilled to see it kind of finally taken down. It's, I mean, do you have, through you to the manager, do you have any preliminary ideas of if once this, and when it gets freed up, ultimately through land court, what do you think that looks like? Maybe offered to the butters or something along those lines? Because it is a very tight postage stamp lot.

Manage a golden.

Thank you, Mister may 3 to the Council Council. I'd probably say yard sale parking in that area is kind of tight. However, it's going to take some time. It's just as you're reading this. It's been 20 years and it happens when you know somebody is not available. That will take ownership of the property and I'm sure the city solicitor. I've talked about this at length to try to find people and everything else, but it's just going against the property, which I think at some point in time will be sold to one of the butters. This 3 butters or maybe even a car condo idea for the for Hill Street could be any one of those things is going to be it's going to be on our our routine to try to clean it up. Keep it clean.

And that's what I think at least for right now the neighbors are most thankful about is that the city saying will continue to at least keep it somewhat clean and put it no trespassing sign on there. So thank you.

Thank you Council Robinson Council mercy.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Mayor. So I looked online on the GIS and I looked at the piece of property and it looks like a pretty, you know, it's not that big, but it would be excellent for a yard sale program. And I looked on the GIS to each abutter And they don't have much land. So to give them a half of this, that would be beautiful for them. And then it would put it on the tax roll and it would be utilized. So that's good. Because it's an unbuildable lot to begin with. So that's a good thing. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Marcia. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Chau, seconded by Councilor Duran. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 7.1 Motion and Response J, Firehouse Repairs. Councilor Noon.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you to the City, Assistant City Managers, CFO Baldwin, for the report. The report indicated that you're not finished the assessment yet, right? The colia assessment is not complete yet. Is that correct, CFO Baldwin?

Mr. Mayor, CFO Baldwin.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. That's correct, Counselor. They are nearly complete with their report and findings, but our proposal is once the report is complete, if this matter could be referred to a subcommittee. They came in once before prior to engaging in their work. We'd like to bring them back so that we could discuss the findings and put together a roadmap for next steps.

So the next step will be to the subcommittee, so to speak. And so what's the timeline after the subcommittee for the projects to start, CFO Baldwin?

CFO Baldwin?

Yeah.

This is something we'd like the OPM to comment on, but what we've discussed with them in our preliminary meetings is to take action on the most immediate repairs with the funds in hand. And so it's important to note the council's made a significant investment in firehouse improvements, $9.3 million. And so there is funding available to start to attack those things that they've identified. But what we're finding and not to get ahead of ourselves is that it is likely that we should start talking about a new fire station and then the conversation needs to sort of evolve and We need to engage the community as to where that is, how it will be built, et cetera. But there are immediate needs in the existing firehouses that we will address. We'll put those out for RFP once they finish the schematic designs for all of that work. That'll be phase one. And then phase two will be this discussion and movement towards a larger solution for the fire department.

Thank you. Thank you. Looking forward to this, for this repair to start. Because, you know, our firefighters need, you know, a decent firehouse to house, to stay there. 24 hours shift is not, and stay in some area, some firehouses is deplorable. It's very unfair to them. So I'm happy to see the report. I'm happy to see that we put, you know, part of our capital campaign or, you know, a capital budget. So going forward, at least we can tackle the one that needs to be taken care of first. I hope when the report, full report, full assessment comes that, you know, you send it to the council so we can send it to the subcommittee. to have that, maybe that time we can invite the OPM to come and comment on the timeline as to when they expect to start and when they expect to finish and what, why, how to start first. Thank you.

Motion by Councilor Noon to send this to a public safety subcommittee seconded by Councilor Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. Councilor McDonough.

you i just had one uh mr mayor one quick question um just the noting that the the high street uh station is a historic building um with masonry repairs it approaching 500 000 i'm wondering as a historic building is this something that the city could apply for some cpa money to assist in in these repairs or Could we look to see what exterior repairs, what work could be eligible for CPA funds?

Manager Golden? Thank you very much. Mr May through to the Council Council will be applying for everything. And yes, for his from a historical standpoint, that is definitely something we could do, but will also also be trying to lean on our state and federal delegation as well. There are some substantial repairs that need to do need to happen here. These some of these buildings have been touched in in quite some time. I've also asked the chief and the assistant chief to put together what what we have been doing over the last three or four years, and that's. making the interior of the buildings a better place to to be uh but that's we're still a long way from we're a long way away from being where we need to be and that you know could possibly include in our future uh you know maybe a new fire fire station someplace As well as police, we have, you know, our public safety buildings in total really need a lot of assistance. We've done a lot of work. This council has done incredible work with the high school, with the MSBA, AARP, and the municipal buildings are kind of next on a list of things that we need to kind of attack.

Thank you, Councilor McDonough. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Decoto, seconded by Councilor Leang. All those in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. 7.2, information report, traffic calming. Mr. Manager?

thank you very much uh mr mayor and three to the council council this gives everyone an opportunity i believe and of course ms altman is here to answer the fact of uh the 85 percentile of what had happened um you can pick any street colburn or jewett and then what happened after things were were put into play i think that it shows that it is making a difference. I think it's making a big difference. I think that most folks are happy with what's happening. This doesn't mean the outliers that are not paying attention or driving through the city any which way they want. But we rely, obviously, on the police department to catch those folks. But overall, I think it's showing improvement. And the council should take a bow on this for making this happen. Ms. Altman, do you have anything else to add to this?

No, I just wanted to make sure that the Council knew that in these locations where we had targeted these installations, it was successful. And speed humps can only be one of the tools that we use in our toolbox to keep people safe in the city. Where appropriate and where we can meet our requirements, they are an effective tool, like I said. I am working more consistently with the engineering department to be comprehensive throughout the city. uh we've found that sometimes a raised crosswalk or a raised intersection might be a good alternative to a speed hump and it also helps us address ada compliance so um where we in some of the more challenging areas of the city so stay tuned

Councilor Joann.

Yeah, I just wanted to thank Ms. Altman again. We have a lot of traffic related reports this week. And I think the message is that there are both a number of tools that are available. There are a number of criteria though that have to be considered. you know so just asking for a speed hump isn't enough that there are both physical and other constraints in it in the process and i think the message from one of the reports is that things need to be looked at comprehensively because if one moves YOU KNOW, OR SLOWS DOWN TRAFFIC ON ONE STREET, THE SPEEDERS WILL JUST MOVE TO THE PARALLEL STREET. SO THERE'S A COMPREHENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD FEEL THAT, OR LOOK, REVIEW THAT HAS TO BE CONDUCTED. AND AGAIN, I THANK MS. OLTMAN FOR BOTH TRAINING ME ABOUT THAT, BUT TO CONVEYING THAT INFORMATION TO ALL THE RESIDENTS THROUGH THESE REPORTS. THANK YOU.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So Liz, you work on a number of this, as you listed here, installing speed hum. Have you looked, using the criteria that you have, have you also, what's some of the other streets you're looking at in terms of going forward? Have you considered looking at, say, Boston Road, Stevens Street, and whatnot?

So there are certain streets that have too many cars on them to have speed humps on them. They are emergency access routes. Their speed humps are not appropriate on major corridors. But there are other things that we can do on those corridors. For example, the things that the engineering department is addressing on Chelmsford Street in the section that they are repaving this summer, we are adding in some median areas and we're adding more crosswalks and we're adding some bump outs and things like curb extensions and things like that. So to make the feel of the street,

on those major corridors feel more like pedestrians are expected there and that they people should slow down there's some of those Street like you said the corridor um in the Highland were like one of them will be quarter will be Pine Street right right will be Westwood Street

Right. So those are streets that we wouldn't target speed humps for because of the volume. We have to put trucks somewhere, right? And so they do have to service our small businesses and our businesses. So those are the appropriate places for trucks to go. But we want the trucks to go slowly, so we need to look at when we are repaving or have – the opportunity to do other treatments there. That's what we wanted to do in those corridors to make it less attractive for people to just go fast.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council. New Council Robinson.

Thank you, I'm I just like to say thank you very much the these installations, I mean this. 2 streets and son of a cold and street at 25 miles an hour. We found before 48% of those vehicles traveling there. Now after installation 9% significant reduction. BEACON 72% TO 20% SIGNIFICANT REDUCTION AS WELL AS I MEAN BOTH STREETS THAT I MENTIONED LESS THAN 1% GOING OVER 35 MILES AN HOUR SO I MEAN THAT'S PRETTY SIGNIFICANT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THESE INSTALLATIONS AND i appreciate how you strategically are looking at the entire grid and seeing what's the most effective solution um i do have questions but and i don't expect it tonight uh maybe we can discuss it in depth on emotion but now that we're doing that cso project i'd love to see some ideas that you have for the rebuild part when we ever get to that portion of it so but thank you

Oh, I have a whole traffic calming restoration plan in the CSO plan set. So don't worry. I've had my input on that.

Thank you, Council Robinson. Council McDonough?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I just quickly, this is great. Maybe in the form of a motion later, I just wanted to put it on the radar, is trying to identify, and we spoke about it a little bit, but streets that either become cut-throughs due to traffic calming or just have kind of started to emerge as cut-throughs with higher speeds than normal. The one that I've gotten a lot of calls about recently has been Warren Street in downtown, but you also see it, motion response I got earlier with Beaver, sometimes Jackson Street just kind of trying to think through and then also you know I know I know your department is doing the greatest intersection improvement in the history of the city of Lowell when you're gonna remove the worst intersection in the city of Lowell over by Gorham Street but then it's that work intensifies and people start looking for ways to that's all just trying to think about

plugging the hole so that people that think they live on a quiet street and then suddenly are like i've got a f-150 going 45. right yeah thank you motion accepting place on file by council of dakota seconded by council yang all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered 7.3 communication city manager requests approval of out-of-state travel mis motion to adopt by council robinson seconded by council of mercier roll call council koto yes

uh yeah get you yes council jared yes council yeah yes council mcdonough yes council mercia yes council noon yes council robinson yes council rourke yes council scott yes council chow yes 11 years thank you seven point fear communication appointment of rithi young to the license commission motion to adopt by councillor noon seconded by council of mercia

Councilor Marcia. This is a resume of former Councilor Ritter-Young. Well I thought I was reading a bio from his birth because it was so thick and there were so many pages I almost fell asleep but it was amazing and I was exhausted but anyway thank you. If you didn't fall asleep tonight you won't fall asleep reading that.

Roll call.

Councilor Locoto. Yes. Mayor Gitche. Yes. Councilor Duran. Yes. Councilor Leang.

Yes.

Councilor McDonough.

Yes.

Councilor Marcia. Yes. Councilor Noon.

Yes.

Councilor Robinson.

Yes.

Councilor Roth. Yes. Yes. Councilor Scott. Yes. Councilor Chau.

11 yes. Thank you, Mr. Clerk. 7.5 communication resignation of Andrew Tang from License Commission. Motion to accept and place on file by Councilor Scott, seconded by Councilor McDonough. All in favor signify by saying I any opposed so ordered 8 votes from the city manager 8.1 except and expend 117,000. $117,645 tobacco control grant FY27, waive full reading and second reading by title. Vote authorizing the city manager to accept and to expend funds from the grant from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Department of Public Health for the continuation of the tobacco accession and prevention program for fiscal year 2027 to be administered by the city of Lowell Health Department. Motion to adopt by Councillor Robinson, seconded by Councillor Rourke, roll call.

Councillor Cordo, yes. Mayor Gitche. Yes. Councilor Duran. Yes. Councilor Liang.

Yes.

Councilor McDonough.

Yes.

Councilor Marcia. Yes. Councilor Noon. Yes. Councilor Robinson. Yes. Councilor Rourke.

Yes. Councilor Scott. Yes. Councilor Chau. Yes. 11 years. 11 years. Motion passes. 8.4. Vote authorizing city manager to file special legislation. Vincent Fernandez. Wave full reading and second reading by title. Vote and act relative to the retirement of a police sergeant, Vincent Fernandez. Motion to adopt by Council Rook, seconded by Council Robinson.

Mr. Mayor, Mr. Mayor, just a question for the city manager. I think it was probably about nine months ago, we had a disabled officer who spoke at length about his plight. And obviously, I'm in favor of this for Mr. Fernandez, but this is a precedent here that we are setting. And I just want to make sure that my colleagues understand that, but obviously, The disabled police officer that was here before us would have the same advantage as well. And I'm sure there would be a few more coming down the pike. Your thoughts? Thank you very much, Mr. Mayor, through you to the council.

Council, yes, this could be precedent setting, but what would happen in this matter, the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the Governor have already signed into law what people are going off the HEROES Act, and what other folks prior to, they made a decision a date forward, not exactly the date going backwards. What people will be asking for is, would the retirement boards go backwards to a date? So yes, it could be precedent setting. But what I'm asking the council to do is to allow this to go to the House, to go to the Senate, to find out what they're going to do with it. They will take consideration in from the retirement board. uh parac etc i don't know where this is going to go i wouldn't want to i most uh most likely i this this was from 10 years ago from mr fernandez so mr fernandez we're going to be going back 10 years with another officer as well i imagine that's right all right but that would be once again i wouldn't want to uh um Tell Mr. Fernandez, just because a vote was taken here that it was going to happen, it still needs to go through the process as well as the retirement boards. So this is a first step of the journey. Understood. Thank you.

Councilor Duran. I had some similar questions trying to understand if, because it does feel like this could be a precedent, how many more people might be eligible for this request and what the financial impact could be to the city if we move forward. Because that is, I mean, we have responsibilities not only to the individuals, but to the city as a whole.

Manager Golden.

Thank you, Mr. Matthew, to the council. The answer is no, we don't know how many people may come back. However, this would be for the retirement board, not necessarily the city. The retirement board is the one that pays the, now the assessments may come into the city as well. But this is something that is step one of what I would say is going to be a multi-year process. Legislatively, once again, Legislatively, they went prospective. This is going in the back direction. Retrospective, I suppose.

Thank you, Councilor Duran. Council Rook, did you have anything to add? No. Roll call.

Councilor Cotto.

Yes.

Mayor Gitche.

No.

Councilor Duran.

Abstain. Abstain.

Council Yang. Yes. Council McDonough.

Yes.

Council Mercier.

Yes.

Council Noon.

Abstain.

Council Robinson. Yes. Council Rourke. Yes. Council Scott.

Yes.

Council Chau.

Yes. Motion passes. Nine ordinances from the city manager. 9.1 ordinance amending ordinances curb cut. Give first reading motion to refer to a public hearing on July 28, 2026 by Councilor Rourke, seconded by Councilor Scott. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 10 reports. no reports 11 petitions 11.1 miscellaneous tracy smith request installation of a handicap parking sign at 24 paula street motion referred to transportation engineer for report and recommendation by council mcdonough seconded by council dakota all in favor signify by saying aye any opposed so ordered 11.2 miscellaneous jamie lynn norton request installation of a handicap parking sign at 32 griffin street motion to refer to transportation engineer for report and recommendation by council marcia Seconded by Councilor Noon, all in favor signify by saying aye. Go ahead, Council Member Zia.

Mr. Mayor, if I could suspend the rules and allow for a bundle. You just did 11.1, but you beat me to it, because I wanted to do 11.2 to 11.6.

We're just on 11.2 right now, and it's already been a motion to accept and place on file. All those in favor, signify by saying aye. Any opposed, so ordered. Do you want me to just fly through them at this point? 11.3. We're on 11.3. So 11.3, motion by Councilor Marcia to spend the rules to bundle 11.3 to 11.6. Seconded by Councilor Robinson. All in favor signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 11.3, miscellaneous. Monica Suada requests 15-minute parking sign at 219 Central Street. 11.4, miscellaneous. James Morgan requests no parking sign on Ox... Oxford St and 2nd Ave from the last driveway on Oxford St up to 2nd Ave. 11.5 miscellaneous Ravel's DC Chiropractic Healing Center request to install overhanging sign at 45 Palmer St at 11.6 National Grid request installation of conduit to energize new transformer at 1365 Middlesex St. Refer to a public hearing on. July 28, 2026. All in favor? Signify by saying aye. Any opposed? So ordered. 12, City Council Executive Session 12.1, Executive Session to consider and discuss the purchase, exchange, lease, or real value property 40 Market Street ACID Process 11 and 12. acre urban renewal parcels, UHCTIF plan, public discussion of which could have a detrimental effect on the city's position. Motion to enter an executive session. Adjourned from executive session by Councilor Noon, seconded by Councilor Liang. Roll call.

Councilor Decoto. Yes. Mayor Gitche. Yes. Councilor Duran. Yes. Councilor Liang. Yes. Councilor McDonough. Yes. Councilor Marcia. Yes. Councilor Noon. Yes. Councilor Robinson. Yes. Councilor Rook. Yes. Councilor Scott. Yes. Councilor Chau.

11 years 11 years counselor mercy your announcements saturday yes yes yes thank you mr mayor on this saturday july 18th at 10 30 at city hall here there will be an invitation to the public to attend A dedication of to the city of the City Hall clock tower in memory of veteran and devoted civil servant Walter Wally burns so anybody that knew him and all the years he worked in City Hall You're welcome to come down and join in to this dedication.

Thank you any other announcements Seeing none. We'll go into executive session. Thank you

All right then.