City Council - Regular Meeting

Good afternoon. The city council committee on the ordinance of legislation May 6th. Time is currently 5:15 p.m. We call to order. Clerk, call the role, please. Council Kadim here. Councelor Daniel here. Vice President Dion here. Councelor Pereira. Chair Reposo

here. Pursuant to the open meeting law, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present. They are deemed knowledge and permissible. Item number one this evening is citizens input and I believe we do not have any citizens input. So we'll move on to item 2A. It's the approval of the minutes for the April 21st, 2026 meeting. Motion to adopt approve. Second. Motion to approve made by councel, second by vice president Dion. Any discussion? All those in favor? I oppose. The eyes have it. Item 2B is the approval of the minutes for April 28th, 20 2016. Motion to approve. Second.

Motion to approve made by councel Daniel. Second by Vice President Dion. Any discussion? All those in favor? I. Any opposed? The eyes have it.

Item number three is proposed ordinance traffic handicap parking referred to the committee on 428 2026. It reads Fifth Street West 65 ft north of Rodman Street. Barn Street North 395 ft east of County Street. Dwelli Street North 38T west of Monttop Street. French Street North 241 ft east of Barnaby Street. Griffin Street south 94t east of Broadway. Middle Street south 481 ft west of South Main Street. Palmer Street North 40t west of Plymouth Avenue and Union Street west 18 feet south of Hope Street. Any questions from the committee if we need to speak to director of traffic? Otherwise, a motion.

Motion that the ordinance be accompanied by an emergency preamble. Okay. Motion for emergency preamble made by councel. Second by vice president Dion. Roll call. Roll call on the emergency preamble. Uh councelor Kadeim. Yes. Council Daniel. Yes. Vice President Dion. Yes. Council Pere. Chair Repos. Yes. Motion for the motion. Motion to pass through all readings. Motion to pass through all readings made by councel Kadim. Second. Second. We just did. Okay, never mind. Second by councel. All those in favor? I.

Any opposed? The eyes have it. Item number four, proposed ordinance, traffic miscellaneous referred to the committee on 428 2026. Section one is 1-hour parking Pleasant Street North, 75 ft west of 9inth Street. It reads Monday through Friday 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 pm. Section two is handicap parking removals. Shaveson Street West 25 ft north of Bedford Street, Forest Street East, 198 ft south of Park Street. Plymouth Avenue West 20 ft south of Fifth Street and Walnut Street north 124t east of Handover Street. Will the director of traffic and parking come on down please? Hello, Miss MacArthur. Hello.

How are you? Good. Good. How are you? Good. Introduce yourself for the committee, please. Stephanie MacArthur, director of traffic and parking. Thank you. Um, just asked the question uh section one, please. Can you give some explanation on that, please? Sure. So, that request came in through a business um on Pleasant Street, Gr uh Granite City Electric, uh for one parking spot for customer parking. They do have a small parking lot, but unfortunately their vans, um, their business vans do take up that parking. Um, so for their customers, they're requesting that 1 hour parking. Excellent. Any questions from the committee? Councelor Canuel?

I do have questions about the striking out of the handicap parking on the four streets. Just kind of curious how those come about. Sure. So, strikeouts are usually if any residents move um or have passed away. Okay. Um either the property owners or family member will contact us um and we will remove the parking spaces for those individuals. All right. Makes sense. Thank you. I Any other questions from the committee? Thank you. Is there a motion? Recommend ordinance be passed through first reading. Second. Motion made to pass through first reading by Vice President Dion. Second by councel. Any questions? All those in favor? Any opposed? The eyes have it.

Motion to lift item five from the table. Motion to lift item five from the table made by councelor Eanuel, second by vice president Dion. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? The eyes have it. Item number five is a communication for the city resident regarding the parking ticket appeal process which was tabled 46 2026. We'll invite attorney FET down to the table please. And actually director MacArthur is still here. So attorney for debt if you can introduce yourself committee please. Good evening associate. Assistant Corporation Council Kenneth, Office of Corporation Counsel.

Thank you, sir. Um, Miss MacArthur, I know last time we discussed um some possible changes to some verbiage, not only on the tickets themselves, but also to the website. So, I'll let you speak to to this.

Correct. So, the changes have been made on the city website. Um, it is posted on the city of Far website, traffic and parking municipal hearing link. Um, so any resident who has access to the internet can access that information. Um, I know the question had become as far as how many parking tickets I had in stock. Um, I do have quite a few parking tickets still in stock. Um, for the parking control officers, um, they're computerized tickets. Um, I approximately have about 33,000 tickets still available in stock. Um, so I I definitely want to use those up. Um, so it's 55 tickets per roll comes 100 rolls per box. So 5,500 tickets per box. I still have six boxes available. So those do have to be utilized prior to changing that. Um in order to change that verbiage, um I'm waiting on the company to discuss with their engineering team uh to see what the formatting is going to be because it's going to it's technically going to have to change the formatting on the back of the ticket. Um it does state on the back of the ticket that there's a $10 processing fee. It just doesn't say that it's per plate as it is stated on the city website in the letter that is sent to the resident. So, anytime anybody requests a hearing, no matter what way they request it, whether it be online, via mail, or in person, they are contacted via mail with a date and time.

And on that letter, it does state that that hearing fee is paid per plate and required prior to the hearing date. Understood. Attorney FET, you have anything to add?

No. Uh I I think that we are in full compliance based on what the language is on our current ticket. I think we exceed whatever needs to be on that ticket by way of uh educating the recipient as to what their rights are and how to go about uh seeking it. I would would I made the comment last time make it this time. I don't think there's anything unfair whatsoever in regards to the process by which tickets are uh are given and the uh opportunity to appeal them is provided. Understood. Anything from the committee? Vice President Dion, just one question. Sure.

How long do you How long do you think it'll take to go through 30,000 tickets? It all depends on my park and control officers. How much revenue would you like? Yeah. How much you looking for? I won't answer. I'm I'm not going to answer that question. I'm going be the fifth on that one. What do you What do you average in terms of tickets annually for your clerks? So, issuance for parking for the parking control officers? I mean, I'd say per day. I'm looking at anywhere between 100 to 200. Okay, that's per day per officer, right?

Per officer. I have four parking control officers. So, so it all depends. We have a we have the street sweeping program currently going on that runs from April to November. Um, so unfortunately depending on compliance, some days are greater than others. So it'll be relatively and then once street sweeping program is up November 1, that's when snow season starts. So it'll be less than a year, six months. Yep. All righty. With that, I yield. Thank you. Anything else from the committee? Motion grant leaf to withdraw. Motion made grant leaf to withdraw made by council kadim. Second by councelor vice president Dion. Any questions? All those in favor?

Any opposed? The eyes have it. And just to the clerk, um I know the resident is not here. Can we follow up with a correspondence to what the final action was of the committee? So, she is also notified. Can I just say one thing about Yes, sir.

calling her a resident because I think it should factor in here. Uh, as councelor uh Pereira accurately noted, um, the person making this claim claims that her car is garageed in Somerset, has never paid an excise tax to Paul River on that particular plate. Um, and as such, I don't think that um, uh, resident is proper until she complies with law that requires her to change her address within 30 days of establishing residency. I have communications. She's lived on Breman Street for years. So, every day she drives in Fall River, she's committing a crime. Um, because she hasn't made herself a resident in in in the terms of of license obligations and notification to RMV of your current address. and just posit that for the council to uh consider.

Thank you, sir. Thank you. Appreciate that. Okay. Commission. Motion to lift item six from the table. Motion to lift item six from the tables made by councelor Canuel. Uh second. Second by vice president Dion. Any discussion? All those in favor? Any opposed? The eyes have it. Item number six is a resolution to discuss potential amendments to the emergency parking ban ordinance. I will invite the city administrator down, corporation council, and the director of city operations. If you can introduce yourselves for the record, please.

Stephanie MacArthur, director of traffic and parking. Al Oliver, director of city operations. And O'Neal Souza, interim city administrator. Alan Ramsey, corporation council. Thank you all. Um, I was the author of this resolution, so I'll I'll just start real quick. Um, I know we had a discussion about this back in January. It was tabled. Of course, we were fresh off from a snowstorm. Um, so I'm going to go to Director MacArthur first on this. Uh, any any thoughts or feelings about um what I've kind of brought up to you on this. Can I request that we never talk about snow again after the last winter that we had?

Understood. So, um, interim chief and I have had this conversation. Unfortunately, and like I said at the last meeting with New England weather, we honestly we would rather keep it more vague than not. We would we would much rather prefer a judgment call than not because we just don't know. I mean, we could be expecting 24 ines on a Friday call on that parking van and then Thursday at 2 in the morning they announce, "Hey, we're only getting a dusting." Mhm.

So for us to again like I said we it is a team effort. I mean everybody at this table can attest to that. We we meet prior once we know the forecast or the anticipated forecast. We do meet prior. We watch that forecast. Um essentially we do do 3 in or more and that parking ban is in place. Um, I think with the advanced notice and the towing automatically, it does it it really does get people to move those vehicles for that parking ban. Um, I mean, I don't know if anybody else wants to speak on council. Vice President, do you have

Yeah, I think I I totally agree. I think I said it at the last meeting. I think number one, there's too many variables things. I mean, you hear it all the time. you live in New England, wait a minute and the weather's going to change. Um, it's just not something concrete enough that you can nail it down and say every single time, this is the day, this is the time. I think it's it's just there are just too many uh moving parts. And I think if you live, again, in New England, but especially in any area that that does have parking bans, you have to anticipate there's going to be a parking ban. And there's no lacking for information. It's on the city website, the police website, it's on Facebook, you can call city hall, you can call the police. There are just so many ways if you're not sure to find out.

Um I I don't know. I think just given the circumstances, I I think it's it's just the the best it can be uh under the circumstances. So with that, I yield. Yeah. And I and I would concur too that I know the conversation we had last time a deputy chief or was here um we kind of jumped into the communication pieces and the outlets that they have and he was also talking about um additional outlets you know that we mentioned as well. I'm going to go to corporation councel Ramsey. Are there anything is there anything in the ordinance while we have this this conversation going in the ordinance that needs to be updated as far as language is concerned?

Yeah. Um well a couple things. First I guess first thing I had a question. I I didn't honestly I don't like the way it's written. Um it's confusing to me which is uh you know that's a problem. So for example if you look at the ordinance in letter B versus F are they essentially saying the same thing because I always thought you know parking on the east side for north south street or the south side for east west? I mean I thought the hydrant is on that side. It's kind of redundant, isn't it? DNF. We don't have it in front. I'm pointing here. Sorry. Well, you can have it. So, anyway, what I did was

I prepared two kind of ordinances. They're in draft form. One essentially tries to keep the language of the original one. I think simplifies it dramatically. So, I mean, I can pass this around. I'll put the the one with bold is a little more simple to read, I think, with headings. I mean, it's a very rough draft form, but if this ordinance committee prefers one versus the other, I can tweak it. Um, I'd say the two major changes. Well, I mean, I just tried to make it easy to read, number one, but I also added um without talking to the chief of police that, you know, I thought maybe the mayor, the chief of police or designated representative that the the chief of police, you know, there we often I mean, the mayor's allowed to go on vacation. So, you know, I I've once lived in DC where I think the the mayor of DC was on television smoking crack, but he got in more trouble for being away during a snowstorm. Um, at least as far as the public was concerned. But, you know, there are people in place when uh the mayor's away that can declare an emergency.

Okay. Vice President Dia. Yeah. I think in regard to the fire hydrants, I think in general um streets that run east to west, the fire hydrants are on the south side and streets that run north to south, the fire hydrants are on the east side. But I know there are certain circumstances where it's opposite or um there's a oneway off of Stafford Road. And I know because we would had this issue with a uh somebody trying to put in a a driveway and they have parking uh hydrants on both sides for some reason. So we do have those rare occurrences, but I think in general um the fire hydrants are on the opposite side of where you can park in a parking van,

right? If I said that correct, but yes, I agree with you on that. Um, and as far as the notice requirements, I also like to keep it vague because I mean this thing might have been written back before the internet existed. Who knows? So, you know, you put reasonable measures um that may include X, Y, and Z, but it doesn't mean that the city has to do any of the above. Um, you know, at some point the city will have to make a call whether it's worth spending money for. You know, I don't want to specifically include television or radio when there's probably other ways to reach the public, but I think it as long as reasonable efforts are made, that's fine. Yeah, I I I would agree. Especially with social media, everybody knows everything. So I uh yeah, with that platform, I mean, everything is out there. I I agree with that. I yield. Thank you,

city administrator, please. We have tried to to make sure that at least 24 hours when at all possible a parking ban notification goes out so that people do have the opportunity to either see it on social media, maybe hear it on see it in print media or hear it over the radio. So that's one of the things that we try very hard to do. We also worked on a potential 3 in or more automatic parking ban. We're still going to have to notify people just like we do right now because people will say, "I didn't hear the forecast. We didn't know." So, I mean, just adding any type of uh predicted inches in an ordinance for snowfall, I don't think it's going to really help us at all.

Director Oliver. Sure. I mean that 3 in is is somewhat um vague because there are times where we do get 3 in and we're able to maintain it depending on the volume of snow coming down the temperatures outside. So we'll hit the 3-in mark, but we're able to maintain it via the brine, via the uh salting. We can control that. If we can maintain that, we'll have no problem blades are not being dropped. So that holding it to a 3 in is is is not fair to anyone because dropping the blades is the last thing we want to do. But that's one of the things that we have to do. So

understood. I mean personally as the author of the res resolution, I'm comfortable with the idea that we are updating the ordinance, you know, getting some language changes, which I think is helpful because the last time it was um written was 2008 at this point. So it is it's a good thing that we are uh making some motions on that. So, I guess my question now, um, can we refer this officially to you to send back a final draft of the ordinance? Yeah, I think that's the probably the best thing to do. I mean, I if you want to take a little informal poll of whether you prefer the kind of scrap the old one with the brand new one or try to stick with the remaining the existing language, that's fine.

Yeah, I think what we'll probably do is uh to give an opportunity for the committee members to review this that's in front of us for the first time or in front of me for the first time. I think it would be good. we um we can refer it to the corporation council's office to then you know I know you mentioned you want to talk to the chief of police is that what you said before or Well yeah I mean I think if you if we're going to allow the chief of police to declare an emergency then probably just to you know let them know see if they think it's a good idea or not. I mean they may have reasons I'm not aware they think it's not a good idea. Okay fair enough. Any other questions from the committee? With that said do we have a motion? Motion to refer to corporation counsel. Okay.

Motion to refer to corporation council made by councelor Canuel. Second by vice president Dion. Entire item or just um clarify the entire item or just the proposed ordinance? The proposed ordinance made. Second. Okay. Made by councelor Canuel, second by vice president Dion. Any questions? All those in favor? Any opposed? The eyes have it. Mr. Ramsey, I'll give that back to you. Great. Thank you very much, sir. And then when when that's ready, just let us know. Do you have something? Oh, yeah. I'll make what I'll do is I'll I'll make a copy and email it to everybody here, please. And then you at least have it because I'm not sure I even saved one of the copies. So, fair enough.

Can I need it that way?

Thank you, sir. All right. Moving on to our agenda is item number seven this evening. to convene with the city administrator corporation council and a representative of for government television to discuss the creation of a proposed ordinance requiring all public meetings be to be recorded either video or audio which was adopted on 414 20126. I will note for the committee that Mr. Cotchman who is the director of uh Fred TV and former government TV informed me that he was unable to make this meeting. Um so we I have spoken to him since to schedule this to another meeting. However, I did leave it on the agenda. A because of timing, but b uh corporation council Rumsy and the city administrator is here well. So, if you if either of you would like to speak on this ahead of time.

Yeah, I'd like to chime in if I can. Okay. Go ahead. Council before I I spoke with Mr. Cotchman on this issue, I had exactly the same concerns. So, I know he sent an email correspondence to actually I guess he didn't send there. I wasn't sure if he sent the ordinance committee or not. But, you know, my concern independently of Mr. Cotchman is I think they do a really excellent job of televising almost every committee meeting that we have. We have a number of committees. Um, but I was worried that there may be a few small ones that they don't have the staffing to do. And apparently that's the case.

So, they do advertise most. They don't advertise all of them, but you know, we're trying to I I think it's admirable in to make an effort to televise all these, but they're going to be budgeting issues, staffing issues, somebody gets sick, weather issues, cars break down, and what I worry about is that we have a meeting that's ready to go forward and for whatever reason it can't be televised that day. I don't want to invalidate the meeting and cancel the meeting. So, I think it's an aspirational goal, but to make it a requirement, I I had some concerns and apparently Mr. Cotchman independently shares those same concerns.

Yeah. And just to clarify too, not necessarily televised, but at least recorded because I I know there are there are only two meetings at this point. It's the city council meetings and the school committee uh main meetings that are live. Other meetings are recorded and posted later. So I think you know I just want to clarify that televised versus you know recorded and displayed later. So council

thank you uh Mr. Chair. I was I was just actually going to make the same statement. I don't I don't know that they ne need to necessarily be um televised live, but the recording itself and I don't I don't think that and I and I appreciate the the staffing issues and things of that nature, but something as simple as an owl, which is just a desktop camera that can be utilized through the uh through a laptop could be utilized. Um you know, I I had to do that in Secon when our local TV station uh shut down for a while. So that's how we broadcast our stuff. And it's something very simple. It's just like you're going to go use a camera for for Zoom and just hit the record button. Um,

I don't I don't disagree with you. I think we've got a a good majority of our committees that are being televised. I think just to have a select few not televised, I think is a little bit detrimental, especially if people want to participate or even just figure out what's going on uh with that unless you you attend those meetings. I I think a lot of us don't even know, you know, what's going on uh with regards to those committees. I for one I think if we can just tweak the language that every effort will be made. I I don't disagree with corporation council. I don't want it to the ordinance to restrict um a committee from having a meeting, especially if it's an emergency meeting uh without having the ability to televise that, right? Because there's nothing uh requiring that the meetings be televised. They just need to be open to the public for um open meeting law purposes. So, I I don't want to get away from that, but I think if we can get some type of language that uh satisfies the need that every um I don't know, I guess um every effort will be given to make sure that these uh things are recording uh are recorded. Um and then we go from there. I don't I don't know if we can get some language like that, but that's what I'd like to see. With that, I yield.

Thank you, Vice President. Dia. Yeah, I was just going to say how many aren't recorded is because I know that there are like the traffic board for example, you can't you don't watch their meetings live. However, um you can go back and watch them video on demand. Yeah, they usually post it the next day. Yeah. Or sometimes earlier than that.

So, um if I may council, I I think as of two months ago, the library board of trustees meetings were not being done that way. Two months ago, they started being recorded and posted. So there was and that's actually what was half the reason this was prompt I prompted writing this was because that was one of them which and not to go on to your on the floor but um the question that I was going to have is is exactly that um which of the boards and commissions that exist here in the city which ones are currently not being but you're on the floor.

Yeah. No, so I just saw so we have I don't know numerous committees and boards like an incredible number. So, um, apparently there's only two that, uh, subjected to that and we probably have, she don't even know 30 commissions and boards. We have a lot. You include all the uh, committee subcommittees. Yeah, that's probably about right. 30-ish looks like.

So, I Yeah. So, I think in that respect, we're doing a good job. But, um, yeah, that might be an option. some type of thing where theirs can be recorded as well so people can view them if they choose to after the fact that I yield. Thank you.

Yeah. And and I would add too and again the really the purpose of this is kind of to strengthen what we're already doing and again I'm not in any way criticizing what they're doing. I think they do a fabulous job but I firmly believe in how can we take it a step higher. Um, so for example, the meeting of the library board of trustees probably was recorded on on some sort of similar one position camera there and it was hard to it was hard to understand a committee members the discussion that was going on because I would imagine the only microphone that was attached there is not like what we have here. It was probably the one mic on the on the camera itself. So then trying to listen to that meeting and hear what the discussion is was a little difficult. So, even if it's again trying to strengthen this, if it's a position where funding is needed to get equipment for these off-site recordings like the sewer commission, the water commission for example, um that could be an an opportunity to think about. The other thing, and one thing I think about too, and again, this will be expanded when Mr. Cotchman is here, is that, you know, we have the first floor hearing room downstairs that's equipped, set up, microphones, cameras, and all for a good adequate meeting so everybody can be heard. you know, I know not all the boards and commissions utilize that. So, that's another thing to think about as well. And again, just for food for thought as we kind of go down this road. Councelor Daniel,

thank you. Um, no, I I love the intent here. Um, I think the be it resolved portion of it. I think really helps to address, I think, some of the concerns because it says all public meetings to be recorded with either video or audio equipment. So, I think when we think about audio, I mean, someone could easily take out an iPhone and use the the voice recording feature of that. I feel like, you know, making sure at a minimum we have at least the audio of what transpired, I think would go a long way to, you know, allowing people to hear the discussion points that went on even if video wasn't allowed in that case. So yeah, I

Yeah, and the Commission on Disability does their their uh meetings via teleconference and it's it's a video of the audio essentially that's posted. Um and I believe the health board, the health commission meets on Zoom and that recording is posted as well. So again, there are definitely options, but I I I would like to see as one counselor where we're in a position where there are no boards and commissions that are not recorded. I would like to see all of them personally speaking as one and again for open transparency purposes I think that's the best but again like I mentioned I think there are some opportunities to make it better and I I realize government TV is probably limited in in some senses of funding so if that's a conversation we need to expand and try to help them out then maybe that's a conversation the committee can have with city administration um city administrator do you have anything to add

I mean just at the present time the retirement board and cultural council are the only two not currently being recorded or covered So it's it's a small number. So maybe with working with Mr. Codman, see what resources he'd need to be able to add those two. Okay, that's good. I think we've had a good discussion to start and then of course um we have a future meeting coming up and Mr. Kman will be here. So some of the story been discussed we'll be able to expand on and see what we can do moving forward. Anything else from the committee? Motion to table. Motion to table made by councelor Canuel. Second. Second by vice president Dion. All those in favor.

Any opposed? You guys have it. Item number eight is to convene with corporation council to discuss amendments to 2-151 of the city code regarding city council standing committees adopted 129205. This uh resolution was filed by council of Pereira in regarding to uh the the standing committees. And I will say for the record that we did have a similar resolution filed um that was looking at the standing committees um but we definitely hold discussion on this as well. Uh corporation council.

Yeah. I'm not certain what um the committee wanted. I know that on February 11th of 26 we did amend the names um for G and I which would be real estate and uh human services. We amended the name. So, I'm I'm not sure what else is the committee wants me to look at. So, I mean, I printed it. I have it in front of me. I'm ready to help where needed, but I'm not sure what what's needed. Okay. Anybody from the committee before I

comment? No, I think in reviewing the ordinance myself too, I know um the the number of committee members obviously outside of the ordinances committee, which is the bigger of of them all, um are all set up obviously I think what what is an appropriate number of members. I think all of them are three. Um, except this committee obviously is bigger and obviously the finance committee which is the council itself. Um, but I'm comfortable with that. I don't know if any other committee members have anything to add or change or what we feel we like to do with this. Given council, sorry, council can given this was uh council Per's resolution, perhaps it might be appropriate to table this matter until she's able to maybe clarify her intent or anything further she'd like to see on this. will of the committee. Sir,

can I do you yield? Council, I councel Kadim, just curious, are we reading this resolution to mean just the committees of the council or are we talking about I I took this as all the committees and commissions that currently that we currently have because I know Yeah, because you're talking city code,

right? And I I know uh council Pereira had started this endeavor trying to just go through and like we were talking about the police commissioners that were still there but you know those um nobody was being appointed to that. So really kind of eliminating the police commissioner standpoint. So I I thought maybe that's what we were looking to do was just to number one look at the committees the viability of them uh if they're still needed um or if they need to be updated uh if they've taken on additional duties to kind of really clarify what those committees are. But I wouldn't disagree. I I think it probably makes sense to to table this item until uh council poor comes back just to make sure that we've captured what the spirit of the resolution was. Um but I I do think it was you know just the totality and not necessarily the the council committees.

Gotcha. Do you yield? I do. Thank you, Vice President Dion. Yeah, I agree with Council Kadim. Um because also I I do remember her at one time reference referencing the fact that in the charter that these committees are supposed to be looked at and evaluated. um every so often and that hasn't occurred. So I think that was part of the reason why she also uh submitted this resolution. And again, it's along the same lines as what council Kadim just stated. Um but it's directly related to the charter uh requiring it. So with that, I yield. Councel Canuel.

Uh Council Vice President Dion made the point I was going to bring up, which is we have a charter provision that says this is supposed to happen and it hasn't happened yet. So with that, I yield. Fair enough. Council Kadim, so I guess if we're going to table this, I would just I'm not sure who would we request this through either the clerk's office or the administration just to give us a list of the outstanding um committees and commissions that exist

and then um I think from there we can kind of go down that list to identify which ones are active and not active and if they're not active, try to figure out why they're not active. uh you know that and and some of it may be you know Massachusetts general law had some some changes and and now the authority is no longer with that that border commission and then we could essentially abolish that committee or whatever the case may be and I think it'd also be helpful to know if there's any parts of the ordinance that would um reference any of these you know commissions or committees that we should know about while while we're doing this review. So with that I yield. Do you want to make that to the clerk to have that given to us? I will. I'll just let discussion happen. Okay. So then

sounds good. Vice President Dian.

Yeah. No, I just want to uh say that probably just you could do it through the clerk's office because uh very recently within the last month, maybe six weeks, I did exactly that because I had the original ones that I had gotten when I first got on received when I uh get on the council and everything was outdated. So I reached out to the clerk's office. I said, "Can you give me updated all the committees, who's on them?" So, they did all the committees, who's on them, the the upto-date dates of appointment, reappoint, when their terms are up. And also, any of them that have an ordinance related to them is in it, and the booklet's about this thick. So, they already have done the work. So, it's just as simple as reaching out to them and asking them for more copies.

So, I I don't think we need a a form of motion. You can just send that to us. Yeah. Perfect. And just to clarify, council, the city clerk's office is gonna updates that. Got it. Thank you. Do you with that? I yield. Thank you, Council King.

As I review this um a little closer, um council Pereira was referencing to 151 of the city code, which is specifically talking about the city council committees, committee on finance, ordinances, legislation, public works, regulations, etc. I don't know that the scope of what she's written here talks about what we were just talking about a moment about the the boards and commissions which I think is separate. So you know when it says be it resolved if um required committee members listed within 2151 as I look it up that is only pertaining to the city council committees.

Correct. And and and for the record that's the way I read it as well. Um you know it it's the first statement says standing committees then it goes on to the duties and responsibility of the city council committees. Um but understood. So I think you know to that point I think you know we should probably ask the question what happened to the resolution that the council adopted uh June 26th or so of last year during that meeting that was sent to the mayor requesting that the boards and commissions you know review get um reviewed because that has not happened. I think that does need to happen to the point of my colleague next to me. So with that I yield. Anything else from the committee on this? Is there a motion?

Motion to table. Motion to table made by vice president Dion. Second by council. All those in favor. Any oppos? The eyes have it. Item number nine. Motion to take items nine and 10 together. Okay. Motion to take items and lift from the table. Yep. Lift to take items nine and 10 together. We first made by councel. Second. Second by vice president Dion. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? The eyes have it. Motion lift from the table.

Motion to lift items 9 and 10 together from the table made by councel Kadim. Second by council Canuel. All those in favor? Any oppos? The eyes have it. Item number nine is to convene to draft. It's resolution convene to draft the proposed ordinance requiring city council approval for any contract renewed or extended by the mayor for contracted employees, department heads, or division managers table 4626. and the proposed ordinance requiring city council approval for certain employment contract obligations tabled 4626. Anybody on the committee would like to speak on this first or corporation council?

I think this is my third time being down on the issue, so I don't really have anything else to add. Fair enough, sir. Is there a motion? Vice President Dion, I don't know if if uh Council Canuel would like to uh speak to what he has written. So um or if we just want to move forward with a motion to move forward with it. Uh yes. So I with that I yield yield. Council Canuel.

Yeah. I think I I just kind of took the request from the resolution the council adopted uh back in December was that this committee draft one uh and I think you know I just kind of put pen to paper to what I perceive to be the intent of it. I think you know councelor Kadeim in previous discussion items has you know raised the prospect of you know whether or not this is really in the best interest I think uh of the city in terms of retaining employees attracting talent. Um, so I I think at this point, um, we have to make a decision about whether or not, you know, this is in the best interest of the city to move forward or if we think, you know, for the time being, um, you know, we don't pursue this further. I'm curious to hear my colleagues thoughts.

Do you yield, sir? Do councelor Kadim.

Thank you. I I I think just in terms of if you're asking for my opinion, um my statement was I don't from a philosophical standpoint don't necessarily agree with this provision in the charter. However, um it is in the charter, right? So I I think if we as we typically do, we we state vehemently that we're going to follow the charter regardless of whether or not we agree with things or not. Um this is my opinion. I just I again I know that we're just rehashing this. Um I disagree with the legal opinion that's before us on on just on a number number of fronts. Um you know when we look at the uh what was issued to us today it's just talking about we only have uh the right to the initial appointment. Um again we we went into contract terms. What does that mean? Uh corporation council has said that there's a a property right or right to the to the position. Um, again, I just looked at the legal definition. Um, if an individual contract is renewed, is that considered a reappoint? Um, and again, just what I'm finding online, and I'm not saying it's accurate, but this is what we typically do. We'll throw something into uh Google and and get a response. And the mayor has often done that. It says reappoints in many contexts, particularly in academia and government, a renewed contract is functionally and legally deemed a reappoint requiring uh affirmative action by the employer to re-engage the employee for a new term. So, I still maintain um and feel that the appointment and the reappoint should come back before us. So, uh if if we don't like what's in here, then there's a process to to change the charter, right? We just can't ignore the charter. I I don't I don't know that that's um you know prudent on us especially that we we take an oath to uphold the you know the charter and the ordinances of the city. So I for one this is a disagreement and I've said this at a

another meeting or in another context with something similar to this that I think um it's up to the council to make a determination as to whether or not they agree with the legal opinion. Uh if we don't agree with the legal opinion, I I'm prepared to make a motion that we move um make a recommendation to the full council that we move forward with uh uh court assistance and and making the determination as to whether or not the city council does have the authority, which is as it's written um in the charter to to see whether or not reappointments are included in the appointments. Uh we we've had this conversation with regards to uh appointments to commissions and committees. They they come down before us for reappoints, right? So, it's in the same same paragraph. There's no change. Uh there's actually uh an an actual call out if you read the uh following sentence that calls out uh the uh the boards and committees uh in particular saying that they must reside in the city. Right? So, if if if the intent was to take the boards and committees uh and have an exception to it, it would have been called out. There's already an exception to the boards and committees uh that that is highlighted in that paragraph. So, from my standpoint, um my motion is to recommend that the council pursue uh court uh court action or legal action uh and pursue it with the court to get a determination as to whether or not uh the city council under uh 2-10 has the authority uh and is required to to reappoint and or confirm uh reappointments. That's my motion. Motion made by councelor Canuel. Uh councelor cane for that matter. Is there a second?

I'll second it. Okay. Second by vice president Dion. Discussion on the motion. Council, is there not any happy medium that we could potentially achieve absent court action? Is there a mediator or I guess? So, if if I may, I think I may have asked that question at the last meeting. Um, and I think the answer, and I don't want to quote you, Corporation Council, but I think the answer was no.

No. Um, you're correct. I mean, you I'm reluctant to bring this up because it was my opinion before and it's still my opinion now that when you have black and white language in front of you that the, you know, interpretation or history or this is what we meant to do or didn't mean to do is irrelevant. It's only when it's ambiguous and you need some interpretation. But is this council even aware of the email submitted by the former chair of the Fall River Charter Commission? Is this committee even aware that he wrote an email? Um,

not requested by my office. I just I think he submitted it to the the Herald News is what I think he submitted to. Yes. Is Has this commission seen it? Do they care to see it? As I said, I I don't really think it's relevant for the same reasons I didn't think the the uh opinion of the person in this room was relevant two weeks ago. But here's an email that was written. Can I guess can you elaborate what the email says and what the I think at this point if you'd like to introduce it to the committee cooperation council. I I'm fine with that. And can you read into the record? Um I'm fine with that. I'm comfortable. Uh I said I I did not solicit this. It was forwarded to me. Um it it basically is in agreement with my legal opinion which

Okay. So can I just point of clarification? Well, it's not it's not I guess I mean we we had a a charter committee member come down before us and he spoke several time. He's here now. I mean are we going to take his statements at at word? He's he's just he had just the amounted the amount of votes in weighted vote as any other member. like the the chair doesn't have any different vote than any other member, right? They're just running the meeting. So, if we're going to then say that the chair in their opinion has more relevance and or

not saying that I honestly think neither one is is relevant because of the same reason I said before. Um, you know, that being said, we're we're talking about the chart has been in existence and now was 2017, right? So, nine years. I don't think there's been a single renewal that's come before this council. Um, we have a legal opinion saying it doesn't need to come for the council. And I guess, you know, I'm I'm trying to figure out, but I I guess what why you wouldn't take your council's legal advice on this issue because it's not like I'm coming in and saying we've been doing this wrong for the last nine years. We have to do it this way.

Can I um we're we're this is just the way it's always happened under the charter. I'm not sure who asked the floor. I'm sorry. No, no, no. No, no, no. I didn't mean to y when he was talking. I just I wasn't sure if councelor can has the floor. I'll yield to my colleague. Sorry. He yields. I thought it was Michel. I apologize. That's all right. Um No, I I listen I I I guess what I'm trying to figure out is if there's no relevancy, then why bring it up at the at the committee meeting tonight? Right.

Well, I think there's I mean there seems to be this, you know, this distrust, which I'm not sure why it exists. So, I mean, when you have the council president say that there's nothing in the charter that gives the, you know, that's a one bite at the apple, that there's nothing in the charter that says that. I mean, he actually says it quite well in his email, arguably better than I did in my opinion, frankly. But, um, I I think I'm trying to give both this commission and the public at large more trust. I mean, it's it was my independent opinion before I knew that email existed. So,

yeah. So I guess this is and it I don't know if it's about trust but it comes back down to legal definitions and term terminology right so I just on the face when we start talking about contracts and terms anybody who is employed for a contract an individual contract has a term there is no guarantee and this is where we disagree there is there is no right to a employment past that term of the contract. You do not need to terminate the individual when a contract expires. If there is no willingness on an administration to enter into a successor agreement, the individual who signed that contract knows that there is a specific end date, no different than any other term, so that their employment is for a period of time. Hence the reason why people will come down before this council and start talking about when we when we're looking at ordinances, well, we want to be in the union, there's more protection. The reason that there's more protection for a union besides the union uh representation for any type of grievance in in the collective bargaining agreements and terms in the in the agreements is is that they don't have to be reappointed. There's no reappointment clause. Their their contract goes and it's and what they're negotiating is the terms of the contract in their successor agreement. It's not their employment. This is an employment agreement, individual employment agreement which are typically three years, one year, two year, but typically three years. And at the end of the 3 years, there's no guarantee that you're going to have another three-year contract or a one-year contract or a two-year contract. When the contract renews, there there are a lot of people that tend to look for other jobs because there's no guarantee that they're going to be renewed. And to be renewed, renewed, reappointed, if you're entering into another agreement, that would tell you that there's a reappointment to that. And as I mentioned before, the reappoint requires an action, right? So, you're reappointing that person. So, if you have, as it's written here, that there's confirmation on the appointment, how would there not be confirmation on the reappoint? And then how do you get around the fact that the administration

sends down every reappoint for boards and committees when it's in the same section of the charter? Those are the those are the discrepancies that we see. And it's not what we're seeing here in terms of how you describe the terms, how you describe the reappoints are not consistent with what with how that's interpret interpreted with other municipalities there. It's it's very clear when you have an individual contract, the term expires upon a three-year contract if it's a three-year contract, right? I mean, at what point, let's just take the superintendent, right? We were going back and forth. The school committee was going to fire the superintendent. Everybody was saying, "Let her finish out her term." What happens if they let her finish out her term and they didn't want to renew? What happens at that point? They don't need to fire somebody. She's no longer the superintendent, but we're being told that she has property rights to that position. No, she does not. It's for a specific term, and that's what we're saying. And and from a philosophical standpoint, I understand the uh negative components of it, but this is when we say that it's clear, it's not clear. I I have a a a specific difference of opinion on how this reads compared to to corporation council and I for one just want it clarified and I'm not saying that things were done um anything was done wrong uh it may be inconsistent with what the charter that it may not be malicious or the intent but we have different opinions on how that section is read just like we have different opinions on whether or not we can conduct an independent legal review uh independent um investigations into any city departments. Right? So those are the those are the conversations that you know I think we need to have and moving forward the only way there's no mediator there's there's no compromise then we need to just get the official opinion and ruling from from a judge and I'm prepared to go in that direction. I think if if we're ever ever going to challenge um any any of the charter in

terms of how it's written and the authority of the city council, the city council's authority is questioned every single meeting. Every single meeting. And as councils, we just sit here and and decide we're not going to do anything. If you folks want to do that, that's fine. My motion stands. I want to go to court with this and I want a judge to rule on our authority as a city council to reaffirm appointments because that's the way the charter is written. With that, I yield vice president. Yeah. So, we have two other issues and I think everybody will agree. I think to a certain extent on this subject the waters have been muddied and what I mean by that is how many times recently has the city council been asked okay okay I know we don't really have the votes but would you agree with one year just give one year we'll see how it goes and then beyond that we can figure out what we're going to do well if we have no say in the reappointment what's the point in the one year because at the end of for one year. It's not one year anymore. It's I'm going to give two more years. I'm going to give three more years. And we have no say, it happened. And we potentially have no say in it. Um unless the administration changes their mind. So, it's kind of a it's kind of a moot point. Why bother saying, "Well, just agree with it for one year when that one year can just automatically turn into three more." Um so, I think that's muddied the waters a tad. And then the other thing is so here we are back a few years ago very similar. So we have two charter commissioners all voted in by the same people all with as as council Kadeim said equal standing with two opposing opinions.

one supporting the city council, one supporting uh corporation council. Well, then to me that indicates it's not black and white because the the the charter commissioners can't even agree. So when it's not black and white and they can't agree, then somebody has to make a decision and there's only one person that can make a decision. Um, and it's unfortunate that we get to this this point, but um, I think if that's the route the city council as a as a body decides to take, I think it should be amended to include opinions on other matters as well um, that are very pertinent and have been uh, talked about recently. But let's wait and see what the rest of the discussion brings. With that, I yield. Councelor Canuel.

Thank you. So, I think Councelor Kane's uh position is it we have the authority in the charter. I think I've been more along the lines of I think we can give ourselves the authority by writing it into ordinance. And I think I'll address to that um end of it because when I look at 2221, it talks about the appointment uh of to city boards and commissions. So this is what we've written into the ordinances and it said the mayor shall appoint or nominate a successor to any member of a city board of commission whose term is expired within 6 months goes on to state later um specific language um except as otherwise pro provided in se subsection A or otherwise provided by law. All members of city boards and commissions shall continue to serve until their successors are appointed or until nominated and confirmed as the case may be. So I think the key words for me in that is the as confirmed part because that to me implies that it has to come back down to the city council for re confirmation uh in those cases. And so for me, I think my position is more of I don't know that the charter explicitly says it because black and white it does not say that. But I believe the city council possesses the authority if we write it into orange just like we've done in 221 that's been on the books for I think it was last amended in 2007. So that one's been unchallenged for almost 20 years or probably longer if that was amended last at that time that we could add, you know, the potential or that we have before us um to give the authority. I I'm curious um to corporation council's thoughts because 221 and I have it right here for you does specifically write the um until nominated and confirmed piece of it. So

what I guess to what councelor Christine was saying, how is it that boards and commissions have to get that but not the department heads I guess when all of them have that initial confirmation before us that you if I can address that I mean I assume what you're saying is 221. Yeah.

That's for boards specifically. So I mean the legal analysis, the proper legal analysis is that the charter authors clearly understand how to make somebody come back for reappoint reconfirmation when the term ends and they specifically added it to boards and commissions. And the fact that they didn't have that same provision for department heads and city officers means the the implication is that they knew how to do it and they chose not to. So that article that you're uh section that you're reading is actually a very strong argument in favor of my opinion

except this isn't the charter I'm reading from. This is the city code which is what the city council has created or uh made over time and adopted. Look,

I mean I I can say the same things over and over again. I mean I've this is my third time down. I don't need need to belver the point. I put it in writing. Um, you know, there's not much else to say. I I I'm confident. I'm correct on this. I don't think it's a gray area. I don't think it's a close call. Um, I think, you know, even on top of all that, um, we have seven year I'm sorry, nine years of doing it exactly like I'm suggesting it's been done. So, um to then now nine years later talk about fund a a lawsuit uh which costs money for an issue that um has never been an issue. Um and even though we've had numerous this this we've had numerous renewals in the last nine years, this is not a new issue. It just seems to me to not really be the issue that needs to go forward. So just to be clear, I I'm understanding that from your legal opinion uh addressing specifically the charter that we don't you don't believe the way it's written, we have uh the authority to do it. I guess the separate legal question I would have is since the city council at some point last amended in 2007 um has that language for boards and commissions uh about reconfirmation. Could the city council doesn't it would then possess the authority to require department heads who also had appointment uh confirmation down here before us if we were to write it into ordinance city code just like we've done with boards and commissions. Wouldn't we have that authority?

No. I mean once you have an executive authority you can't you can't write an ordinance that gives you executive authority. So I mean that I mean that would be the distinction. I mean, well, obviously the arguments the the difference between councelor Kadim's argument and yours, I think largely is councelor Kadeim's argument that the charter gives the city council the power and and frankly although I disagree with them, that would be the only way to get it. I think the the idea that you can write an orange then give you the power is also incorrect. Okay, I thank you,

Council Gem. So, I've been hearing I've been hearing this lately and I guess I just want some clarification on this. It's a waste of taxpayer money. Who who exactly gets to make the determination of what is a waste of taxpayer money? Well, I mean, I think my authority is to file suit on behalf of the city of Fall River. So, I make that call on a a regular basis. But, you know, I I understand it's still a valid point you're making. I understand it. Right. Because because I You're an elected official,

Right. Right. And every time I try to suggest something, I'm being told that I'm wasting taxpayer money. Yet, I'm right. Um, in my mind, whether you agree with me or disagree with me, my intentions are to protect the residents of the city of Fall River. Right? So, the city of Fall River residents voted on a charter. It is very clear I'm in disagreement with what's before us. And yet, I continue to constantly hear on a number of occasions that we are wasting taxpayer money. It's in the media. It's being told to us. Um, if I don't vote a certain way, I'm wasting taxpayer money. I just want to know where I can go to find the actual definition of what wasteful spending is or wasting taxpayer money is because I'd like to know what that barometer is so when I'm making my decisions I can go and say, you know what, yeah, I probably shouldn't go down this road even though it's the right thing to do because it is wasting taxpayer money. I I just want to know where I can get that clarification. Okay? Because and and if if there is none, I I would just suggest that all parties, the city council, the mayor's office, anybody in in local government, stop saying that we're wasting taxpayer money if you can't define what wasting taxpayer money means in how we get there. Because in my mind, we have a charter and we are elected to uphold the charter. So, we've got a disagreement, but I do have a compromise. So, if we're willing to take Mr. my oza's email saying that we don't have the authority to do the appointments or the uh confirmation of reappointments. I will forgo that as long as we also take Mr. Myoza's opinion that he sent to me on another point of a charter. So he sent to me and it's quote, "Hi Sean, you are correct. Article two of the charter was intended to give the city council more authority and allow for investigations in any city a agency. As a former city councelor, I personally felt it was important that there was balance between the two government branches of local government. So you disagreed with that.

So what I will tell you is I will accept this email saying that we don't have the authority to do reappoints if you accept my message from him saying we have the authority to conduct investigations into departments. That's that's

well as I said from the beginning that opinion is irrelevant to to the charter interpretation because the charter charter interpretation for this was a black and white thing. It was not an ambiguous issue. But that being said I actually from the portion you just read I wouldn't have disagreed with you. The charter does give the city council the power to do investigations but I think what's implicit in that power is that it's for legislative or budgetary purposes not for purely executive functions. So I wouldn't even disagree with what that portion of what you read to me from Mr. Mosoza. That's that's accurate. You do have investigatory powers.

No, but he to give the council more authority, which means it's not just legislative because we we have all the legislative authority now. So to to give us more authority would mean that it would have to go beyond the legislative authority. We have the legislative authority currently. So I I don't want to belver the point but from my standpoint it it to me it comes back down to how it is written how we we've handled uh items in the past because there is nowhere else that would suggest that you know boards and committees need to come back down before us for for reappointments but they have so they've all come back before us. I still think that's a strong argument to be made. I still think the terms of a contract is a strong is a strong argument to be made. I think that reappoints as it's defined legally is a strong argument which would give us the authority as a legislative body to um confirm reappointments because at the end of the day if you're on a contract your contract expires at the end of that term you are being reappointed. So my motion uh I'm now is on the table and that's that's the direction I'd like to go.

Yield council. I yield. Any other discussion on the motion? Councelor Canuel, I think it's if if we're going to move forward on that motion, I think then we should potentially dispose of the proposed ordinance because I think it weakens the argument of my colleague. I think he's saying that we possess the authority in the home room charter. Therefore, we would need to write it into the city code. So, with that, I would make a subsequent motion to leave to withdraw the proposed ordinance. Yeah. So, we'll take the we'll take council Kadim's motion first. Clerk, can you reiterate to the committee what the motion is, please?

I just council, can you reiterate your motion, please? That uh the committee on uh ordinance legislations make a recommendation to the full council uh that we pursue legal action to get a legal determination from a judge on the city council's authority on reappoints. Motion made. And we already did have a second on the original motion discussion. Vice President Dion.

Um I would like to amend that to also include the investigative authority of the city council and the ability to hire um outside agencies to help us to investigate situations. I'll second that. We have an amendment on the floor made by Vice President Dion, second by vice by councelor Kadim on the amendments discussion. Councelor Canuel, I think I'd just like to move forward with this. I feel like we keep talking about it at every meeting or subsequent ones uh keep coming up. I' I'd really like us to just get this all settled and and move forward, whatever the ruling may be. So,

understood. Yield. I didn't yield yet, did I? You did. Did I vice president? Yeah. Um, yeah. Well, I guess that was the point. I just wanted to amend it because if we're going to go, let's let's not go five times. Let's take what's important and do it all at once and be done with it. With that, I yield on the amendment. All those I just got to repeat. Of course. on the amendment. Can you repeat your amendment? To include um the city council's authority to investigate 2-7A

2-7A um and be able to hire outside agencies, whether it be uh yeah, legal, whether it be an investigator, an attorney, whatever the case may be, whatever way you think is best to on the amendment. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? Okay. And on the motion as amended, we was made and seconded. All those in favor? I. Any opposed? The eyes have it to now to motion leave to withdraw the proposed ordinance.

Okay. Motion made to grant leaf to withdraw the proposed ordinance made by councelor Canuel, second by vice president Dion. Discussion. All those in favor? I. The any opposed the eyes have it and there is no other business in front of the committee this evening. Motion to adjurnn. Motion to endure made by vice president Dion. Second by council Keno. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. The committee ordinance legislation is now adjourned.