City Council - Regular Meeting

Thank you.

Good evening and welcome to the regular meeting of the Lawrence City Council. Today, Tuesday, August 18, 2026, 7.15 p.m. Person 2, Chapter 20 of the Act of 2022, this meeting will be hybrid, allowing participation both in person in the city council chamber and remotely. There are some people also that can get into the Zoom link that is being sent out. Also, Facebook, Lawrence City Council, and YouTube, Lawrence City Council. I would like to ask for the roll call.

Councilor Gonzalez. Present. Councilor Miguel.

Present.

Councilor Marmo. Present. Councilor Infante.

Present.

Councilor Reyes is noted as absent. Councilor Del Rosario. Present. Councilor LaPlante. Present. Council Vice President Levy.

Present.

Council President Rodriguez. I know he'll be joining us remotely at this time. I'm going to note him as absent.

Okay, can we stand? Your mic's off.

Present.

Perfect, gotcha.

Thank you. Can we stand for a moment of silence, please? Council, there is a motion. There is an agenda to Oh, I'm sorry. There is a minute to approve for 5-19-2026. May I hear a motion, please? So moved. Second.

Second.

All those in favor? Aye. Roll call, please.

Council LaPlante? Yes. Council Del Rosario? Yes. Councilor Reyes? It's noted as absent. Councilor Infante? Yes. Councilor Marmo? Yes. Councilor Miguel? Yes. Councilor Gonzalez? Yes. Council President? Yes. Council Vice President?

Yes.

So Council, we have some people in here for public participation. I would like to ask the member of the public wishing to address the city council for public participation that they will have two and a half minutes to do so. And at the two minutes mark, you will hear a bell, and from that point, you will have 30 more seconds. At the two and a half minutes mark, you will hear a second bell indicating that your time is up. Please address your comment to the city council as a whole and not individually. Please state your name and address for the record. The third person on the agenda is Brenda Rossi, please.

Good evening, councillors. My name is Brenda Rossi and I reside at 127 Chester Street. Those of you who know me know that I do not get up and speak unless I believe in something. I believe that this discussion regarding what is happening in our city should not be held in executive session, but rather out in the open in front of the people who elected you to your positions. We are all in this together, and together we need you to be above board with us. We are one Lawrence, not the North, not the South, but one. Thank you for considering this.

Thank you. We have the second person, Rich Rosso. Council.

Microphones, damn.

Good evening, councilors. Rich Russell, cranky old man, 34 Cross Street. My moment of silence tonight is for Abbott Lawrence, a money-making industrialist who helped create Lawrence to make money. He died 171 years ago today in 1855 at the age of 66. Now we fast forward to today where some politicians are still in it for the money. I will keep this short and sweet. The public deserves to know what the city council thinks they can do about this situation. The city charter is written in plain English. There are no provisions that cover a situation that we are presently facing. A recall requires a minimum of about 7,400 valid signatures in a 30-day window, and we know that ain't going to happen. If the council goes into a super secret executive session to figure out what they can do, let me give you an answer before you totally alienate the citizens of Lawrence. There ain't nothing you can do about it. If you go into your super secret executive session, The minutes of that meeting will probably be released about the time the mayor gets off of parole, so do yourself a favor and discuss the situation publicly before the citizens of Lawrence wonder whose side you are actually on. Years ago, Lawrence was built on Bardwell Falls and made a lot of people rich, and now It appears that that manner in which some people are getting rich nowadays will be the downfall of Lawrence. Lastly, when is the city gonna follow MGL 121B sections five and six regarding citizen membership on the local redevelopment authority? As always, I thank you for the time.

Thank you. The next person on line is Councilor LaPlante.

thank you madam chair members of the council uh as you know every two weeks i come here and i mention uh the individuals who we're going to be honoring as part of the lawrence square project this upcoming week this thursday will we be remembering and rededicating the sign for phil moore phil moore was a world war ii uh infantryman he received the bronze star he's lived to tell the tale came back to lawrence And he worked at Cedar Crest, which you may or may not remember. But he was very active in veterans organizations and was very much a very strong veterans activist. And so we'll be remembering Phil Moore this coming Thursday. In two weeks, we're going to also be celebrating and rededicating Captain Jim Mulligan. This one is extra special to me because I had a chance to meet Jim Mulligan, and I know that my colleague from District E went down for the funeral a few years ago. His sign is at Salem and Everett, and if I forgot, Philip Moore is at Broadway and Concord. But Captain Mulligan, his claim to fame is that he served going from World War II all the way to Vietnam, and he was a POW for seven years in Vietnam, where he stood in solitary confinement for some time. He was such... a pain in the butt to his torturers that they moved him to a place called Alcatraz, not the Alcatraz in San Francisco, but Alcatraz, and there were only, I think, 11 guys that were there because they would not give anything up, and they couldn't break them, and he was tortured. So anyway, he's a Lawrence guy, an amazing, amazing man, an amazing story, and I'm very much looking forward to remembering him again a week from this Thursday at the intersection of Salem and Everett Street. And everybody, of course, is invited. Thank you.

Thank you, Counsel. The next person in line is Counsel Stephanie Infante. Thank you.

Good evening, Councillor Stephanie Infante, 200 Common Street. I'm actually reading an email on behalf of a constituent that reached out to me requesting that I read this on her behalf, as I've done so in the past for other constituents. Dear Councilor Infante, I am writing to you ahead of tomorrow's city council meeting as I am unable to attend and speak during public participation. As your constituent, I am asking you to work with the rest of the council to seek the resignation of Mayor DePena. The recent federal charges combined with the state charges from earlier this year and multiple lawsuits against his administration raised serious concerns about his ability to effectively govern Lawrence. The city deserves leadership dedicated to working for its residents rather than a focus on mounting court cases. Without assuming guilt, it is clear that these legal issues may cause a major distraction from running the city. You have my consent to mention this email at tomorrow's meeting if you deem it appropriate for any agenda items. Sincerely, Michelle Feeney. Thank you.

Thank you. So we had a couple of people through the computer. So Mr. Enrique? Yes.

Hi, Enrique Sanchez, Massachusetts. I'm really disappointed with what's going on in Lawrence.

Please, can you state your name and address, please? Hello? Mr. Fabian? Mr. Enrique? Mr. Enrique, are you there? Okay, so the next person in the line is Fabian R.

All right, good evening, Council President and members of the City Council. My name is Fabian Rojas and I'm a resident at 50 Greenwood Street. I'm joining tonight because I understand that transparency and financial oversight are essential for good government. On today's agenda, document 35526, it's asking for the City Council to authorize over $3 million from the Gas Columbia Settlement for clean and efficient municipal energy projects. I'm not gonna sit here tonight and say that we shouldn't be spending this money. All I'm asking please is for us residents to understand exactly what's being approved before the $3 million are being committed. Some of the questions are what projects will receive this money? How much each and one of them will cost? How are they being selected? What savings or benefits are expected? And how will residents be able to see the results afterwards? Lawrence's history reminds us that oversight really matters. In 2010, the Commonwealth enacted special financial stability legislation for our city. And in 2014, independent audit later identified a material weakness in budgetary control. That history is not about attacking anybody, is not about criticizing, but it is a huge reminder that transparency should not happen before problems arise, not after. Tonight's agenda also includes fiscal 2025 city audit and a discussion regarding complaints and charges concerning a public officer. Whether we're talking about public money, public officials, the standard should always be the same. Accountability, transparency, public trusts. As a resident and for my community and my constituents, We're simply asking to understand how decisions are being made with the public resources. I respectfully ask each and one of you elected officials to please continue acting on behalf of the people of Lawrence. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Fabiano. If somebody would like to speak from, this is from Facebook, YouTube, or Zoom, please, can you put your hand up?

That is, yeah, that is Fabian.

Chancellor President Rodríguez, to everyone. Anyone else would like to speak?

No, I'm basically out now.

There is no, Council President, nobody is putting their hand up. Let me just look in the chat real quick. Okay, so public participation is closed at this moment. So the next item in the agenda. is that communication from a your city official in the city at all. So we're going to go practically on a secular section and the agenda as a post indicated that the council contemplating going into an executive session on document 3 5726. In order to do so, I need a motion to go into a second section on the Demand General Law C-38, section 21A-5, to investigate charges of criminal misconduct. I would like to hear a motion on item 357-26 for the second section.

Madam Vice Chair, could you also give an explanation as to the reasoning behind? You have to give an explanation.

I already did it. So move for discussion. Discussion.

Through you, Madam Vice President Levy.

We need a second on the motion. We need a second on the motion.

Second on the motion for discussion, yes.

Okay. Thank you. Council Marmo. Discussion.

Council Marmo. So we received a second? Yes. All those in favor?

No. No? Discussion. Discussion, okay.

So through you Madam Vice Chair, I feel like it's important to not just jump into executive session, I think we need to afford the public at least an opportunity to, if there is any discussions from my colleagues as well as myself, which I will state my thoughts regarding this item, that we are given the opportunity to have that discussion publicly, given the realms and the bounds that we could have these discussions. before jumping into executive session to discuss some more delicate matters. I wanna start off by saying that this item, I'm highly disappointed that we even have to have this discussion. I think a lot of us, and I'm including myself, I've worked really hard to show that Lawrence is more than what the stereotype is. I work really hard to showcase and highlight the positive things that are happening in this city. And when I see news media outlet, and I know that they're doing their job covering this item, as important as it is, that I hope that you guys take a good look at this room that seems to be somewhat empty. It's empty and I remember vividly how not that long ago when we had a former city councilor in a similar situation where she was charged and I'm hearing a lot of, you know, right now the conversation is allowing for due process and I believe that. I do, I believe in it and I respect it and back then I did not discuss the charges of that former counselor allowing for due process to take place. And I haven't had any public communication or discussion regarding what's happening right now with our mayor, because I also believe in the due process that should be taking place. But I also feel the need to call out the hypocrisy that took place back then. There was so many people that filled this room, and it is the very people that I see that they're not here with us. And it's somewhat amusing, even though this situation is not amusing at all, it is amusing to me to see how some people could be so delusional. Where was that due process expectation for that counselor? and we're having this discussion and having those expectations for our mayor. That's something I really wanna comprehend. I remember conversations surrounding having that city councilor resign and not seeing those conversations being had when it comes to our mayor. Not that that's something I'm requesting, but I want us to remember and keep the same energy that we had back then. So let us be fair and be consistent. And hopefully, I'm looking for clarity from our council president, from our vice chair, from our city attorney to see what guidance could be afforded to us in order for our city to move in a positive direction. And I ask for the news outlets that just as much as you covering all the bad news that happens in Lawrence, all the bad news that happens in Lawrence, our transgressions, that you guys are here as well covering the positive things that happen in our city. Because there are amazing things that happen in our cities. There's students that are graduating and going to Ivy League school. There's murals being done. There's small businesses that are coming into our city. And I don't see the positive stuff being highlighted yet we're quick to want to showcase and talk about the negative stuff, because apparently sensationalizing all the negative stuff that happens in Lawrence seems to be what runs social media. So that is all for now.

Any other council that would like to cancel the plan?

Thank you. So this is going to be a motion to go into executive session. I'd like to just repeat one more time. Why are we going into executive session? What legal authority are we going to executive session? And have we got any legal guidance for going in and doing that?

The grounds would be under Section 21A5, which is to investigate charges of criminal misconduct. There's another option that was a 21A1 that's not appropriate for this instance. That's not appropriate for this instance because as a body, you don't have any... 21A1 would have included discussions regarding discipline and dismissal, which also relate to any kind of criminal charge. But you don't have the ability to... GOVERNMENT IS NOT GOING TO DISMISS OR DISCIPLINE THE MAYOR. DISMISS OR DISCIPLINE THE MAYOR. THAT WOULD NOT BE AN APPROPRIATE THAT WOULD NOT BE AN APPROPRIATE ROUTE TO LOOK AT 21A5 INSTEAD OF 21A1. ROUTE TO LOOK AT 21A5 INSTEAD OF 21A1.

AND WHOSE OPINION WAS GIVEN ON AND WHOSE OPINION WAS GIVEN ON THIS?

THIS? THE CITY ATTORNEY?

THE CITY ATTORNEY? MR. HOOTON. MR. HOOTON. HE'S GOING TO BE JOINING US.

HE'S GOING TO BE JOINING US. HE'S ACTUALLY HAD A FEW DAYS OFF HE'S ACTUALLY HAD A FEW DAYS OFF WHICH HE HASN'T HAD OFF. WHICH HE HASN'T HAD OFF. HE'S GOING TO JOIN US REMOTELY IF HE

But what, but there was a clause in there. You said clause five. Can you read clause five? Do you have it?

I have some of it. It just is when you're investigating charges of criminal misconduct, that is a five.

Are we planning on investigating causes of criminal? Isn't that what the courts are doing? We're going to be investigating. That's what we're going to be talking about in executive session.

You're going to be investigating...

Isn't that what the FBI is doing?

You're going to investigate the charges. You're not doing the investigation on the FBI. No, you're right. The FBI does something very different than what you're doing. You're just looking at the charges. You're just discussing the charges. You have an absolute right to discuss charges, and it's not appropriate to do it in public, as you could be discussing his character in that process, which would not be appropriate to do in public.

I...

You don't have to go into executive session. There's a motion on the table. You can just vote no.

No, I get that. But what I'm trying to do is honor the intent of what the executive session is. I'm trying to better understand why we should go. I mean, we should not go into executive session unless we really have to. That's correct. As others have mentioned, rightfully so, we should be conducting our business in the open. We should be talking about these things in the open. There are certain times that we shouldn't. We were talking about somebody's personal reputation, for example. We're talking about somebody's medical, for example. Perhaps even for potential job searches, for example. There are certain times, certain times, where we need to go in. I don't know quite yet if this rises to that, and I would like to ask the city attorney that, if he's available.

Let's get him on the phone. He's very willing to be piped in. Nope, he said he's on vacation. He said when we're ready for him, he'll jump on. So in fairness to him, no. Do you have any questions for anyone else? Like the financial questions, CAFO is here, any other issues that you wanna talk about while we get him?

Are you talking about this issue?

Yeah.

Financial?

Do you not think it's financial?

No, no, I just, my understanding is that this,

I think she's going to make sure that people understand we have certain checks and balances in place in the city with other funds so people feel secure. She's ready to speak on that if you want to talk to her about that. You don't have to...

I have no problem with that. I think this is very encompassing, and I think it's important that we hear what the capitol has to say because these are public monies. Public monies, we've all read the allegations. I don't need to say them. So we understand what the allegations are. So I am curious to hear what the capitol has to say regarding the public monies.

I think he... No, the bill was for discussion.

My understanding was that some people are not comfortable going into executive sessions. They want to have as much discussion out of it as they possibly can. Maybe I'm misreading the...

If there's no objections to that, can we listen to the capital? If somebody objects, I'm happy to withdraw my request. But if there's no objection, can we go ahead with this?

Madam Vice Chair, Madam Vice President.

Council President Rodríguez.

So Madam Clerk, just to clarify, the motion is to go into the second section and it was open for discussion. So my question is, is it in order for us to discuss the item while we still have the the the floor to go into a second section because this is not a motion to uh discuss it's is the motion to go into a second section and if we have another motion that allow the discussion with the cuff and then that that will be a relief in order but i mean right now the motion is to go into a second section

So the motion is to go into the executive session and the discussion became, do we really want to go into executive session? How much of the conversation can we have outside of executive session? There seems to be some appetite for staying outside of executive session as long as possible. So I think having discussion on the document.

It will be in order to have a motion to discussion? For discussion?

There is a motion on the floor for discussion.

Yes. That is the motion at this point is for discussion.

So the motion was not to go into executive session.

The motion is to go into executive session. Now we're discussing whether they want to go in. That's what they're discussing.

So, Council President, for your knowledge, we are calling right now the city attorney because Council Laplante has some questions. And from there, we have maybe to decide if we're going to go into the second session or...

So what I'm saying is, Madam Vice President, by us allowing the clerk to go into the discussion, the council is not discussing whether or not we're going into a separate section. We're discussing the item. And I have no issue discussing the item as far as we have the proper motion, which is basically to discuss the item in public. That's not a problem. So entertaining the council, While we are discussing to go into a separate section, that's kind of like, you know, we're discussing the item perhaps.

Council Vice President. Council.

Council Vice President. Okay.

Thank you. I'm making a comment regarding the actual motion. My position on going into executive session, I don't believe that we should go into executive session. I believe that most of us know the allegations that were put forth by the media, and I believe, well, I'm only gonna speak for myself, the same information that is out there is the same information that I have as a city councilor. I don't see any sensitive information needing to be discussed, but I'm only one of nine, and that's my stance on executive session.

Councilor Brescia?

Can we call the roll?

Okay, yes, please.

I'm just going to call the roll for Councillor Reyes. Councillor Reyes, present. Thank you.

Thank you.

Councillor Rosario.

Thank you to you, and I also feel the same way as Counsel Infante. I believe that us discussing the charges, when we know the charges, it says investigating the charges, it thinks they're out there. If not, you can get it from DOJ.org, and you have all the information. So why do we need to go into a second session to talk them out ourselves? If somebody has a sentiment and want to say something about it, that there is something that you want to request, You can say it in the open. But discussing the charges, it's losing the time. Everybody knows what the charges are. Everybody knows what the mayor is going for. So I don't see, I mean, we got the rights to go on a secondary session, but I don't believe that we're going to discuss anything that everybody don't know already. I mean, again, if any of the councillors that are pushing for this have something to say, say it in public. You know, you want to call for resignation, say it in public. You want to call for every call, say it in public. That's all the difference it's going to make on a secondary session. You're going to talk your sentiment, what you feel, how you wanted this to proceed, just say it in public. But discussing the charges, everybody knows the charges here and all over the world. So everybody knows the charges. What are we going to discuss in a secondary session that people already don't know?

Thank you. Madam Clerk.

Through Council President.

Madam Vice President Infante. Madam Clerk, can you read the item that we are trying to go into service session for?

The document number is 37, excuse me, 357-26. It's discussion regarding complaints or charges concerning a public officer executive session anticipated. Is that what you want, Councillor?

Yes. The discussion, through you, Madam Vice President, the discussion in public or in inter-secretary session, to me is the same. I have no problem staying in public discussing this matter. At the end of the day, there was a motion to go into a secret session, it was second. I think it will be appropriate to... go for a roll and then make sure that we have that on record that if that if the council wants uh decide vote in favor or against that they have we have that and then we can move on with the discussion that doesn't mean that the item is going to die as soon as we vote in favor or against the executive section the discussion will continue in public

Okay, so, Madam Clerk, when you call the roll call for, to go to an executive session or no?

Sure.

Please.

Council LaPlante.

To go to an executive session, no.

Councilor Del Rosario. No. Councilor Reyes. No. Councilor Infante. No. Councilor Malmo. No. Councilor Miguel. No. Councilor Gonzalez. No. Council Vice, Council President. Council President?

No.

Council Vice President? No. So we are not going into executive session.

Madam Clerk, I have a motion.

Okay.

Motion to open the item for discussion.

Second. There is a motion to open the item for discussion. Already second. Discussion?

Madam Vice President Infante. I'm sorry, Madam Vice President Levy.

Council President.

The reason why, through you, Madam Vice President, first of all, I would like to apologize to everybody that is on the chambers because I wasn't able to attend. And the reason why I have this item on the agenda is because I think it is important as part of the local government for us to entertain a discussion regarding to what happened in the city of Lawrence. There is many factors that we should be potentially talking about discussing in public or perhaps as needed, potentially into executive session if it is needed. But the reason why is because we have to have this discussion at some point one way or another. What happened in the city of Lawrence is an important situation that we as a council, as part of the government, as part of the city charter, we should be aware and if there is anything that happened that we should discuss that is not part of the public convenes or it's not part of the public discussion, we should be as a council, we should have that information. To me, I personally read the complaint that the person, Brian Edepeña, and his business have, that concerns me tremendously as a council president due to the fact that even though those are personal matters, the city as a whole might be affected due to those charges that are against the person, Brian and his business, that happened to be the mayor of the city of Lowndes at this point. As a councilor, as a council president, as a councilor for the last almost 11 years, and as a council president for the last almost three years now, I have been part of this administration and I have concerns when it comes to many issues and I have agreed and have voted in favor of other items presented in front of us with the intent of always have the city of Lawrence as a main priority. And I always have preached that Lawrence should be on top of everybody's head. and Lawrence should be the main priority of everybody that is serving on our public office and everybody that is living in the city. So therefore we can have a community that is a driven community and is buried perseverance and buried a community that everybody wanted to be. Essentially, when it comes to these type of situations, that affect the main goal of us as a public servant. The negative impact that these might have within our community is something that we shouldn't, even though we support the person, at some point people has been, publicly vocal about supporting Brian De Pena, it happened to be that his action when it comes to this situation, not necessarily on alleged matters, but in traceable matters and perhaps traceable situation that traceable money that were transferred from one account to another account that at some point it has been traced, not necessarily proof in a court to allowing him to not to go through the due process, but perhaps traceable amount of money that were transferred from his business account to his personal account. seeing this as a situation that might be seen as fine when there is a corporation loss in the state of Massachusetts that would not necessarily follow. And therefore, those transfers that were traceable from his account, his personal accounts, to accounts that were not related to his business, perhaps the campaign, perhaps other high loan interest payments, and so far so one and uh how this affect the community in general uh those are discussions that we uh should be aware of that we should be uh discussing as needed and also we as a as a as a member of this community should be concerned that uh the mayor of the city uh have done those type of situations because now uh the mayor is the authorized person uh that is dealing with the public funds that we pay as a taxpayer. And we have made decisions on as a counselor. Therefore, me personally, I'm definitely in favor of going through the due process. And I'm gonna respect that for writing the opinion as a person but we also need to discuss what are the repercussion and the impact that this type of situation might have for the city of Lawrence in general and for our finance in general, for the services that we provide to the people. And by adding this item on the agenda is because I would like us to have an open conversation about that our city of Lawrence, the city that we all love, because there's no doubt that we all love the city of Lawrence, but it's also no doubt that if we as a city don't come together and put the city first, this situation might affect the city tremendously in the near future and the long term of the city of Lawrence. With that said, Madam Vice President Levy, thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Mr. President. We have also the city attorney, Tim Houghton. Can you hear us? Can you hear me?

Yes. Hi.

How are you? I can hear you and I've heard the meeting so far.

Can you hear me? Yes. Before we go to the city attorney, may I make a statement?

Okay, can you hear us right now?

Yes, I've been listening.

Okay, so we hear you.

Thank you, thank you. I know there are some legal questions, so I just wanna make my statement not regarding legal quickly, but Council Marmo said some of the things that I had prepared for tonight, but I do want to say that as a city councilor, I've been contacted by multiple media outlets and individuals, family members, and I haven't made a statement. and for various reasons that I'm going to stay after this. But I also want to say that this has been a situation for our community that none of us thought would happen. I know the day that morning when I found out, it was very unsettling and it wasn't a good feeling. And I had many, many thoughts and emotions going through. But what I want to say is that My silence, first, my silence so far has first come from the information that the public has is the same information that the city council has had so far. Secondly, I do think about the DePena family, especially his smallest son that I'm sure is hurting for his father, and no matter what, a family going through anything is horrible, especially when there are children involved. But lastly, I've been quiet because I quite frankly, until now, I didn't have the words to address the hypocrisy that I've been seeing the last few days. When a former city council member faced serious allegations, community members and even city councilors were very quick to speak publicly. I was vice president of the council at the time and I even received emails from colleagues requesting her resignation, myself and the council president. When the counselors spoke up, including myself, about due process and letting the process do its thing until we get an actual verdict, we were labeled as, well, accused as defending a quote unquote criminal by the community and also colleagues. So now I have to ask, where is that same standard today? We cannot demand accountability when it's politically convenient and then suddenly call for patience and due process when it involves someone that individuals support. Due process applies to everyone, including our mayor, including the former city councilor, anyone that is up against a legal situation. But so does accountability. This is also simply not a private matter as we're hearing throughout conversations in our community. For the simple fact that a portion of the allegations does involve campaign activity. And that warrants acknowledgement and transparency. As a legislative body of our amazing, beloved city of Lawrence, which Councilor Marmo mentioned earlier, there's more good things that happen in our community than bad. I'm sure that, well, so far what we're hearing, I believe most of the Councilors are on the same page about keeping Lawrence moving, keeping our community moving forward. and ensuring that our municipal government continues to function and serve the people that elected us and just serve the community as a whole. But I also have to say that we must remain consistent in how we respond to matters of this caliber. regardless of who that person may be facing the situation. And lastly, our responsibility is to continue doing the work of the people, as I just mentioned, while holding ourselves, because I'm also including myself in this, accountable and holding ourselves to the same standards as we expected in previous situations. Thank you, Madam Vice President.

Thank you, Councilor Infante. Any other person that would like to speak on this item?

Councilwoman? Through you, Vice President. I think that the item at hand honestly holds no weight if we're not hearing from the city attorney. I was looking forward to addressing this item mainly because out of all the items on our agenda, we desperately need his input, his legal input to guide us in this situation. So I'm glad he was able to join us because without him joining us, I feel like this is a dog and pony show that we're just having these conversations and there is no follow up to it. So I just want clarity and I want to hear from the city attorney to let us know where we stand and how to move forward.

okay can you hear me now yes okay i'm going to agree with all some of the councils that have spoken but i just want to be very specific i think your job as a city council is to protect the city of lawrence i think that from what we've heard so far that there has been no allegations of misuse of lawrence city funds or funds coming into the city i think the job of the city council at this point is to assure the public that they are going to keep their eye open work with the capo and make sure none of this affects the funds and things that are happening in the city of Lawrence, that the city of Lawrence is still operating, still doing its job, and that the councilors are going to ensure that. I think that's what people are, again, as you say, nobody is convicted of anything right now. We can't use that thing, but your job, regardless of what's been argued or whatever, is to protect the city of Lawrence. and i think your job now is to tell the citizens yes we are going to be on top of that i'm going to you're going to work with the capo you're going to work with the mayor's office and make sure ensure that all things are running right and all monies are handled properly i think that's that's the position the council should be taking at this point thank you any other council that would like to speak council laplan

Just as a great segue so with that we almost had the capo speak but now it's the time just just to kind of reiterate what the with the city attorney said so we can hear firsthand what kind of public impact is having a public dollars and the impact that's having on the city financially capo.

Good evening, counselors from on us about just capo. I will only be speaking on behalf of the finances of the city. I want to assure the council and our residents of the city of Lawrence that the financial operations remain in place and will continue to be handled carefully, responsibly, and in accordance with all applicable policies and mass general laws. Our internal controls are strong and remain a top priority. Financial transactions are subject to proper authorization, documentation, review, reconciliation and oversight. We will continue to monitor and maintain these controls to protect public funds and ensure the accuracy and integrity of the city's financial records. The city's financial operations are based on established policies and procedures and do not depend on any one individual. Our finance staff will continue to follow these procedures and can provide the council with timely reports and financial information as requested. We take our responsibility to protect taxpayers' dollars very seriously. We will remain transparent, accountable, and committed to strong financial controls and the highest standards of financial integrity.

I have a follow-up question specifically The allegations deal with COVID monies and the allegations are improper access and spending. Those are the allegations. Was the council at all involved in the money going through the council, city involved at all with respect to those kinds of the PPP and the other COVID monies? The city was not involved at all.

This is personal between business and the COVID transactions that they had. The city was not part of any of that money.

And so that was between, not the city, but between the federal agency that administered the funds and the applicants of which we were not a part of that. Is that the understanding? That is correct. Thank you.

Okay, any other council that would like to, any other question regarding the finance situation? Any other one that would like to talk?

no thank you thank you all right good question uh to the couple uh do you uh can you give me a general statement as of how uh potentially this uh my if it is any potential um potential of the city being affected in the future because of what happened in the, you know, in general.

As I clarify with Councillor LaPlante, this is a transaction between a business and the financial assistance that was provided by the federal government through COVID assistance. The city was not involved and has nothing to do with it.

All right, no problem. Thank you.

You're welcome.

I was going to make him. I'm not sure if with this automatically go away after we finish or there's any emotion. It would just go away. Right. Thanks.

I like their president. no i guess i just want to hear the mother clerk about the question i wasn't able to hear no there was no any any questions so that we don't have to um there is no more motion to decide uh are there Mr. President, do you want to propose anything else?

At this point, I will ask for a motion to table.

So there is a motion to table. The item 357.26. So there is a motion to table. So second.

There's a motion.

I'm properly seconding that then. So there is a motion for item three to be 5726. Did you second? I seconded it, yeah. Okay. Second by Councilor Vivian Marmor. There is no discussion and a motion to table. Madam Clerk, roll call please.

Councilor Gonzales. Can we just open a discussion? Again, I do have a question. Motion to- I will drop my motion to the table.

Okay, there is a motion to untable item 357.

No, no motion to withdraw. I will draw my motion to table for to open up the discussion for Councillor Rosales. Councillor Rosales.

So, Councillor Lapointe had asked the question if this would just go away, but now we have a motion to table. I just want to understand why.

Typically, anything in the correspondence section, communication section, is put there specifically so we can discuss it on the night it's introduced, but it doesn't require action, so it doesn't need to go to committee, so it's kind of a nice place. Oh, I guess I misunderstood what, okay.

So I think what he was saying is exactly what you, no, you're. Yes, that's, okay, I misunderstood what he was saying, okay.

He was saying why are we tabling it, because normally we don't table from communications, but you can, you just, it's not normal. Yeah, okay.

Okay. So motion to table then again.

There is a motion to table already second by Council President. There is no discussion for a motion that is stable. Councilor Gazzella.

Councilor Gonzalez? Yes. Councilor Miguel? Yes. Councilor Marmo? Yes. Councilor Infante? Yes. Councilor Reyes? Yes. Councilor Del Rosario? Yes. Councilor LaPlante? No. Council President? On the motion to table? Yes. Councilor Vice President?

Yes.

Motion carries.

So motion carries. Thank you. So we have a couple of words. So committee report, so Budget and Finance Committee, Madam Chair of the Budget and Finance Committee, item 3, 1926.

Item 319-26, FY 2027, budget amendment request. Restoration of data entry clerk was sent up as a unfavorable recommendation, and I make that as a formal motion.

Can I hear a second? Second.

Second for discussion, 3-0 Milan Vice President Levy.

The motion is already second. Discussion? Council President?

So, just to clarify the motion, this is to 49. So, another vote, right?

Yes.

Okay.

Any other council that would like to discuss the item?

I would. I would. So the purpose of getting this as an unfavorable is that it would still be in the committee right now and that was the only motion that could get it to the full council. So I thought the full council was the place where we could actually have a discussion about this matter. It's more complicated than I'm going to be able to describe here in a brief moment. However, having said that, I would suggest that this is something that we probably should adopt. We should pass. The way that we got here, we can cast aspersions. We can say it was... And I think the administration admits to fumbling that, at least during the committee process. But having said that, there really is no good option on this. And the best option out of the bad options that I mentioned at the full council, I'm sorry, at the committee level. at the committee level, was to actually, we probably need to get this thing passed. So, I just want to make sure, as a parliamentarian, if we vote no on the motion to, as an unfavorable, does that still stay there as a matter? Have we disposed of it, or is it still or does it stay, there's no final action? That's my question.

The question was?

If the vote, this is a motion. To deny. Motion was unfavorable, I believe. Unfavorable recommendation.

Normally we'd send up as a motion to withdraw, but she sent up as a motion to deny, which is fine.

Let me look at it again.

What number is this?

319-26.

I recall very distinctly that the motion was sent up with an unfavorable recommendation out of the committee.

Right. So an unfavorable recommendation is one to deny. You either approve it or you deny it. Normally when we set up, unfavorable would be to withdraw. It's a little different.

So. Madam Vice President. What's your motion?

You made the motion.

Point of clarification. So there's a part, so the part that Councillor LaPlante is speaking of, that's not incorrect. I believe that was the sentiment of that councillor, but there was two other councillors, there was three of us present, two other councillors that do not agree with amending the FY27 budget, and therefore that was when two other motions denied. The two Councilors at the time, myself and Councilor Marmo did not agree with amending, and two to one, the unfavorable motion passed. But for the majority, it wasn't because, you know, for the full Council discussion. I mean, obviously there's still a discussion pending, but during that time in the discussion, I believe Councilor Marmo and I made our stance clear that we were not in favor of this. At that time, I don't know.

Right now, your motion before the body is to approve, to deny, to withdraw?

To deny. When we make a favorable recommendation, that's always a motion to approve. So I'm trying to understand why is there a discussion when there's an unfavorable motion? a motion when the opposite of favorable to approve is the opposite. So that's fine.

So your motion that you've made for this body is a motion to deny. That's the motion that's before the body.

Is that the motion? That was not what came out of the committee. Is that the motion right now before it's motion to deny?

That the motion before the body right now is motion to deny.

Different than what the committee motion was, but right now this is a motion to deny. Just so we're clear.

The motion was unfavorable.

It's written right on the piece of paper accurately. That was the motion. Just so we're clear.

So what normally would come out of a committee recommendation is a favorable recommendation, and that implies a motion to approve. It doesn't say to approve, it says favorable. Understood. So her point is simply where it says unfavorable, the implication then is the opposite of favorable, so approve is the opposite is to deny. So that's the motion.

It makes it a lot cleaner. I'll be very candid with everyone here that motion to deny makes it a lot... It's cut and dry, now I get it, right? So if the motion fails to deny that, does that mean it's approved?

It does not, it means we take another motion. Got it, just want to make sure we're all set on where this is going, okay.

Can I ask Mr. Spanner to speak?

That's what I was asking, so we have Mr. Spanner over here.

Yes, good evening, Vice President Levy, Octavian Spanner, Senior Advisor to the Mayor, good evening, Councillors. If I may, I would like to request this item to be tabled. And I think when we had the discussion at the Personnel, was it Personnel Committee? Budget. Budget and Finance Committee. I believe that we can run into legal issues. And I would like the opinion of our city solicitor, our city attorney, to provide you and the mayor counsel in regards to this. Because if, let's say if you vote in favor or against, there's implications on both sides. So, Vice President, I would encourage you to, to entertain a motion to table this matter until we get the.

Motion to table item 319-26. Second.

Wait, no, before we table, let's keep the discussion open, please.

Okay, so. If you're gonna table it, why not just table it?

Jesus Christ.

You're gonna table it.

We're gonna table it anyway, right? Yeah. Yeah. But before tabling? The reason was very clear, the legal implications

Council President, according to Mr. Spanish, so there are some legal implications.

Yes, I mean, I understand there is legal implication either or. What are the legal implications? We're not at a first grade level here. Well, let's talk about it in public so people know. What are the legal implications?

I withdraw my motion. I withdraw my motion.

There is no discussion and a motion to table. I withdraw it. You're going to withdraw it? Yeah. Okay. All right. So, discussion.

So, through you, Madam Vice President Levy.

Council President.

So, we receive information of the mayor advisor. that we're gonna have legal implications on either or. So just looking at the finance, city finance, and what we're doing here, we're doing an amendment to the fiscal year 2027 budget. And this is on relationship to this specific position. If the council decide to approve the transfer, what we are doing, we're transferring the funds from the DPW back to the mayor's office, because there is potential situations with the unions. If we approve the transfer from the DPW to the union, to the mayor's office, what happened thereafter is that it's gonna stay just like it was two years ago that we have that position here at the mayor's office. So that's the reality of what we're dealing with right now. The legal implications are there. Why, because now the union is involved because we transferred funds for a position that was non-union. And it went to DPW. If the city council decide to cut the budget of a specific amount of dollars for a position that now is gonna be on the mayor's office, that money's not gonna longer be there available. That's what we're doing. We are mending the budget, fiscal year 2027 budget. So therefore, if there is any legal implication that somebody's suing the city, hey, let's talk about it. Because we can definitely talk about, oh, we're gonna get sued. Yes, we might get sued on anything. but this is how we perform business. We're not scared of being sued just because somebody is gonna sue us. This is not how we do business. What are the legal implication? We're not first grader here that we're gonna get scared of, oh table, just because. No, that's not how we work. We're transferring back the money to the mayor's office and the city council is denying it. If we cut the funds, just like we amended the budget, we can definitely present the cut to that specific budget of that specific amount, no matter where the department. If the department DPW, the council cut the budget for that. If the department is at the mayor's office and the council decide to If the funds get transferred to the mayor's office and the city council decide to cut the funds at the same time, it is what we got presented to in front of us. An amendment to the budget fiscal year 2027. What are the legal implications?

Are we going to get sued?

Why?

Through you, Vice Chair. We need legal advice. I mean, Tim is not, he's on vacation. I would rather get the, we were not able to have this conversation with Tim. BUT I BELIEVE THAT WE DO NEED OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. THIS IS NOT, LET'S SAY, AN EMERGENCY. WE CAN DO IT AND BRING IT BEFORE YOU AGAIN AS AN ITEM, BUT WITH LEGAL OPINION ON THE MATTER. AND IT'S JUST REQUESTING YOU TO TABLE THE MATTER UNTIL WE GET AN ANSWER FROM THE ATTORNEY, WHICH I THINK IS PROPER. and then come before you and then you take a vote.

Okay, so through you Madam Chair, Madam Vice President Levy. So now it's not about legal implication, it is a legal advice. The concept have changed because we're not talking about legal implications. This could be because of, due to the fact that the budget and finance committee discussed this item and it was clear in public that the budget and finance denied the petition that we potentially have legal implication. Now it's not legal implications all of a sudden. We need a legal advice. It is completely different than legal implications. because the legal advice could be, yes, you can do that, no, you can't do that based on this law that we might violate. Illegal implications is gonna be a consequence of our action that potentially it's already happening because it was an affirmation, not an opinion. So there is no legal implications as far as we know. And yes, potentially, it will be beneficial for the discussion to have a legal opinion. That's what we're hearing.

Okay. So we can table the item.

I mean, I can't be that clear. Madam Vice President, I can't be clear. So I would leave it to your discretion as a body to make that decision.

So, Councillor, can I hear a motion on this item to table? Motion to table item 319.26. Second. There is no discussion on item to table. All those in favor? It's already second. Councillor O' Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Motion carries.

So, motion already carried for item 3-19-26, item 3-20-26. Item 3-20-26, IAFF Local 146, Lawrence Firefighters Union Collective Bargaining Agreement, a transfer of $600,000 from prior year salary reserve

to fire department various salary accounts. It was sent up as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion. Second. Second, okay.

So motion was already made and second by Councillor Marmo. All those in favor? Discussion? Any discussion for item 326? So. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

I appreciate all of you for your time. So at this time, I'm gonna be leaving the meeting. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Council President. Okay, so. Last one. Yeah.

Item 344-26, authorization to expend 10,000 from project number 19,580 established persistent to mass general law chapter 40 section 22G for the co-sponsorship of the 14th annual Lawrence City Theater Festival and related ADA commission obligations was sent up as a committee report pending documentations and I make that as a formal motion. Second.

Most already made in second discussion.

Discussion real quick. I just want to call everybody's attention that there is I'm gonna vote yes on the table in it for a second. But there is a city attorney's opinion that's been provided to us just so we're aware that the conversation goes to the next round. That's it.

Thank you. Any other discussion on the item? There is no more discussion. All those in favor? Aye.

So, Council, you will- This is a motion to approve the committee report.

Okay. I apologize. Who seconded that? It's on the committee report.

Who seconded it?

I. I seconded it.

Vivian second.

Okay, thank you. I apologize. I just was trying to find the attorney and I missed that piece.

Again, Council, the plan mentioned attorneys.

Is there a motion at this point.

Approve the committee report.

We just voted on that yes, so it was was our motion now.

A motion to approve now. Motion to approve. So motion to approve or read the second you want to and you want to read the city at only.

I can if you, it's three pages if you really want me to. Can I just read you the last sentence? How does that sound? Sounds great. Discussion. Can I just read it? Discussion.

Okay.

The last sentence just reads, for the above stated reasons, it's recommended that the City Council members not approve the item as presented and take action it may deem necessary. They may further be in the best interest of those intended to benefit from the actions of the Law Commission on Disabilities in relation to the implementation of Mass General Law Chapter 40, Section 22 expenditures. Mass General Law Chapter 22 expenditures have to be solely for the benefit of persons with disabilities. So I think the attorney was saying that you could give the money to the commission, but he wants to do it to sponsor a theater event that is not solely for the benefit of people with disabilities. Maybe you want to amend it to allow them. Part of his was $2,500 to cover their events, their own events. Maybe do the whole $10,000 to them to do their own events. But the attorney's saying no. The attorneys are saying that several portions of this don't meet the criteria.

Yeah. Okay. So I'm going to make a comment on this regard. I got a phone call from.

You have to pass the gavel.

The next person. The next. Cancel the plan.

Take one down, pass it around.

Council Levy, Vice Chair Levy.

Thank you, Council La Plata. I already received a phone call two days ago from Richard. Rodriguez, and he already mentioned that the city attorney did not approve the transfer of the spending of the $10,000, but that was in the hands of the member of the city council to decide whether or not to approve it or to decide to use the money to support the the project 9580. That is my comment on this regard.

Council Member Platt.

Councilor Infante.

Thank you. Mr. Chair, I don't know, how do you? Mark. Thank you. Distinguished Counsel from District F. Through you, Chair. So the city attorney's correspondence stated that This is supposed to be for the benefit of individuals with disability or that fall under the ADA compliance statute and I had the pleasure of attending the initiation of this event with my fellow at-large colleagues and I saw nothing but and involvement with members of our community that have disabilities. And it was really, it was a beautiful moment. And we also had other individuals that may have not been part of the actual programming, but they were there. And their faces, their excitement, the hugs, the laughter, just seeing them seeing someone that looks like them do something so amazing for the community. I can only imagine how the actual plays are going to be. I haven't had the opportunity to go. I know they started this weekend, but I do see a benefit to the community. And I think, I believe that it is in line. And for that, because I've seen it with my own eyes, I will be supporting, I will be in favor of this.

Council.

Any other councillors? Seeing no other councillors, I'll call the question on there.

Okay, no, I'm just supporting what council Stephanie, it's saying, through you, regarding, so we were in there and we were very happy also to see how these people interact with the public, not just only with the public, but everybody that was there. So you can feel like the heat and the emotion on every single people with disability that were part, so you... WE ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

ANY OTHER COUNSELORS? SEE NONE. I'LL CALL ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED NO. ROLL CALL VOTE, PLEASE.

COUNCILOR DEL RIZARIO.

YES. COUNCILOR DEL RIZARIO, THANK YOU. YES. COUNCILOR REYES. YES. COUNCILOR INFANTE. YES. COUNCILOR VICE PRESIDENT. Councilman, yes, yes, yes, yes, no motion carries.

Thank you for so. Council, we're going to go to the public hearing so we have I don't 4926. is the creation of a security assistant position at the police department.

Madam Chair.

I'm going to read this. Document 49-26 notice is hereby given that the Lawrence City Council will hold a public hearing on Tuesday, August 18th at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 200 Common Street, Lawrence, Mass. Pursuant to Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2023 and in accordance with the recently revised City Council Rule 2, this meeting will be hybrid, allowing participation both in person and remotely to accommodate participants with health considerations that prevent them from participating in person. To receive access codes for remote participation, please contact the city clerk at eileen.vernal at cityoflawrence.com or 978-620-3230, or view the meeting on Facebook and YouTube. The purpose of the hearing is to gather testimony, information, and public input concerning the proposed amendments to revised ordinances of the City of Lawrence to be further amended by adding the following subparagraph to section 2.56.115 of the Municipal Code, Executive Assistant of the Chief of Police. A, position established. Position established, there is hereby established within the Police Department of the City of Lawrence the position of Executive Assistant to the Chief of Police. This position shall be a full-time benefit exempt FLSA position with the City's classification and compensation plan. B, appointment. The Executive Assistant to the Police to the chief of police shall be appointed by the mayor upon the recommendation of the police chief. The appointment shall be made in accordance with the city charter and the city's personnel policies and procedures. B, powers and duties generally. The executive assistant to the chief of police shall perform such duties and responsibilities as are assigned by the police chief, which shall include but not be limited to those set forth in the... The approved job description on file with the personnel department in the offices of the city clerk. C, appropriation. The funds for this position of the executive assistant to the chief of police shall be appropriated by the city council through the annual budget process. No individual shall be appointed to this position prior to the council's appropriation of funds sufficient to cover all costs associated therewith, including salary benefits and other related administrative expenses. D, qualifications. The minimum qualifications for this position shall be established in the job description approved by the city council, maintained on file in the personnel department. Qualifications shall include a minimum, one, graduation from high school or vocational school, or possession of a GED or equivalent, or associate's or bachelor's degree in a business administration, public administration, criminal justice, or related field two must successfully pass a comprehensive background check including criminal offenders record information quarry check and fingerprinting due to the handling of highly sensitive and confidential department records three proficiency in standard computer systems and software including microsoft office suites word excel powerpoint outlook adobe acrobat and relevant records management or database systems familiarity with municipal finance or payroll systems is preferred E, salary and benefits. The position of the executive assistant to the chief of police shall be compensated at the grade E, 54,600 to 87,360 per the city's classification and compensation plan and shall be entitled to receive all benefits provided to employees as regularly employed in the administrative services of the city. To the extent that there exists any ordinances to the contrary, they are hereby repealed in that respect only. Persons wishing to be heard shall be afforded the opportunity. So any members of the public?

We have, yes, any member of the province that would like to make a comment? So we have here in front of us the Chief of Police, Mr. Mauricio Aguilar.

Yes, good evening to members of the council. Maurice Aguilar, 55 Lowell Street, Lawrence, Mass. Thank you very much for the opportunity to be heard today relative to this reclassification. Essentially, what we're asking for at this point is reclassify what, what is known as a confidential secretary to the executive assistant. The reasons for that are, well, many. First, the position of the confidential secretary was established as far as what the duties are in 2022 by the Collins Center. And the work that is being done by the person serving as confidential secretary at this time has grown exponentially. I mean, the previous confidential secretary position censored on internal administrative tasks. Essentially, they used to manage the chief's calendar. They coordinated basic meetings, travel, personnel and vehicle files, routine public inquiries and the like. It was pretty reactive as opposed to proactive and managerial in nature. As you know, the operational demands of the Chief of Police Office have grown both in volume, complexity, and public visibility. The overall character of the work that the confidential secretary carried out in accordance with the Collins Center was all, as I've stated, reactive and clerical. One of the major differences relative to the changes now is that what was once a task-oriented support has become work that requires prioritization, analytical judgment, external presentation, accountability for outcomes, that affect the chief's office and the department standing with the public and with city leadership as well. This particular incumbent at this time is doing things that are far removed from what basically she was hired to do. The incumbent now regularly compiles organizes and safeguards documentation related to legal matters, personnel actions, internal affairs investigations and the like, of which you understand a single breach of confidentiality in that regard is going to be resulting in, you know, consequences that potentially impact us a lot more than just the raise that we're asking for. And I'll get to that in just a second. The amount is de minimis. The position now represents the chief's office externally as well. The incumbent communicates, and when I mean communication, I mean electronic communication, phone communication, telephonic communication with community stakeholders, law enforcement officers on behalf of the chief. She coordinates community meetings, public forums, special events, maintains ongoing communication with external agencies like other law enforcement agencies. And basically, this is above and beyond public, I mean, passive public contact. She's not just answering the phone, yeah, taking a name, I'll call you back. It's a lot more involved at this point, and there's a lot more at stake at this point. She is an active representative of the Office of the Chief of Police, and by extension, the city and its leadership. As far as, I've also added financial accountability. I think that, you know, as far as financial accountability, this trickles down to pretty much everyone there. I am training my captains as well to be a little bit more fiscally responsible with their units and what they do. I think that the impact on that is gonna be observed and appreciated within short order, but it goes all the way up to her. She puts last eyes on documents that come forward, on things that I need to sign, that includes grants and all of this, and so there is a lot to say here, and I'll leave it open for, I know it's late, whatever questions you may have in that regard. Now, relative to the change that's being requested here, the change and the difference in the salary is approximately $9,160. However, it's really more akin to $1,160. And the reason for that is when we look back at the FY25 budget, I mean the FY26 mayoral recommendation, it changed from the FY25 budget, which was at $138,080 to $130,000. Now granted, that's for two confidential secretaries, or what they classified at the time as confidential secretaries, but that was for two. But there was a reduction of $8,080, and I'm referring to page 69, of the proposed FY26 Mayor's recommendation, just for reference. There was $8,000 taken from there at that time. So when we look to recapture the $9,160 for the expanded responsibilities and the truth of the matter is that the difference is $1,160 for which we are already budgeted. And this is why I mean that it's a de minimis impact on someone who is doing exponentially a lot more work than was ever expected. You know, this person has been patient, hardworking, never had a single complaint, neither have I or anyone else who she's worked for over the course of several years. And I know for a fact that there were many, many years in which she worked without a raise and everyone around her was kind of getting a raise and she wasn't. not just here on the basis of justice and equity, this is what's right, but I'm also here to tell you that this person, the job that she's doing, the salary is not commensurate with that job, and I think that the de minimis amount that we are requesting respectfully from the council is just appropriate and necessary for the changes that have occurred within the police department.

Councilor? Any question? Discussion?

Is there a motion?

There is no motion because it's a public hearing.

It's still open to public hearing? Yes. Okay, I'll wait.

Okay. There is any other person that would like to speak regarding this item, item 4926, the creation of the security assistant position for the police department?

So do we want to close the public hearing and then make a motion for discussion by the councilors? One of you close the public hearing.

Okay. So I'm closing, so just to close the public hearing for item 4926. May I hear a motion?

Motion to approve.

Second. You just closed the public hearing. Yes.

No, no, she just asked for a motion. Yes.

Motion to approve. So there is a motion to approve. Second. May I hear a second? Second. Second by Council LaPlante.

Discussion.

Discussion. That's all the plan.

Okay, I thought you wanted to say something.

I did, I wasn't sure if she could hear me.

Oh, okay.

Can you help me understand, I mean, you've listed various reasons as to the difference between the confidential secretarial work compared to the executive assistant work. But can you pinpoint one major task or duty that this individual now has that clearly differentiates what a confidential secretary's duties are compared to an executive assistant's duty?

Yes, I think that one thing that even with relative to records, which is where I am more of a stickler on relative to the privacy personnel records and like back back in the 2022 confidential secretary, basically all they did was just maintain filed personnel records and, you know, and kind of put them away and what have you. Now, the confidential secretary is handling sensitive information concerning internal affairs matters, legal matters. I know that I've disciplined certain individuals and that had legal consequences to it. There has to be a level of confidentiality related to that as well for keeping those records. She's responsible for safeguarding and to maintain full compliance with law, regulation, and policy as far as confidentiality. Also, back with relative to citizens' complaints, for example, before she answered the phone. And if Citizen had a complaint or whatever the case may be, she just jotted down, well, what's your name? John. Yeah, we'll take your number. Now, I have, she's more active relative to routing where they're supposed to go. If something is an internal affairs issue, if something is supposed to be related to the patrol division. So she's taking on a lot of that. The citizen complaints, you make sure that those are referred to the right people for tracking and what have you. And let's see what else here. Executive support relative to organization documentation, we've already hit on that. Oh, budget tracking as well. I have her now just scanning MUNIS to make sure that on a month-to-month basis, we're kind of on the right path. Now, I understand that I have someone who does that, but as you know, Director Shepherd is very busy as far as the grants that we're constantly looking to get in order to supplant our budget. And that's gonna be a little bit more proactive going forward as well. So she's doing that. She directs, prepares, proofreads, edits official correspondence, reports, presentations, memoranda. That never happened before. It was just somebody, and I don't mean to minimize that by any way, but she was just filing and what have you. and there is a more meaningful, more impactful, and certainly a more helpful role for her, and she has taken that on head on, and especially the expectations. She's trained herself, and she's doing a great job in that regard. I mentioned the financial oversight. It's just a different animal altogether with regards to, from a professional perspective, what she is handling, how she is handling it, and what is expected of her now.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. So, Chief, I happen through you. I happen to believe that based on what you've been saying, that this is a position that is a needed position. It's a position that would provide some assistance to you. But I just want you to know that I know this is a nuance, and it won't be lost on you when I say this. I'll be voting for the position, not the person. So it's the duties that that position is required to administer is what I'll be voting for. Less important to me is the individual, no offense to that individual, that's doing a good job and all that, because that position's gonna be much longer than the person's going to be there, and we need to think about it beyond, like any other position, we gotta think, is this a necessary position for the police department? And the answer, I think, is yes, based on the testimony that you have. That is why I'll be supporting this motion tonight. Thank you. Understood.

Thank you, Council. Any other comments or any other discussion? So there is a motion to approve item 4926, already seconded. Council? All those in favor? Aye. So I'm . Any votes? The vote is to approve.

Right.

we don't need a roll call unless we um oh we don't have any any any people in here yeah okay so motion is already uh approved um any numb no thank you thank you very much have a great night So the next item on the public hearing is item 308.26, is the removal of the handicapped parking. Do you want to skip those two?

No.

OK. All right. You want me to take us abroad?

OK. I was just saying, is there anyone in the room that needs to go before we go? There's no one here.

I can make a motion that we dispense with a preamble. This is public hearing 308, right? Yeah, I'm second.

Document number 308-26 and 309-26 both relate to the removal of handicap parking. We need to take a vote on the preamble. Oh, sorry. Councilor, I know you made the motion. Who was gracious enough to second?

The preamble was made by Council LaPlante, already seconded by Council Stephanie Infante. All those in favor? Aye. Discussion?

uh... it is not because uh... so and you know thank you house dot number three oh eight and three oh nine uh... members of this here is to get the testimony information and public input concerning the proposed amendments revised ordinances of the city of law to be for them and i don't believe in fine-tune paragraphs in section ten point thirty six point three four zero of the missile code handicapped parking dot three oh eight dash twenty six buswell street south side from a point 165 feet east of the intersection of monmouth street to a point 185 feet east of the intersection of monmouth street and document number 309-26 durham street north side from a point 300 feet east of newton street to point 320 feet east of newton street persons wishing to be heard shall be afforded the opportunity

There is somebody on the public that would like to talk regarding item 308, the removal of the handicap parking at 16 Basel Street. So public hearing is closed. Council, what is the motion?

Motion to approve. Motion to approve. Second.

There is a motion to approve item 308-26 already second. All those in favor?

Aye.

The aye have it. Ordinance?

309.

I'm sorry?

Document 309.

Oh, you want me to continue with this?

Oh, we already have the public notice, so.

Yeah, so let's finish, okay. Item 309.26 is a remove of a handicapped parking, 25 Dorhan Street. This is a public hearing and there is someone in the public that would like to speak on this item. There is no public hearing. It's closed. So, Councilor, what is the motion? Motion to approve. Motion to approve by Councilor Reyes, second by Councilor Miguel. All those in favor? Aye. Any no? So the ayes have it.

Council. I'm sorry?

Yeah. There's some people here. Council Vice Chair, from the Ordinance Committee, item 378.24.

Item 378.24, install one SO pole on Auburn Street near Short Street and Oak Street. It was sent to the full council to withdraw, and I make that as a formal motion.

Second. Discussion? Any discussion on the item? There is no. Council, what is the motion? It's already, I'm sorry. It's for withdrawal.

Yeah.

All those in favor? Aye. The aye having. Item 170.26.

Item 170-26, install one J-O pole on Island Street and install new pole 5-2 approximately three feet from pole 45-60. It was sent to full council to withdraw and I make that as a motion.

There is a motion. Second. 170-26.

176 actually already approved. That's why it's so withdrawn now, because if you look, you can see the approval paperwork is in there. We're just going to withdraw it.

It's for withdrawal right now. Yes. So there is a motion already made and second. Any discussion? Council, no discussion. All those in favor? Aye. The ayes have it. Council Chair, Vice Chair, I'm going to jump to Item 3-2726.

Yes, Item 3-2726, the Recovery Month Celebration and Overdose Awareness 2026, Sidewalk Parade from Campagnon Park to Crowning Park on Saturday, August 29th. It was sent to the full Council with a recommendation. I make that as a formal motion.

Motion already made in second. Discussion? One discussion real quick.

There was a question with regard to the march portion or the walk portion of the event, and we did receive a memorandum from Captain Cirillo today, dated June 18th, saying that the police department is very aware of that and they're in favor of it and they support the item. So that was the one piece that was outstanding, and we did get that memorandum.

Perfect.

So... We already hear what the police already say. All those in favor?

Aye.

Okay, I have it. You're ready to go. Okay, so. I'm going to jump to the old business for item 3-29-26. And I would like to hear a motion to release this document from the committee. So item 3-29-26 is that you Field Day at the O'Connell Park is going to be on Thursday, September 3rd, 2026, from 11 a.m. to 3 p.m. by the Kindle Boys Community Church.

So the motion is to take it out of the committee?

The motion is to release from the committee, yes.

Yes, I'll make that as a motion.

Okay. So the motion already made and second. All those in favor? Aye. Discussion? No.

I'm assuming that we have to vote now on whether we approve the item because we have to get out of there.

Yes. Item 3-29-26. I would like to hear a motion to approve the item. Motion to approve.

Motion to approve item 329.26. Second.

Already second. All those in favor? Discussion. Discussion.

Do we have clearance on that date? I don't see the, do we have that?

Yes, we do.

What's the number again?

329. 329, 26.

From the old business, yeah.

Right, do we have something that says that we do have something? Okay. Was that one of the emails that was sent today?

No. No, no.

Yesterday? Even worse.

This item was at the committee with the paperwork from Recreation. The applicant was actually at the committee level, but the meeting went so late She had to leave. So they didn't hear the item, so it stayed tabled at committee. So as a courtesy, we had put it on his old business. But we do have the paperwork from you, Alexa, and I apologize, I'm not finding it in my file.

And you're vouching that we have that?

I am vouching, you have it. I know you have it, yeah.

Yeah, well, Councilor Miguel. I do have. Okay, so he got it, the yellow paper. All right.

Okay. And the most important, is that the right date on there?

Yes, September 3rd. September 3rd, okay, thank you.

So we've got a motion to approve.

There is a motion to approve item 329.26. It was second, please. It's already, okay. Are you making the motion? No, she's seconded.

Okay, let me get it.

Frankly, the motion comes and brings seconded it. All those in favor? Aye. They aye, you have it. Item 3-3026. I would like to hear a motion to release Item 3-3026, the Music and Cultural Effects at the O'Connor Park that will be on Saturday, August 22nd, 2026 from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m.

Motion to release from the committee. Item 33026. Second.

So motion to release from the committee and already second. Discussion.

Discussion. I don't have the approval from the Recreation Department in my package, so I'm not sure if any of you has that on.

That one I'm not as confident on, to be honest with you. That was actually this Saturday, the 22nd. The 22nd.

The 22nd.

This is next weekend.

Which item is that? We're looking at 3.30. Would the council be comfortable making it contingent upon verification or not? Sometimes you've done that before. You vote on it contingent upon.

Yeah, we'll be entitled to support as well. So motion to approve item 3, 30, 26, upon verification of the approval from Recreational Department, Music and Cultural Fest at the O'Connell Park, Saturday, August 22nd, from 3 p.m. to 8 p.m.

So there is a motion to approve item 3, 30, 26. May I hear a second? Dispending with .

Discussion. Yeah, so this is, I'm a bit more of a stickler when things are in my district. So if this wasn't in my district, like whatever, but it's in my district. So I don't know much about whether the organization, I don't, when I hear music and cultural fest sometimes, I'm not sure if folks are showing up and understand what I call the Del Rosario rule, which is, you know, keep it to a dull roar, be mindful of other people in the area. And they were about to pass something, and I'm not sure the message got to them. So I'm not gonna be supporting this only because they're not here tonight. I don't know if they showed up in the ordinance committee. I don't know what's going, who are these people? They may be people I know. I have no idea who they are, and may be very good people. But I just don't feel comfortable OFFERING A PERMIT TO SOMEBODY WHO I HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO SAY BE MINDFUL OF THE PEOPLE THAT I REPRESENT. THAT'S ALL.

I THINK ONE OF THE REASONS IS THAT WE ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE A MORE MEETING BEFORE AUGUST THE 22ND AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE TRYING TO APPROVE AND PASS THE

Do we receive any documentation? Do we notify this person to come in front of the council today?

I've told myself I want to be better in being consistent when we're saying yes or no to things. I am so for saying yes to these type of events, but every now and then when I listen to my colleague, I have to agree with him. When I'm looking at the package, I'm actually curious if this, you know, I'm not familiar with the organization or the individual. I'm not sure if this is the first time that they're holding this event. I would love to, you know, if granted, if this isn't something that hasn't been provided in the past, but I believe you guys do mention it, but I would like to visually see, um, if they have done, you know, if it's a recurring thing that we, that they come before us every year to host the same event, I want to make sure that we were able to see that. And if there were any, prior issues and challenges with this individual. Because I don't believe we should be, and the fact that this person is not here to speak on behalf of this event, I don't see myself voting in favor of it. But again, I do want to be more consistent when it comes to making these type of decisions.

This particular group, I'm not familiar with. They did do it once before? Okay. Like several groups, we've seen them hundreds of times or dozens of times or multiple. I guess they've done this one time before. I was not familiar with them, yeah.

If I still have the floor, could we discuss briefly as to what were the issues and challenges that we faced with this individual in obtaining the permit?

Okay.

My understanding is that the confidential secretary for the city council did invite this person to come to the committee and they gave her a lot of pushback as to why they need to come to a meeting. So maybe we don't want to. the process. So it's however the council wants to vote on that.

So taking that into consideration, do we have to ask for a vote or just withdraw the motion?

Yeah, withdraw the motion is fine.

Okay, so we can hold another motion.

So there's no motion.

There's no motion.

Motion to table. Motion to table? No. No, I mean it's not going to happen.

Do you want a motion to withdraw?

I'll make a motion.

Okay.

I'll make a motion to withdraw.

Second.

Second.

So a motion already made to withdraw this item, already second. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. So the aye, aye. So we're gonna continue with all the name committed?

Yes. Okay. Item 297? Yes, 297.26, the request of Home Rule Petition under the Hartville, Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 32, Section 94, requesting a line of duty designation for deceased Lawrence police sergeant, charged and done. It was sent to full council, but it was asked to withdraw, I mean to table by the city attorney because we need to have his opinion on this one.

Motion to table. Second. So there is a motion to table item 29726 is the request for a home rule petition under the Hart bill, my general law 632, section 94.

So there is no- Council Chair, would the sponsor be willing to withdraw the motion for a moment for one point that I can make? Sure, Robin? Would the sponsor of the motion withdraw for one moment so I can make a comment on this?

Oh, okay. I withdraw my motion to table for now. So the motion to table is already withdrawn.

Withdrawn momentarily. Yeah. One of the things that was mentioned is that from some of the supporters of this was to, there may be a need to go into executive session, so I wanted to make sure that this item had something on the clause that said executive session anticipated.

Just in case. Just in case. That's right. That's it. Thank you. Thank you.

Motion to table. Second. There is a motion to table already seconded, item 297.26. In the motion to table, there is no discussion. Item 323.26. We vote. We didn't vote yet. Oh, I'm sorry. There is no discussion. Motion to approve. All in favor say... I don't believe 2326.

I don't believe 2326 create ordinance and review and renewal of residential and handicap parking spaces. It was sent to cool to full council to order for the hearing and I make that as a form of motion.

second okay so item 3 23 26 is the creation of the ordinance so already motion already made it in second or discussion that was ended for a public hearing so all those in favor item 32426 create ordinance small waste hauler registration and accountability ordinance it was sent to full council with a favorable recommendation to order for a hearing and i make that as a formal motion so motion already made it for item 32426 for the creation of an ordinance a small waste hauler registration i like to recuse myself from this vote Okay, thank you. So any discussion on this item? So that one, we have to send it to a public hearing. It was a public hearing. His motion is to order a public hearing. Oh, because it doesn't say anything. So that was send it to a public hearing. All those in favor? Aye. They aye, have it. Item 32526 is the old second half dealer license.

It was sent to the full council with favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion.

Thank you. Motion already made and second. Discussion? No. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. They aye. Aye. Item 33126.

item 331 26 short community outreach no we already voted we already did that one uh church community outreach campaign on common on september 12th it was sent to full council with a recommendation pending recreational department uh approval i think that we already got the approval for the recreation department the 331 can you verify that

motion to table.

There is a motion to table item 331.26 that short community already second. There is no discussion and I don't for a motion to table or a favor. All those in favor? Yeah, that is what I say. All those in favor? Aye. The aye having. Item 33326 is the remove, okay.

Is to remove handicap parking on 81 Barking Hill Street. It was sent to full council to order a public hearing. And I make that as a formal motion.

Second. Item 33326, the removal of the handicap parking. Motion already made and second. Discussion? That was also to order a public hearing. Yeah, that was the motion. Okay. Any discussion? There is no discussion. All those in favor? Aye. There you have it.

Item 3-3426. Item 3-3426, remove handicap parking at 38 Alder Street. It was sent to the full council to order a public hearing. And I make that as a formal motion.

Second.

motion already made in second regarding I don't treat it for 26 that removal of the handicap parking this caution. You know this cause you are also a favor. I I I don't 3, 4, 1, 26.

Item 341.26, add compiling city agencies to adhere to Chapter 9.25 to the Municipal Code Surveillance Technology. It was sent to the full council as a committee report. And I submit that as a conformance.

Item 341.26 was in the report is that they are comparing city agency to chapter 9.25 of the municipal code that was submitted by Council LaPlante. Discussion? No.

No, I submit it as a motion and I'm okay.

So there is a motion as a committee report on the report.

Yeah, I agree.

It's okay already second. Also, I'm also a fail. I they I have it.

So I can make a motion that we approve this and I would also like to make as part of the motion. because of the timing that we did in the earlier one that we order a public hearing for the second meeting in October. That's 90 days. And I'll have more discussion if that's the motion. So I'll have more discussion on it if given a chance.

So there is a motion to, could you repeat it please?

Order a public hearing on this item on the second meeting in October.

Discussion, discussion. Discussion. Discussion, thank you. So, as brief as I can make it. So, this is dealing with the cameras.

Oddly enough, it's still on the news at various levels. I don't need to go into more detail now about that, but I think we all know what I'm talking about. And so what we're trying to do is our part in this which is making sure that every camera that's inside a building, a city camera that we have out there, that the public is aware that there are cameras and they know what the cost is, what the purpose is, and what the impacts are, what are the results of the cameras. And hopefully with this item, there is now a vehicle so when we start getting the information from i.t and all the other departments that have that information that could be submitted as part of the public hearing packet so when we order the public hearing we will all know the public, all of us will know about the cameras throughout the city, the departments who have the jurisdiction over them, and the things I just mentioned. So that's what this is all about. So that's that.

That is also include, that is gonna be by building city property by building.

The ordinance, this is not my ordinance, the ordinance says any cameras that the city utilizes, the public needs to be aware that there's cameras. So we need to know if there's cameras in City Hall, for example, we need to know that there are seven, I'm throwing stuff out, seven cameras at City Hall and they're on various floors and we've been able to capture, what's the purpose of the cameras? They need to say that so the public is aware. How long are we keeping the information? What are we doing with the information? These are all part of the discussion, part of what should be provided to this council. This is a very strong city council authority. This is not the mayor's authority. This is the council's authority. We don't have many of these things that are as significant as this. We do parks. We do permits, which is important. But this is something completely different. And we all know the reasons why now. We've seen why this is important. And now we just need to catch up. So yes, buildings, parks, streets.

Alley.

Alleys. They're cities, right?

Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Yeah.

Any other discussion on this item? Any other comments? No? So all those in favor? Aye. So the aye have it. 34626.

item 346.26, install one S.O. Paul on Franklin Street near Valley Street. It was sent to the full council to order a public hearing and I make that as a formal motion.

Second. So item 346.26, they install one S.O. Paul on Franklin Street near the Valley Street. Already second. Discussion? Also in favor. Aye. So there I have it. 347.26 in that 3J04 on... Councilor Miguel.

No, keep going.

3J04 on Broadway near Arlington Street.

Yes, it was sent to the full council to order a public hearing, and I make that as a formal motion.

Second. So item 347, 26, a motion is already made for the public hearing and second, a discussion. There is none, so all those in favor? Aye. We have 348, 26.

Item 348.26, install 105 feet of underground conduit on Andover Street near Blanchard Street. It was sent to the full council to order a public hearing. And I make that as a formal motion.

Second. So motion already made for item 352.26, the William Reservoir Park on Saturday. No, we didn't vote on that. That says the 348.26.

Yeah.

Instead the 105 of Underground Country on Andover Street near Blanchette Street. Motion already made. And second, discussion? There is none. All those in favor?

Aye. I don't three fifty to twenty six wedding on Reservoir Park on Saturday September 5th from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.

It was sent to the full council we favor recommendation and I make that as a full motion was already made it for I don't three fifty to twenty six at the wedding for the Reservoir Park discussion this costume yeah this caught my attention so

I don't recall us doing, like, approving weddings. I know there, like, I believe there are weddings that take place right across the street and can't be known in common. I don't recall anybody coming for permit to have a wedding across the street. Can I? Yeah, I'm looking for help, yeah.

Sure, so weddings officiated by city officials like the clerk and the assistant clerk during the workday can be in city hall or in city property. So we use the chambers for the most part. Occasionally we will use the park across the street. I think it's a good point. I think it's a good point. And when a city sponsors an event, then it's not required for council approval, the same as if the schools use a field. Okay. So city clerk or the city assistant clerk during the workday, those weddings which are allowed by mass statute don't require an additional approval. This is a different, where they're bringing in like 25 chairs to set up and the officiant is not a city official and it's a separate and distinct item that they just want to use the park at the

a fee associated with this?

I don't think we charge a fee to use the parks, no.

So if you want to get married in a park and you don't want to pay a lot of money for a hall, you can go there and pay nothing.

So this is for the ceremony. You're not having a celebration there. They're just having the ceremony.

Okay.

Like, yeah, we don't want to have, like, because some people start getting a one-day liquor license.

Can you imagine where this is going is my point. We're not charging anybody for the use of our public spaces, which I think we should be thinking about, which I don't know. I'm kind of surprised, and I should know this, but anyway. Those are the rules right now, but we're paying this much for anybody to use our parks. I think if you went to Boston, you'd want to use the park, for example. I think there's some sort of fee. It may not be $1,000, but there's a fee because people want to use it.

And so... That may be a conversation for another day. Yeah, you're right. Not tonight, though.

Right, thanks.

Well, as far as I know, as far as I know, yes, it's going to be... it's not like a party but it's going to be a celebration right in there after the wedding oh i thought it was just the ceremony no they we also talk about the speaker that and the people that is going to be serving in there

Yeah, they did mention about the speaker for the people that was going to do the ceremony and the piano for the introductory music, not that they will have a party or a reception. We did specify if they bring anything to the park, they have to dispose it and leave it clean.

and they has to leave it as a clean as they gonna find.

Through you, Madam Chair. So now that you guys have a little bit of information regarding this wedding, is there any rules as to how many people can attend this wedding?

They did specify in the application about a maximum of 50 people to the wedding.

Okay.

Okay, that's good.

I just, you know, it's a little bit concerning as to knowing how crazy things can get, just how Mr., I mean, not Mr., Counselor LeBlanc said. So that was my question.

We have had people request the use of a pump for a birthday party or a baby shower in the past.

We've never had a wedding request like this before, but we have had those requests. And again, they set the number of people that are coming and they set the timeline.

And we try to talk about the noise. But my... Councilor, just a question.

Yes.

I understood them as saying they were doing a ceremony. Is that also your understanding, or are you saying something different? You're saying just the ceremony?

Yes. That was what it was, this councilor.

Because you said something about food.

Yeah, they mentioned that they're going to have a little resection, and that is why they're going to have all of these people, and they want to bring the speaker, the piano, and for the

So reception is different from, yeah, it's a party.

Well, I guess if we allow the baby showers, what would be the difference of the wedding, right? Yeah.

But we already talked about the music, the speaker, how they're going to use it. Practically, we didn't entertain more than on three sections, or if they're going to be dancing or doing anything else.

Just to be clear, I'm looking at the application, and it's talking about chairs, tables, flowers, arches, small tent, banners, generator, mic, piano. Nothing about food. So I'm thinking this is not a reception because there's no food.

That's what I was mentioning.

DJ, mic, speaker, piano.

Yep.

It's the ceremony.

It's the ceremony.

Because I've said it before.

It's okay. Well, maybe we are inviting and we don't know. Okay. Okay.

Exactly.

Well, there is a more still please under that. So that is the most of the guy they I don't think that the 2.26. Already sick. Any other call me so with you on this began. All of them favor. They I have it. Okay, so we have, okay, let me see what is this. From, okay, so from table Mares, August 5th, 26, we have two item for withdraw. I would like to hear a motion to take a iron document 27526. It's from ordinance.

Motion to withdraw item to 7526.

Motion to untable item to 75.

Motion to untable item to 7526. Proposed ordinance, the name change for ordinance 02.48 to the Office of Human Resources and Labor Relations. And I make that as a formal motion.

So there is a motion on table, item 275.26. Any discussion? There is no discussion. All those in favor? Aye. Okay. So now the item 275.26, I think we have a motion for withdraw.

Motion to withdraw item 275.26. Discussion?

Discussion on item 27526.

Yeah, did that come from Mr. Spanner? Okay, got it, thank you.

Yes, he sent an email on that regard.

Yeah, that's what I thought, thank you, yep, thank you.

so there is a motion already second there is another discussion on this item any comment okay all those in favor aye they i have it so um i don't 276 26 uh

Motion to untable item 27626 creation of proposal ordinance 02-48.050, Deputy Director of Human Resources and Labor Relations.

Can I hear a second? A second already made it for item 27626, discussion. Discussion. Council.

Just for clarity, I think it's important to just say this. It's important that we say that there was a reason why we were drawing it, and the reason is because it was requested by the administration to put it on the agenda that they wanted. So I just, and that happened again for this document as well.

Yeah, we got the email from the administration.

But I just think it's important that we say that, which I just did, so thank you.

Okay, thank you. Council Vice President. Thank you. Through you, a question to Madam Clerk. I did see the email, but did they send or speak with you in person regarding this Madam item? Do we know why they're requesting to withdraw it?

He sent a long, Mr. Spina sent a lengthy email as to why he was withdrawing it. I put it in the file, I believe. It's true. I don't know. It's okay.

If it's in the email, I'll take it. Yeah, I'm sorry.

Thank you. But he did send a lengthy email as to why he was withdrawing it.

So there is a motion to take the item from.

The current motion is to untable.

To untable. So I already second, all those in favor? Aye. So may I have a motion to withdraw the item 27626?

Motion to withdraw item 27626?

Second. So motion already made it in second, all those in favor? Discussion? All those in favor? Aye. The aye. So councilor, any other item that you would like to take out of the agenda? Well, we don't have any item from the committee of the court, from public safety and emergency management. We don't have any report from personnel committee, no report from housing. I don't know, so I have to repeat it again. So there is no report on Housing and Economy Development Committee, no report from Personnel Committee, no report from Police Safety and Emergency Management Committee, and no report from Committee of the Corps. New business. Item 353.26, appointment or change Appointment of Shane Rodriguez as Assistant City Attorney. Personal. Item 354.26, Review and Discussion of the Flight 2025 City of Florin Aurea Report, Budget and Finance. Item 355.26, authorization to expand 3,000, oh, I'm sorry, 3,950,000 funding from settlement agreement following the Columbia gas explosion for clean and efficient municipal energy project, budget and finance. 355.26, authorization to expend 204,993 green community competitive grant award from the Department of Energy, Budget and Finance. 358.26, police superior officers union collective bargaining agreement transferred to 231,375 from reserve. Yeah, it's just reserve, take off the free cash. Okay, from reserve to the police salary and uniform allowance, budget and finance. Authorization 359.26, authorization to expend 131,375 dollars. 114,192.20, and funding from Department of Public Utility, from, okay, Commonwealth Transportation Infrastructure Enhancement Trust Fund, Boyer and Finance. 360.26, authorization to increase the Beall View Cemetery Revolving Fund by 150,000 budget and finance. 360.26 is for withdraw appointment of J. Timothy Cheehee Municipal Hearing Office.

I make a motion to withdraw.

A motion already seconded by Councilor Miguel. All those in favor? Aye. 362.26 Proposed zoning ordinance amendment to create a new zoning overlay district to be known as Highway Essex 2. Overlight District, H8-2 on 6 Chickering Street. That is for Ordinance and Planning Committee. 363-26, no parking. Norrie Street, ordinance committee. 36426 Handicap Parking for Fairmont Street, ordinance committee. 36526 Resident Parking on Childre Street, ordinance committee. 366.26 Handicap Parking 393 Lower Street Ordinance Committee. 367.26 Speaker Rebeck-Linol, Campanone Common on Saturday, September 19, 2026, Ordinance Committee. 368.26 Hearth and Resort Fair Campanone Common on Thursday, October 1, Ordinance Committee. 36926, one-way coaster street ordinance committee. So committee report. Okay, so committee meeting. Ordinance. I'm gonna start with budget.

I actually, I need to schedule two budget committee meetings. I'm gonna start with item 354, item 354-26, Review and Discussion of the FY 2025 City of Lawrence Audit Reports. I did receive an email from our CAFO stating that the auditors got back to her and stated that they are available on September 8th, which is a Tuesday, and this, I had nothing to do with that. The CAFO came to her, came to me on her own accord, but From my understanding, that is the only date that they are available in as soon as we can schedule it. So I'm going to schedule a meeting for Tuesday, September 8th at 6 p.m. as we will only have that one item for that evening to discuss the audit. Now for the regularly scheduled budget and finance committee meeting, Madam Vice President, can I take Tuesday?

So the following Tuesday is the meeting for the city council.

No, no, no, I'm saying the 25th, next Tuesday. Oh, next Tuesday.

Yeah, next Tuesday I'm going to do...

Starting at 630 Pretty long agenda and then personnel at 6 for that one item that we have So personnel at 6 on the 25th Tuesday the 25th and then budget and finance shortly after at 630 So all the names Can we do

Thursday for ordinance or?

Ordinance that we're doing on Monday.

On Monday? Yes. Monday the 24th?

The next Monday. Yeah, next Monday.