City Council - Regular Meeting

Can you please unmute yourself?

Oh, my bad. I thought it was on. I'll start over. Good evening, everyone. Today is Monday, July 27th, and we will start the public speak out of the city council meeting. Joe Bonilla is who I have first on public transportation. I'm going to fly through the names if you're not here because we do have people on the waiting list. Before I call the next speaker, I just want to recognize counselors that are here in person. Counselor Jerry Martin, Counselor Maria Perez, Counselor Zeta Govan, Counselor Victor Davila, and Counselor LaVar Click-Bruce. Thank you. And let me just see if we have any counselors online. I do not see any at this time. So Joe Bonilla, not here. Okay, Erica Cruz. Erica, name and address for the record, and you have three minutes.

Joyce, I don't have my thing ready, but I'll just speak authentically from my heart. So my name is Erica Cruz, and I am the founder and president of the National Center for Civic Empowerment.

Address for the record, Erica, sorry.

155 Allen Park Road, Springfield, Mass., 01118. I am a founder and president of the National Center for Civic Empowerment, which is a nonpartisan organization in Boston, but we do a lot of work in Springfield. And I'm also, in my personal time, a member of Rise Up Western Mass Indivisible, as well as the Indivisible Mass Coalition Safeguard Elections Protection Action Team. And we're just coming to you to pretty much bring forth our concerns that many constituents in the city of Springfield has a rise regarding their poll worker applications. Many have expressed that in the past, they have applied to become poll workers, however, their applications or the status of that applications were never processed. And I just want to note that National Indivisible as well as the Mass Coalition of Indivisible Safeguard Elections Protection Team will be working collaboratively as well with other organizations and nonprofits to safeguard our elections. And we would like transparency, accessibility, and honesty throughout this process. Additionally, many of our residents have expressed concerns of the poll workers application accessibility. They said it's a barrier for them to print and scan and submit their applications through their methods and they are requesting to see if the city of Springfield can implement a fillable app or application for the poll workers, whether it can be through DocuSign or through JotForm. It can just really limit barriers. And I also want to know, with our voter education initiative, which my nonprofit as well as National Indivisible and Mass Coalition Safeguard Elections Protection Committee, We have been working together to bring this initiative of becoming a poll worker. And during that initiative, we have also been raised with concerns from Springfield residents. We haven't had concerns in other areas like Chicopee, Holyoke, Amherst, other areas, North Hampton. But in Springfield, a lot of them have realized that their application is not the same from the Springfield government website versus the HelpAmericaVote.gov initiative through the U.S. Election Assistance Commission. So the discrepancies of having two different poll worker applications from the city website versus the U.S. Election Assistance Commission's poll worker initiative, it's confusing. and poll workers do not know which application to fill out. So we're requesting Rise Up Western Mass and other partners including Northampton Indivisible Mass, Indivisible Mass Coalition, and others as well as The National and my organization are requesting transparency, accessibility, and answers to why we don't have accessible poll worker applications and why our residents are not receiving transparent statuses of their applications or why the elections office have not responded to these poll workers. But I do appreciate and I want to end it with thanking the General Government Committee for being consistent and being transparent throughout this process, asking the difficult questions and being very transparent throughout this whole entire process. We appreciate their support, bringing these questions, questioning the election commission, because that's what we asked for. So we will continue to show up and make sure that we have a transparent election process throughout the city of Springfield. Thank you.

Thank you, Erica. Right on time, Erica. All right. Next we have Judy Holmes. Is Judy Holmes here? All right, moving right along, we're gonna have Liz Ogilvie, and you're speaking on SNAP benefits, is that correct?

I'm speaking on the resolution that you very kindly added to the city council agenda, number 39. Should I go?

Name and address for the record.

Elizabeth Ogilvie. I live at 11 Dartmouth Street in the Mason Square neighborhood. I serve as the executive director for the Springfield Food Policy Council and interim executive director for Gardening the Community. Most people know me as the food lady and specifically the healthy food lady. You've all heard me talk about what a crisis we are in as it relates to food insecurity, which is related to our bigger crisis of poverty, Springfield is the lowest income per capita city in the Commonwealth. We have the highest number of SNAP recipients. That was around 72,000 members of, neighbors, members of our community, which is close to half of our residents. I assembled a packet of information, which you all receive via email, but I also made copies, and you have in front of you, the first page is a chart that shows you what the SNAP caseload looks like and the loss we're having. The loss we're having now is not related to the federal cuts. Those losses will come January 1st. This is because DTA is underfunded in the state legislative budget. It was funded less than it was funded last year, and that is specifically not around the benefit. The actual benefit comes from the federal government and then the state carries a cost share for administering the government. This underfunding is for staffing. DTA is severely understaffed. Less than one out of every four calls actually gets answered, and as a result, folks who had waivers around employment, proving family size, We had waivers during the period of the pandemic and after under the Trump administration, all those waivers are gone and folks just need to complete paperwork. This is not related to fraud. It is related to paperwork because they can't speak to DTA caseworkers. I serve on the governor's anti-hunger task force. We have been calling for more than a year for her to fund more DTA caseworkers and She has not, and so now we're asking for a resolution from this council, asking her to fund it. As the city with the largest SNAP caseload, I'm really hoping that Springfield will lead on this. Councillor Whitfield and some of you were contacted by City Councillor Catherine Golub, who's in Greenfield, she put forth a letter after watching an Instagram video that I did where I implored the governor to fund this, even though I've had direct one-on-one conversations with her, as have entities like Mass Law Reform Initiative, Project Bread, and every member of the task force. So it's urgent. Christina Maxwell at the Food Bank of Western Mass describes it as a tidal wave that is coming. We do not have families or residents, seniors, children who are sitting around doing nothing. To receive SNAP you have to be in school working or attempting to do either of those things. So the rumors that you hear are nonsensical and nobody's getting one and two and $3,000 a month on SNAP. The people who receive SNAP or food stamps, Los Copones, they are all, many of them, already using food banks. So food banks can't make up that gap. We have 68,000 children across the state who have lost their benefit because we tend to care more about children. I care about everybody with a body. In Springfield, it matters because we have high diabetes, hypertension, and cardiac disease rates. And without access to SNAP, you don't have access to the hip healthy food benefit which means you cannot be, medical language, not mine, diet compliant. I urge you when you get to item 39 to please pass this resolution. I will not be here with you because I've been up since 4.30 farming and my day starts early tomorrow. I do want you to know that I watch the council meetings every week. often with pride, sometimes with sadness, but still with my back up for yours. So please, please pass this resolution and then reach out to me. Any of you, Councilor LaVar, Bruce, and Councilor Whitfield, hear me pontificate a lot about this. But I am desperate, friends. I am desperate. Our children are going hungry.

Thank you, fool lady. Appreciate you. I just wanted to welcome counselors that came a little bit late, Counselor Justin Hurst and Vice President of the City Council, Jose Delgado. All right. Next, we have John Johnson with the New Resident Experience. John, please state your name and address for the record, and you have three minutes.

John Johnson for the record, 278 Center Street, Indian Orchard. Madam Chair, I'm going to let you know my topic is changing due to the things. I'm going to be speaking about the, I believe it's the Brentwood Project, but basically I've been looking in the media and reading the newspaper and I want to address the issue about the city clerk. So any staff member, it doesn't matter whether she's the city clerk or they're a park employee. There's a strict conflict of interest for those employees, so therefore we as the public feel safe that you guys are doing what you guys are supposed to do and not giving undue influence or preferential treatment to employees and staff members. So, Councilor Hurst, he brought this up to you guys in the last board meeting. You guys all unanimously voted to send it to his committee to have it looked at. he sent a letter to the city solicitor. The city solicitor came back and said that he's trying to target the city clerk because, and I wasn't here, I just moved here in February, so I wasn't here in 2023 or whenever it happened, but the city clerk accused him of trying to buy votes for $10 and a sandwich, and they're trying to say that it's more retaliation. I don't see it as retaliation. I see it as the counselor brought up a legitimate concern to you guys, and you guys heard his concern and directed the issue to his committee so he could further investigate. And upon doing that mandate that you guys mandated him to do, he requested that information. How can you guys make a determined, well, I mean, technically you can read the laws for yourself and make an individual determination, but that's what you have lawyers for. So I don't understand how the city solicitor can come back and tell you guys that, oh, we're not going to give you guys an opinion. So now, unfortunately, Councilor Hurst has to move to the next thing and get an independent attorney. attorney to make this determination for you guys so you guys can make a educated vote on whether or not should she have disclosed or shouldn't she have disclosed. Then I also hear that she is the chair of the New North Citizens Council. No, she doesn't get paid as a board member. But I'm more concerned with the application that I received, and it's actually an LLC that's on the application that's actually receiving the funding. And if you go do your research and see who owns that actual LLC that is getting the $100,000, it's owned by two other LLCs, and yes, One of the LLCs is a manager by our city clerk. So yes, she will financially benefit. No, not in her role as the new North Citizen Council board member, excuse me, president, but she will benefit as being the developer and getting some type of lease agreement, I'm assuming that they're gonna develop the building, New North Citizen is gonna come in and operate, and they're probably gonna pay the developer a percentage or whatever it is, I don't know, I'm assuming, but that's the whole thing. We don't have to assume, we should ask these questions and get these definitive questions answered before you guys vote. So whether or not he's under accusation for whatever he's under an accusation, the man brought up a valid point. And I commend every one of you guys for voting yes at the last board meeting. And I encourage you guys to vote yes again and stand with him on accountability and asking legitimate, pertinent questions. Thank you. And I hope you guys vote yes on that resolution.

Thank you. Mr. Johnson, Nicole Coakley, regarding the food truck ordinance.

Nicole Coakley, 145 Bristol Street in Springfield. Good evening, Madam President and members of Springfield City Council. My name is Nicole Coakley, and I am a resident of Springfield and a candidate for state representative in the 11th Hampton District. I stand before you tonight in support of our food truck owners and small business entrepreneurs. I ask that as you consider changes to the food truck ordinance, you remember the people behind these businesses, the mothers, fathers, veterans, young entrepreneurs, and families who are simply trying to make an honest living. Springfield should be known as a city that encourages entrepreneurship, not one that creates unnecessary barriers to it. I absolutely support reasonable health, safety, and licensing standards. Those protections are important for everyone, but we must be careful not to adopt policies that become so restrictive or expensive that they make it nearly impossible for small business owners to succeed. When people are trying to feed their families, we should be creating pathways to legal business ownership, not obstacles that leave them feeling like they have nowhere to turn. Every unnecessary barrier increases the risk that someone will operate without the proper permits because they believe they have no other option. That doesn't help the business owner and it doesn't help our city. Instead of asking how can we regulate more, we should be asking how can we help more people operate legally and successfully. Food trucks create jobs. They bring customers to our neighborhoods. They support community events. They introduce diverse cultures through food. They provide affordable dining options. More importantly, they represent the entrepreneurial spirit that we should be celebrating. If we want Springfield's economy to grow, we need to invest in our small businesses, not regulate them out of existence. Let's provide education, technical assistance, affordable licensing, and clear expectations so that every entrepreneur has the opportunity to comply with the law and succeed. I urge this council to work collaboratively with food truck owners before adopting regulations that could unintentionally harm the very people who are working hard to build a better future for themselves and their families. Let's be a city that opens doors instead of closing them. Let's encourage opportunity instead of creating hardship. When our small businesses succeed, Springfield succeeds. Thank you.

Thank you, Nicole. Melissa Hafner? Is Melissa here? Okay. Shamaya Marty? Shamaya? John Migas. John. Louis Sacco. Please state your name and address for the record and you have three minutes.

Good evening, my name is Louis Sacco. My address is 26 Fins Hill Manor in Granby, Mass. My name is Lewis, and I'm speaking not only for myself, but for many responsible members of Springfield's car and motorcycle community. For more than 30 years, this community has been a part of the culture of Springfield. Thousands of hardworking people share this passion. We gather to enjoy our vehicles, spend time with family and friends, support local businesses, and build friendships. The overwhelming majority of these gatherings are peaceful. Recently, however, public statements from city leaders have painted our entire community with the same brush. as though everyone who attends a car meet or rides a motorcycle is reckless or dangerous or selfish. That message doesn't reflect who most of us are. Just two weeks after those statements, our community experienced a tragedy when my friend Tony Castillo lost his life during a police pursuit led by the negligence of the Springfield Police Department. Regardless of how anybody feels about motorcycles or car meets, I think we can all agree on one thing. Motorcycle pursuits are incredibly dangerous. They don't just put the rider at risk. They put pedestrians, other drivers, and everyone nearby in danger. Yet the mayor and the Springfield Police Department ignore this reality and still do this, not caring about the danger or harm it may cause. There was even a chase a few days ago that injured a pedestrian in Forest Park. How many more people need to get hurt or die before you all say enough is enough? Across the country, many law enforcement agencies have adopted more restrictive pursuit policies because they recognize that in some situations, the risks of continuing a pursuit outweigh the benefits. To this day, we have no transparency. I don't even know what the name of the officers that were involved were. Today we demand the release of the body cam and dash cam footage and the names and badge numbers of all the officers that were involved in the incident leading to the accident so that we can know what really happened that night. I shouldn't have to live without my friend and the pain I feel is immense all because Sarno decided to let the reckless police officers do whatever they wanted. I also demand accountability, something we haven't seen much of in this city. Tony deserves justice for the way he was treated on July 11th, and I will fight to get him that. At the end of the day, every rider has a family. Every life matters. Does that mean anything to any of you? I refuse to stand by and let Springfield PD hurt or kill any more people. The time is now for this to change. No more bloodshed over bikes. That shouldn't be a death sentence, it should be a court date. Justice for Tony.

Thank you, John. One moment. John, can you come back to the podium for a second? Sorry about the loss of your friend. What date did you say that happened?

July 11th, the night of July 11th.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We'll be in touch. Thank you. Thank you. Charles Stokes. Charles here. I want to welcome Councilor Melvin Edwards. Is he in the hallway? All right. Eric Maldonado. All right, Eric, please state your name and address for the record. You have three minutes.

Sure. It's Eric Maldonado. I live on 24 Taylor Street, Ward 1. I'm here for the food truck ordinance that will be discussed today. So I'm here, just wanted to give you guys some facts. I am not only a brick and mortar restaurant owner, but I also own a food truck that's out, and I've been doing food trucks for eight years, so I'm not new to the food truck industry. Just wanted to state some facts. The food truck industry makes about $3 billion a year. There's about 45,000 food truck vendors in the whole United States. There's only one active National Street Food Vendors Association member in Western Mass in all of Massachusetts, period. And I've been a member with the National Street Food Vendors Association for three years. Today, we have a whole bunch of food truck owners that are coming here to this meeting today because they are concerned with all the changes that are happening. A lot of them didn't participate in the meetings that we had with Councilor But now it's affecting everybody, you know, and everybody needs to be on the same page. Working with Bill Moore, the national president, he's given us a lot of insight. And, you know, we are starting a chapter here. We actually have our first meeting tomorrow with nine food trucks that we are, that have agreed to come and participate. So the idea is that we would grow those numbers around here so that we can be organized, so that When there is a change, we can have first talks about it before they make changes. And I think that that's the way to go. Again, I've spoken with some of you and gone back and forth and had a great dialogue. And I just think from what Bill said, he's had this fight in other states, and there's no reason for it. I mean, you have 20 spots for 200. food trucks that are public. They have to be somewhere. And they're paying rent in private lots. And I think that the city has potential spots to draw people here with food trucks. And I think that that's something that we should look at as well. So again, I'm here representing. I don't want to speak for them. I came to speak on my behalf, but definitely with them behind me as well. So thank you.

Thank you, Eric. Thank you for your advocacy. And I did get your long message. I had to dissect it. I'm actually chat GBT dissected to help me. No, I am so I can like get through it. But thank you for your advocacy. Appreciate that. So if Charles Stokes isn't here or anyone else that I called, that will conclude the public speak out portion of the meeting. And so we will resume in four minutes for our regular city council meeting. Thank you. Can you hear me?

Okay.

Good evening, everyone. Today is Monday, July 27th, 2026, and we will start the regular city council meeting at 6.30 p.m. Madam Clerk, can you please call the roll?

Calls are sat together. Abstinence. Calls to the market.

Present.

You got to speak in the mic, Camille.

Councilor Govan, present. Councilor Walsh, absent. Councilor Ernst, absent. Councilor Davila. Present. Present. Councilor Fenton. Absent, Councilor Delgado.

Present.

Present, Councilor Click-Bruce.

Present.

Present, Councilor Edwards.

Present.

Present, Councilor Whitfield. Present. Will city councilors and our guests please stand for a moment of silence, which I will turn over to Councilor Click-Bruce.

Thank you, Madam President. I take this time out to recognize Rick Marshall, who was a dedicated member of the city of Springfield with coaching youth in the city of Springfield for over 40 years, probably over 50 years, I should say. Just really took kids from the community. It was called Rick's Five, and the acronym was Reaching Inner City Kids. And without Rick, a lot of young people in this community wouldn't have made it. That's quite frankly what it is. He took us out of the city of Springfield so that we can see other cities and towns and made sure we had food and lodging. So he did a lot of, and he poured into us, also to his wife and his children as well. So I just want to take this time to recognize him and all he did in the city of Springfield. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you for honoring Rick Marshall. Madam Clerk, can you please recognize Counselor in seat number seven? Counselor Arist. Present. Thank you. Will counselors and our guests please remain standing for the Pledge of Allegiance?

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Madam Clerk, can you please call the first item on the agenda?

Confirmation of appointment, Madeleine Landren, Water and Sewer Commission.

Before we start with Ms. Madeleine Landren, I just want counselors to recognize we have a lot of items on the agenda. I will be timing the remarks, and we will be keeping them brief as possible. You all get a total of 10 minutes to speak. It can be cut up and divided on each issue, however you want to do it, but we are going to be as concise as possible. And I know everybody's going to want to speak to Maddie, but let's just keep it short because she's wonderful. Please, Ms. Madeline Landrieu. Councilor Hurst.

So, thank you, Madam President. Maddie actually came to the General Government Committee. We unanimously approved her nomination to send this to the general body. Maddie, I'm going to ask you the same tough question that I asked that you so eloquently found a way around at our subcommittee meeting. But there are a number of... I'm sorry, taxes are going up, we've got utilities going up, and gas prices are going up, groceries are going up, and the water and sewer rates are going up. And so while I am excited to support you, Maddie, I'm just wondering what it is that you might be able to do when we appoint you to the board to reduce our water rate going up yearly.

Well, hello everyone, good evening. As I indicated in last week's meeting, I will seek to understand first and ask the questions why, why the tax increases. And I want to amplify that message to the community so that we have a better understanding and educate our community as to why these increases or not increases are they staying stale. But I will seek to understand what's happening in the Water and Stool Department and I will rely, Justin, on you too to keep me informed or, you know, I'll be welcoming questions.

I appreciate that answer, and yes, we will be in touch, and certainly excited to support your nomination this evening.

Thank you, Councilor Hurst. Is there any other comments? I just want to say congratulations, Maddie. I've seen them. He can go after me. I want to say congratulations. I think you'll be a wonderful addition to the Water and Sewer Commission. You do great work in the community already. You have been for, as long as I've known you, for over 20 years. And I think you are a wonderful addition. Councillor Davila.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I want to join as well congratulating Ms. Landrieu for her appointment. I have known Ms. Landrieu for quite a while. She's always been outstanding at everything she does, and I'm sure you are going to bring your years of experience, your life experience, and you're joining a very diverse, and I'm gonna use the word energetic board. So it is a difficult task, but you have utmost confidence, Madeleine, and congratulations to you, and it will be a pleasure to call you Commissioner Landrieu. Thank you. And I think, Madam President, Councilor Cabana, should I say my time's up? Is that what? I'm watching everybody. I got you. Just make sure I didn't go over my allocated three minutes. No, you did not go over. Good, excellent. Good to hear. Commissioner, I look forward to calling you Commissioner Landry. Thank you. God bless you.

Thank you.

Vice President Delgado.

Thank you, Madam President. I'll keep it short. Excellent choice. Maddie comes to this with a lot of it. experience in both the private sector, nonprofit sector, and all over. So I just think an excellent choice to have a steady hand to be on the Water and Sewer Commission, especially during these tough times, not only hitting our Springfield Water and Sewer Commission, but many of the water and sewer systems across the country. So excellent choice.

Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Govan. And I will also keep it short. I want to congratulate you, Madeline. We've known each other. I think we were in school together, weren't we? It wasn't that long ago. But congratulations. Everything that you've done in the community, I agree, has been excellent. And I expect nothing less. I do expect the Sewer and Water Commission bills to go down. Thank you.

The pressure. Councilor Martin. Did I see your hand? Oh, no. Councillor Click-Bruce.

Congratulations, Madeline. Always a pleasure when we run into each other. Great conversations. Looking forward to working with you. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Any other councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Councillor Santanello. Absent. Councillor Martin. Yes. Yes. Councillor Perez.

Yes.

Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Absolutely.

The appointment has been approved. Madeline, do you have any final words you want to say?

My name is Madeline Landrau, not Maidline. Thank you. Have a good evening.

Thank you.

All right. So I did skip reports of committee, and I think Councilor Hurst gave his first. So we will. Is there any other reports of committee? Councilor Davila?

Thank you, Madam President. I got three quick reports to give to the Chamber on the Sustainability and Environment Committee. We met three times over the last month. First, we met July 13th. Present was myself, Attorney Ken Shea, Ed Collins, Brian Skelly, and virtually participated Jay LaTorre, Alex Sherman, and Byrne MacArthur. We met on May 18th to continue review of a proposed woodland ordinance intended to protect privately owned woodland areas while balancing responsible developments. The committee reviewed a revised summary prepared by SCANS based on prior feedback from the law department. To support further review, the committee requested a case study to estimate potential costs for developers under the proposed ordinance. The city forester and SCANS agreed to work together on the analysis, and it is also my understanding, I got a quick update Friday that they already met, and they are going to be giving us some sort of update on the analysis and a potential cost for developers. We also met with the president on July 20th, and the president was myself.

He said he can't hear the mic. Focus.

Testing one, two, three.

Can you hear now? Focus.

Can you hear me, testing one, two, three? Yeah, okay. Well, we met also on July 20th. I, myself, was present. Councilor Jerry Martin was present. The media was present. The Republican, Gina DeForge. Jorge, for... La Voz Latina and resident Corey Dorham. We met on July 20th to discuss illegal dumping property maintenance and quality of life concerns throughout the city. As you may recall, Madame President, this came after the significant illegal dumping that happened on Orleans Street back in May, and we discussed the response times, enforcement practices, interdevelopmental communications, and C&A fine structures. However, due to the absence of the requested department representative, we are going to reschedule that meeting. I believe it's going to be in about three weeks. We're going to continue that discussion. We also discuss best practices and strengthening coordination among C&A departments. The final meeting that we had, Madame President, was on July 22nd. Present was myself, Councilor Davila, Councilor Govan, Councilor Martin, yourself, Madam President Whitfield. We had a resident Denise, Frank Ryan, Jay LaTorre, Brian Skelly, and Solicitor Bunakanti. Also, we had Brent McArthur and Alex Sherman. We review the discussion again of the woodland ordinance. We received an outdraft on the ordinance as it was requested by the law department. The city force, Alex Sherman, stated that we have a total tree canopy coverage of over 36% throughout the city. The department advised that further clarification of the ordinance goals and scope is needed before sustaining legal drafting can be completed. The matter was held for further refinement and discussion with a follow-up meeting in the next couple of weeks. And that's my report, Madam President. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Donnell. Any other reports of committee? Councilor Govan.

Thank you, Madam President. We held a meeting, the Finance Committee held a meeting on July 13th, and we discussed the Fiscal Accountability and Budget Review Special Committee that you assigned to me, and we're going to be reaching out to the departments, requesting their detailed budgets so that we could review them and go through the process to see if we could not increase property taxes next year. And then today we also had a Finance Committee meeting of the agenda items that were on for today. We didn't take a vote as we didn't have other members present. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Govan. Councilor Delgado.

Thank you. On July 9th, the Planning and ECHO DEV Subcommittee met. We had in attendance were Councilors Hurst and Madam President yourself. We also had folks from the city of Springfield, Jerry McCafferty, Charles Buki. The topic was about a housing study, which was really in-depth, and I won't go into it, but I do recommend that my colleagues watch that meeting. It went really in-depth in terms of the challenges of the city of Springfield in terms of our housing situation. and how that connects to a number of other challenges that we have. But I also look at challenges as opportunities to move up and grow. The consultant there, Charles Buki, really in-depth and was really frank with the council on what he saw were some of our challenges and was recommending us strengthening some of our code enforcement, some of our oversight in terms of rental properties, and really having a strategic look at the city block by block. And so, again, I won't go too far into the meeting, but I'll leave it at that.

Thank you, Councilor Delgado. For point of information, Councilor Davila was also in attendance, and I just wanted to mention that Councilor Delgado and I do sit on that Housing Committee Task Force, and we want to thank Jerry McCafferty for all the hard work. that she's putting into this housing study.

And we can't wait till it goes public and get more community input.

Any other reports of committee? Councilor Cook-Bruce.

Thank you, Madam President. On July 16th, we had a maintenance and development meeting regarding our food truck ordinance. And many food truck owners were in the room. We heard their concerns, and we're going to look to address those concerns later in the meeting. In the meeting was a colleague who's on the committee with me, Councilor Perez, Councilor Whitfield, Councilor Davila, Councilor Govan, Councilor Hurst. We're also joined by our state rep, Carlos Gonzalez. And also, maintenance and development on July, today, July 27th. We had an appropriation order for taking for Garena school projects, $645,000, and an order of taking of land for Garena school as well, which will be on this agenda today. We voted and committed to bring it out. So those are my updates for maintenance development. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Click-Bruce. Any other reports of committee? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll on the reports of committee. Yes. Madam Clerk, can you please recognize counselor in seat number one? Here. Here. Gotcha. Gotcha. Now, can you recall him for reports of committee?

Councillor Santanello?

Yes.

Councillor Martin?

Yes.

Councillor Perez? Yes. Yes. Councillor Brown? Absent. Councillor Gavon? Yes. Yes. Councillor Walsh? Absent. Councillor Ernst?

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Davila? Yes. Yes. Councillor Fenton? Absent. Councillor Delgado?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Clipbrews.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Edwards. Yes. Yes, Councilor Whitfield.

Yes, item approved. Madam Clerk, please call on item number two.

I have here May revenues versus expenditure report.

Thank you, Madam President. Tonight I am presenting the May revenue versus expenditure report. This represents 11 months of fiscal year 2026. Through 11 months, revenue totals 958.2 million, or 94% of budget, while expenditures total 897.2 million, or 88% of budget.

Any questions or comments from councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Santanello? Yes.

Yes, Councillor Martin. Yes. Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Cavan. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Quick-Pulse.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Whitfield. Yes, item approved.

Madam Clerk, without objection, I would like to take the resolution, item 39, out of order.

I have a resolution urging the Commonwealth to provide emergency funding for the Department of Transitional Assistance.

Councillor Cook-Bruce.

Thank you, Madam President. This is a resolution with Liz eloquently spoke in our public speak out regarding SNAP benefits to our residents here in the city of Springfield. And it's just urging city council to support this. And I'm just going to read it. A resolution urging the Commonwealth to provide emergency funding for the Department of Transitional Assistance, whereas the Supplemental Nutrient Assistance Program, SNAP, provides crucial food assistance to thousands of Springfield families, seniors, veterans, individuals with disabilities, and children. And whereas staffing shortages at the Department of Transitional Assistance, DTA, have resulted in significant delays in processing SNAP recertifications and assisting eligible households, causing many families to lose benefits through no fault of their own. And whereas the loss of SNAP benefits also results in the loss of healthy incentives Incentives, programs, HIP benefits, limiting access to fresh, locally grown food at a time when many children are without school meals for the summer. whereas adequate staffing at DTA is necessary to reduce processing backlogs, improve service delivery, protect federal funding, and prevent additional financial burdens from being shifted onto municipalities and local food assistance providers. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the Springfield City Council respectfully urges Governor Maura T. Healey, Lieutenant Governor, Kimberly Driscoll and the Massachusetts Legislature to provide significant emergency supplemental funding for the Department of Transitional Assistance to hire the staff necessary to restore timely processing of SNAP benefits, protect access to food assistance for eligible Massachusetts families, and prevent unnecessary costs from being shifted to cities and towns. Now be it further resolved that copies of this resolution be transmitted to Governor Maura T. Healey, Lieutenant Governor Kimberly Driscoll, and Senate President Karen E. Spilka, Speaker Ronald J. Mariano, the Hampton County Legislative Delegation, and the Commissioner of the Department of Transit Snow Assistance, adopted by the Springfield City Council on this day, which is July 27th, and is sponsored by Madam President Tracy Whitfield, myself, LaVar Click-Bruce, also Justin Hurst, Zyda Govan, Jerry Martin, and Councilor Maria Perez, and the Springfield City Council. This is our resolution, so we ask and we urge all of our city councils to support this and get it up to the governor and lieutenant governor. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Cook. Councilor Hurst and Madam Clerk, please add Maria Perez to the resolution.

Just really quickly, I just want to thank my colleagues. I thank Councilor LaVar and Click Bruce, as well as yourself, Madam President, along with Liz O'Gilvey for this particular resolution. I'm happy to co-sponsor it. No one should be worrying about where the next mail is coming from. And like we mentioned earlier, everything's going up. You know, rent's going up. Taxes are going up. Utilities are going up. Water and sewer is going up. The idea that folks, you know, now will have to use some of this additional money that they may have to cover for a lack of SNAP benefits is problematic. So I'm happy to support this resolution today. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councillor Hearst. Councillor Davila.

Thank you, Madam President. Kudos, Councillor Click, for putting this resolution together. I also respectfully request to be added to the resolution. And just to make a brief comment, I believe that I read a while back that in Massachusetts, our youth or children, about 20%, if I recall correctly, it could be a little higher, experience food insecurity. That is mind-boggling to me. And so I'm happy to join this resolution. And thank you, Councillor Clickboost, for putting this together. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councillor Davila. Please add Councillor Davila to the resolution. Councillor Govan.

Thank you, Madam President. And I want to thank Liz Ogilvie for bringing this to our attention and Councillor Click-Bruce for presenting the resolution. This is a very important issue, as we all know. I'm not surprised that there are so many hungry kids in our city because they're all over the country. You know, what I'm surprised at is that we're not doing more for them. So I want to make sure that we pass this resolution. I hope that we all can vote for it and continue doing the work to maybe grow our own food by local and do all we can to make sure that our children can eat. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councillor Govan. Any other councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councillor Santanello.

I think he's gone.

Thank you.

Absent, Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes, concert Walsh absent concert erst Yes, yes concert Davila.

Yes.

Yes concert Fenton absent concert Delgado.

Yes.

Yes concert. Click Bruce. Yes Yes concert Edwards.

Yes.

Yes concert Whitfield.

Yes resolution approved Thank you Liz Petitions for ever source gas. Is there anyone from ever source gas? I

Madam Clerk, please call item number three. I have here a petition for Eversource Gas, King Street.

Good evening, Councillors. Chris Signoli, DPW Director. Representatives from Eversource Gas are here if you have questions, but to present the petitions. Item number three, King Street. It is actually work that is proposed on Dunmoreland Street and Braddock Street. It is the getting rid of the Excuse me, the medium pressure or excuse me, low pressure and installing new two inch PVC pipe on both streets, a total of 1057 feet. Item number four. is the same type of work on Margaret and William Street. It is the retirement of low pressure service and installation of two inch pipe on both Margaret and William Street, a total of 1,573 feet. The project on Margaret and Williams is ahead of our paving projects to be able to get Margaret Street completed.

Thank you, Chris. Any questions from counselors? Eversource is on line two, just so you all know. There is someone from Eversource. Madam Clerk, please call item number four, and we can vote on both of them together since he gave explanation for both.

Item number four, Eversource Gas, Margaret Street.

Please call the roll on items three and four.

Constable Santanello. Absent, Constable Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Constable Perez. Yes. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Gavon. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Erst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Whitfield.

Yes. Items are approved. Thank you, councillors. You're welcome. Madam Clerk, please call items five through... 19 together for one full as they are under our a hundred thousand thresholds and we can vote on all of them together.

Item number five, Springfield city library donation, $500 item. Number six, club tiger donation. No match for 3000 item. Number seven, FY 27 SLF library in your mailbox. No match grant for $5,000. Item number eight, FY27-SLF staff continuing education grant for $5,000. Item number nine, FY27-SLF library marketing grant for $5,000. Item number 10, FY27-SLF Wi-Fi hotspot grant, $5,000. Item number 11, FY27-SLF library grants, library program grants for $10,000. Item number 12, SEC Training Grants Increase, $13,000. Item number 13, FY27 SLF Music Program Grant for $13,000. Item number 14, FY27 SLF Staff Development Grant for $15,000. Item number 15, FY27 SLF Summer Greeting Grant, $20,000. Item number 16, Last Call Foundation Grant, $30,000. Item number 17, FY27 Shine Grant for the $1,493.49. Item number 18, emergency management performance grant, in-kind match for $64,201.50. Item number 19, FY27 JDP grant for $80,000. Thank you, Madam Clerk. Just for your information,

We did discuss the majority of these grants in subcommittee today, so if anyone has any questions on any of the grants, please feel free to go back and watch the recording on the grants as we do want to get through this meeting. Thank you. Madam Clerk, please call the roll on items 5 through 19. Councillor Santanello.

Abstent. Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes. Councillor Brown. Abstent. Councillor Kavon. Yes. Yes. Councillor Walsh. Abstent. Councillor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado. Councillor Delgado. Absent, Councillor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Whitfield. Yes. Items approved.

Item number 20, Tobacco Control Grant 121,680

$2.

Anyone here to speak on this tobacco control grant?

Good evening, Councilors Talon, Colton, Harris, Commissioner, Division of Health and Human Services. This is our annual tobacco control grant. It is our annual grant to assure compliance with tobacco control rules and regulations. It also supports our shoppers who are go in and try to purchase tobacco products. And if they are successful, they are fined. This is our annual grant.

Thank you. Commissioner, is items 21 and 22 yours as well?

Yes, Madam President. Mass call three is mine as well as mass in motion. Madam Clerk, please call those two items.

Item number 21, FY21, Mass Call Grant, $125,000. Item number 22, Mass in Motion, $139,805.

Commissioner Carlton-Harris, you have the floor. So Mass Call 3 is our grant that we have in the city. We have funding for Chicopee and Hoyo, and it is a substance use disorder prevention grant. Our partners in this grant are the Urban League of Greater Springfield and Encelada, which is in Hoyo. And so that is Mass Call 3. the Mass in Motion grant. Madam President, would you like me to do these one at a time or just keep?

Councilor, do you have any questions on the prior two grants that Commissioner just spoke about? Okay, we can keep going, Commissioner. Thank you.

You're welcome. So Mass in Motion is our health and wellness grant that works with our youth as well as our elders. It's about health and wellness, healthy living as well as healthy eating. And we also facilitate the Massachusetts health and wellness process for the city of Springfield through that grant. That is Mass in Motion.

Any questions from councillors? Madam Clerk, please call the roll on items 20, 21, and 22.

Councillor Santanello. Absent. Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes. Councillor Brown. Absent. Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes. Councillor Walsh. Absent. Councillor Erst.

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Davila. Yes. Yes. Yes, Councillor Fenton. Abstent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Whitfield. Yes. Items are approved. Madam Clerk, please call 23 and 24 together. Item number 23, FY27, SLF, first null.

and operating expenses grant, 145,000. Item number 24, FOI 27, SLF trust and endowment grant, 180,000. Thank you.

Molly, you have the floor.

Good evening, Madam President. Molly Fogarty, library director. Both of these grants are from the Springfield Library Foundation. Personnel and operating one funds Sunday hours at the Central Library, computer equipment, and outreach activities. And the $180,000 for the trust and endowments grant is for library materials. These are restricted endowments.

Thank you. Thank you, Director Fogarty. Any questions from counselors?

You had a lot of grants on here today. Good job.

Springfield Library Foundation came through. Madam Clerk, please call the roll on the two item 23 and 24.

Councilor Santanello. Absent. Councilor Martin.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Perez. Yes. Yes. Councilor Brown. Absent. Councilor Govan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Walsh. Absent. Councilor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Davila.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Fenton. Abstent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Whitfield. Yes, items approved. Madam Clerk, please call item number 25.

Item number 25, Public Health Excellence for Capacity Building Engagement, $400,000.

Yes, we are very pleased to receive this grant. This is a $400,000 grant and it allows us to expand our public health capacity in the city of Springfield and nursing services, community health worker, as well as environmental health and other public health structures that we in the department have the ability to enhance. And so we're really pleased about this 400,000. This is a new grant, as I said, I expect, hopefully it will continue next year. This grant is expected to expire June 30th, 2027. Thank you, Councilors.

Thank you, Commissioner. Congratulations on the new $400,000 grant. Any questions from Councilors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Santanello.

Absent, Councilor Martin.

Yes.

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

Madam Clerk, please call item number 26.

Item number 26, FY27 Counsel and Aging Grant, $488,976. Thank you, Roy.

You have the floor.

Good afternoon. Roy Goodman, Department of Elder Affairs. This grant is our annual grant that we receive for the Department of Elder Affairs. We're in the sixth year of a 10-year grant for the council agent grant that we have. This helps pay for salaries for our employees and the programs that we do at the Department of Elder Affairs. It's an annual grant that we've already approved.

Thank you. Any questions from councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Councillor Santanello. Absent, Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes, Councilor Walsh. Absent, Councilor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councilor Fenton. Absent, Councilor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Whitfield.

Yes, item approved. Madam Clerk, please call item number 27.

Item number 27, FY27, GEU grant. $1,308,213.15. Thank you, Lieutenant Elliott. You have the floor.

Good evening, Madam President, Councilors. I'm here on behalf of Superintendent Akers. This is the annual FY27 Gaming Enforcement Unit Grant. This pays from the Mass Gaming Commission. This grant pays for one supervisor and six officers that are dedicated staff of the Springfield Police Department assigned to MGM Casino.

Thank you, Lieutenant. Any questions from councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Councillor Santanello. Absent, Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Gavon. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Erst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards. Yes. Yes, Councillor Whitfield.

Yes, item approved. Madam Clerk, please call item number 28. You're welcome.

Item number here, I have an order for DPWR Right Share Fund, $158,596.

Good evening councillors Chris signoli dpw director this year the dpw is receiving $158,596.40 in what is called the uber funds it is money that is given to every community in the state of basically collecting a tax on all rideshare rides taken in the state. The money that we get, we use for sidewalk reconstruction, indoor crosswalks, and some of the projects that we've used it on in the past include the crossing at the library on State Street and currently the Belmont Avenue crossing that we are doing, Belmont at Woodlawn. And I'm happy to take any questions.

Thank you, Director Signoli. Any questions from counselors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll.

Councillor Santanello. Abstent, Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Abstent, Councillor Gavon. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Abstent, Councillor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Fenton. Abstent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Klick-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Council Whitfield.

Yes, item approved, and Council Santanello has returned. Thank you, Councilors.

Thank you. Item number 29. Item number 29 is a transfer of Northside Summer Avenue to Conservation Commission.

Anyone here to speak to item number 29?

Yes, good evening, everybody. I am Adam Anulevich, the Natural Resource Manager for the City of Springfield. The Springfield Conservation Commission recently acquired this parcel of land through a transfer. The land is on North South Sumner Avenue. Parcel ID is 11280-0258. It's about 4.25 acres in size and has wetlands present on a western end. I can answer any questions relating to that parcel.

Councilor Degler? Thank you, Madam President. Good afternoon, Alex. So why are we, I see we're transferring to the Historic Commission, excuse me, to the Conservation Commission, but what are the findings that Warren said to be transferred?

We just see it as a natural resource and we want to protect it as such. There are wetlands present on the parcel of land. We would like to protect it and keep it that way.

Can you give me, because I'm having a hard time locating the actual parcel, can you give me a rough estimate where it is on Sumner Avenue?

Yeah, so if you're on Sumner Avenue, it's where it splits, and I guess you have the north-south, north section and south section. It's right where Baird Crest is, where the old church is. It's directly west of that area.

Okay. All right. Thank you, Alex. Thank you, Madam President.

Councillor Davila, any other questions from councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councillor Santanello.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila.

Yes.

Yes, Council Fenton. Absent, Council Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Council Clipp-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Council Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Council Whitfield.

Yes, item approved. Madam Clerk, please call items number 30, 31, and 33 together.

Item number 30, sales of Northside Walnut Street. to the City of Springfield Homes Development LLC for $170.62. Item number 31, sales of Southside Green Street and Rare Green Street to City of Springfield Off Homes for $341.30. And item number 32, Sale 33 is sale of Northside King Street to City of Springfield Homes Development LLC for $6,737.08. I just want to make one correction.

Is the sale to Springfield City of Homes Development LLC not the City of Springfield? Jerry, you have four.

Good evening, councillors. Jerry McCafferty, director of housing. These are three parcels that the city is selling to Wayfinders and actually their subsidiary here is Springfield City of Homes Development LLC. These homes are being sold for the purpose of development into single family homes that will be sold as affordable housing to households with incomes up to 100% area median income. This is a result of an RFP the city did in 2023 that was specifically to make parcels available to nonprofits who were applying for state money under the Neighborhood Stabilization Program. Actually, there were 11 properties that were awarded. Four of those, as I say, were to Wayfinders. Wayfinders was the only bidder on these four parcels. The parcels are being sold for a total of $7,249.72, which is considerably less than the assessed value, which is $75,500. The reason for that is the city's contribution to these parcels as affordable housing is selling them under price, and that is what helps us leverage the money from the state. John Gilbert is here from Wayfinders if you have any questions for them, or I'm happy to take any questions also.

Thank you, Jerry. Any questions from councillors? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. One minute.

Councillor Centinella.

Yes. Oh, sorry. Please call the roll on items 30, 31, and 33.

Councillor Centinella? Again, yes. Yes. Councilor Martin.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Perez. Yes. Yes. Councilor Brown. Absent. Councilor Govan. Yes. Yes. Councilor Walsh. Absent. Councilor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Davila.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Fenton. Absent. Councilor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Click-Fruce.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Council Whitfield.

Yes, items approved. Madam Clerk, please call items number 32 and 34 together.

Item number 32 is sales of Northside Brigham Street and Northside Brigham Street. to Naylor Nation Real Estate LLC for $5,000. Item number 34, sale of Northside Brigham Street and Southside Walnut Street to Naylor Nation Real Estate LLC for $15,000.

Chair, you have the floor. Yes. These properties are resulting from an RFP the city had out last fall, fall of 2025. Naylor Nation applied and was awarded these parcels. The first one is two parcels that are next to each other. They are to be combined to create a two-family home. The bid for those parcels was $5,000. The assessed value is $1,200. There were three proposals for that property, and Naylor Nation was the highest bid and also the clearest, the best development plan of the proposals. The other parcels are three vacant parcels, also contiguous, that will also be combined and will also support one two-family home. In that one, there were four bids. The top price was thrown out because it wasn't compliant with the requirements. This was the next highest bid at $15,000. Those are assessed at $32,500, but the city would be selling it for less than the assessed value because it was the highest bid we received.

Any questions from councillors? Councillor Delgado.

Thank you. Jerry, so are these items different from the previous ones in the sense, the previous ones were non-profit, are these just straight up for sale? That's correct.

This will be market rate development. Okay. No subsidy involved. Yes.

All right. No, that was my question. I was going to ask you on the first one, but you answered it because I know that we've got some lots, and I know we should try everything we can to sell them at market rate, but obviously you already explained why these two. But I also seen some of the work that Naylor Nation does, and so I'm looking forward to seeing what they do with it.

Yes, me too. Thank you. Any other questions or comments from counselors? Yes. Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll on items number 32 and 34.

Councillor Santanello.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Click-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Whitfield. Yes.

Items approved. Items 35 and 36 go together. However, we have to vote separately. We have to vote on item number 35 first and then item number 36. Peter, Kathy, you have the floor.

The first order is... To approve $645,000 for... Oh, wait.

You don't have it for the clerk. Got to call.

Okay. And I just want to let the council know that those funds will be coming from the PAYGO account.

Okay. Call the item, Madam Clerk. Item number 35.

Item number 35, appropriation order for taking for the German Arena School Project, $645,000. And item number 36, order of taking of land for the new German Arena School.

Can you repeat that now, Kathy, for the... I went too fast, sorry.

I'm asking for approval for the $645,000 for the taking of three parcels, and the funding will come from the city's pay-go account.

Does any councilors have questions on the parcels that will be taken? Any questions for finance? Again, we did discuss in the finance meeting, so if you do want more information, feel free, but you can also ask now. Seeing none, do you want to speak, Mr. Garvey? Not particularly. Okay.

It's three parcels for the new arena school. It squares up our property and the contiguous to the property that the city already owns. So it's much needed land that were needed. It's about 138,000 square foot building with 170 parking spaces. So works out well. It's two empty lots and a four family house.

Thank you. Councilor Perez.

Yes, just for the point of the record, I was part of the Finance Committee today, and one of the concerns was, and it was clarified that, first of all, this was a voluntarily eminent domain, and that the city will be working with the four families once the takeover to relocate them. Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councilor Perez. Madam Clerk, please call the roll on item number 35 first.

Item number 35, Councilor Santanello.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Perez. Yes. Yes, Councilor Brown. Absent, Councilor Govan. Yes. Yes, Councilor Walsh. Absent, Councilor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Dabala. Yes. Yes, Councilor Fenton. Absent, Councilor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Klick-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Council Whitfield.

Yes. Item approved. Madam Clerk, please call the roll on item number 36, Councilor Santanello.

Yes. Yes, Councilor Martin.

Sorry?

I'm sorry, I was hoping we could amend a sentence from each. Oh, that's right, that's right. Yeah.

Councilor, who had the amendment? Councilor Click-Bruce?

Thank you, Madam President. Looking to amend, we had a committee meeting, a major development, highlighted on the third page of my records here. It's also saying, being the same premises conveyed to the grantor hearing by deed dated April 4th, 2026, and recorded in Hampton County Registry of Deeds and Book, 26431, page 269 on July 24th, 2026. Then on the back page there will be page number four. Being the same premises conveyed to the grantor herein by deed dated April 4th, 2026 and recorded in Hampton County Registry of Deeds in book 26406, page 378 on July 7th, 2026. And I believe our clerk should have a copy of this as well. Yeah. Thank you, Madam President.

Just for point of information for city council, they were just D recordings that had to be on the land taking page. So we have to amend it on because they weren't originally on here or. Legally, it will not pass. So that's why he amended them on so counselor quick Bruce has Made a motion for an amendment and counselor Edwards second the amendment. Is there any questions on the amendment on the amendments? Seeing none madam clerk, please call the roll on the two amendments just read into the record by counselor click Bruce Constance Antonello Yes

Yes, Councillor Martin. Yes. Yes, Councillor Perez.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Click-Bruce. Yes. Yes, Councillor Edwards. Yes. Yes, Councillor Whitfield.

Yes. Amendments approved. Madam Clerk, please call the roll on item 36.

Councillor Santanello.

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Martin.

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Perez.

Yes.

Yes. Councillor Brown. Absent. Councillor Govan. Yes. Yes. Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councilor Ernst.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councilor Fenton. Absent, Councilor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Clipp-Bruce.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Edwards.

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Whitfield.

Yes. Yes. Item approved. Madam Clerk, please call item number 37.

I have item number 37. I have an order authorizing the retention of independent outside legal counsel regarding the proposed $100,000 appropriation to Capstone, MPZ, and NCC, Plainfield Street, LLC.

Thank you. All right, so I just got a legal opinion. We're gonna pause item number 37 and we'll revisit it after we dispose of item number 38. And we have to do item 42 so that elections are not held up. So let's dispose of those two. Item 41 is not ready. And I think the other two will stay in unfinished business. So, Madam Clerk, please call item number 38.

Item number 38, amended ordinance chapter 279, the food truck.

Councilor Click-Bruce.

Thank you, Madam President. We're here again to discuss the food truck ordinance. Is Chris Signoli still here? He left? Okay. Perfect. Again, this is a brief history on this. You know, we had several meetings in reference to this food truck ordinance prior to me taking over for maintenance and development. I think it happened last year towards the end of the year. A former counselor was working with Chris Signoli to put something together. They fell into my committee as Madam President nominated me to be the president or the chair, excuse me, of the maintenance and development. So in order to try to work with our food truck owners, uh businesses and our residents try to come up with some solutions to make something amenable for all parties now granted everybody's not going to be happy with that being said fast forward we had a couple of my colleagues and myself saw some stuff spoiling on social media We started to be proactive with having conversations with Chris Signoli, the administration. I know Councilor Whitfield and Councilor Hurst reached out to me asking to make some amendments. We did that proactively, making some adjustments to the law department. Again, being proactive. So some of the amendments that we suggested, Because we heard, fast forward to the meeting we had on July 16th, we heard a lot going on regarding the feet, F-E-E-T. I know some people may say feet. The distance from the brick and mortar to our food truck on private property. So what we heard was 500 feet was too far. So we recommended 200 feet. We heard about the hours of operation. I know some were complaining that 11 o'clock was too soon, so we recommended midnight, 12 a.m. Also, I want to mention working with, we also heard in reference to the meeting that technical assistance was needed. So I do know LEDC, with being led by Andrew Melendez, is more than willing to come forth and help out with technical assistance, having meetings and trainings to help facilitate where there are barriers. We also worked with, I personally talked to the administration, Bill Baker, if making this process more seamless. Now, that's going to take some time, obviously, but again, these are conversations we're looking to have with the administration to make sure our food truck owners are being met where they're at. Last two things, I'll make these points that I want to make clear. I want to get to my other colleagues. I want to be on the record to say this in several meetings. I spoke to Chris to push for a food truck park. If we can't have a food truck park, I think we should have designated areas in the city of Springfield where our food trucks can go. I'm going to go on a record with saying that. Lastly, our state rep and some of the colleagues are looking for a pause in all this. I'm willing to hear that out here, see where we're at. but these are the recommendations as a chair that I'm putting forth. If this body wants to entertain a pause, let's hear it out and go from there. Regarding the pause, I want to get a legal opinion on that as well, but I'll pass it back to you, Madam President, and I'd like to hear from my colleagues.

Thank you. I do have a legal opinion on the pause because I knew it was coming up. I'm going to read it into the record for a point of information. Should I step down? No. Okay. You can read it. It's from Attorney Moore. Okay. Yeah, hold on. I just want you to read exactly the law that he said. Okay.

This is what he wrote about. So if you could just read that part. I don't have to read all that. I can just make a statement.

Oh, okay.

Yeah.

When I have the law department make a statement.

Okay, so what we're discussing, item number 37 on the agenda.

Not 37, we're on 38. So this is regarding the food truck ordinance. I'm just going to read into the record. You don't need me for that one. Okay, all right. So I checked with Attorney Moore, and he said, City Council Rule 22D states that ordinances shall take effect 20 days from and after the final passage unless otherwise provided or if an emergency permittable is applied. In the case of an emergency, the ordinance will take effect immediately. However, in all other cases, the ordinance will take effect either at a specified time, at least 20 days after the final passage. Example. 90 days from the date of final passage or on December 1st, 2026. Or if no time is specified within the ordinance, 20 days after final passage. The 20-day minimum period is often referred to as the appeal period for an ordinance where it has been approved, but it can be challenged before becoming operative. Thank you for your time and hope this information is helpful. So that being said, Councilors have an opportunity to, I'm going to say pause because that's the term. I'm going to Maria first because she had her hand up first. That's the term that has been used in a lot of conversations that I've had with State Rep. Gonzalez. Councilor Perez followed by Councilor Govan.

Thank you, Madam President. I'm part of the maintenance and development committee. I have heard from the food trucks themselves. I have heard from other people. One of the concerns that I have, this is new news for me about the appealing, I think that's, And I'm presenting this as a fact. Not having all the facts in front of us, we were able to work with this matter. I am for the pausing of it because I have other questions. I have a particular business that I'm not going to mention, but the confusion was from my part as well as the business owner. There's 2,200 feet, there's 500 feet. And then my question, my technical question is, how do we measure the feet from the business? And do we have a process in place of measurement and have a process in place in saying, yes, you are approved because you are with them? the guidelines that the city is holding. So when I ask that question, and I have spoken to Chris Ignalius being part of the committee, those are the concerns that I have right now because it has turned out to be very confusing. The other thing in the modification of the amendment, there has been some other issues that have come forward. I think at this point, we need to legally work with the law department and see how effective we could put these guidelines, because It has been after so many meetings and getting to the end and thinking that we had it right, we didn't. And I could say that. personally. We haven't. Should be the proper way of saying it. So I'm entertaining a pause until, in recommending the pause until we meet with the legal department and then discuss some other issues that have come forward. Thank you, Madam Chair.

I just want to be clear that the pause, we have two items on the agenda just for a point of clarification of amendments. One of the amendments is to change the foot The feet from 500 to 200. And the other amendment is to change the time of the food trucks closing till 12 extended from 11 to 12. Those are the two amendments that's on the agenda. There's actually three, but the, um, what is it? The time requirement is it council click Bruce? Is it the time requirement? It's in your packet, but The time requirement are for two of the changes. If you could read that language, that's what's up for discussion now. Other amendments can be added, but we are here to vote on the ordinance changes unless someone wants to send it to committee again and we go to a committee meeting again. and we review it again. I personally will not be happy with that for the simple fact that we have had nine meetings on this ordinance where people did not show up. I know food truck owners may have not been notified in the amount of time, but I'll go with the group. So I just wanted to make that clarification. But we are here to vote on something today. Councillor Govan. One more thing, Councillor Govan. In 120 days, we could bring it back, make other changes to the ordinance and things like that. It's not like we can't do anything. I just wanted to make that clear, too.

Thank you, Madam President. With that being said, I agree with Councillor Perez and I think I want to make a motion that we pause the ordinance for the 120 days. And in that time, I think we can work with the organization that Eric Maldonado is working with, which is, I guess, a national food truck organization that can show us what other cities have done and are doing regarding food trucks. Because I feel like this ordinance came up out of nowhere, although last year Two people, a counselor and Chris Signoli, were working on it. I didn't know that they were working on this. If I had, I would have said, hey, let's talk to the food truck owners. But that didn't happen. So I want to make that motion so that I think we can put everybody at ease. This is the time for food trucks to thrive. and they're out there, they're selling their wares. I would not want a food truck in my backyard, right? So we do need some guidance, right? But I think that, you know, being mindful of the season, this is the summer season, this is when food trucks probably make their living. We just heard Liz Ogilvie talk about, you know, the food desert that we're living in still after all these years, and we don't want to take money out of people's hands. And that this is what I think is happening right now because of the confusion, because of the lack of specific guidance. So I would put that motion out there if anybody would like to go with it. and that's what I need to say. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Govan. Let me make this clear again. We have an amendment on the floor that we need to dispose of. Once we dispose of the amendments that are already on the floor, we can then add more amendments. So, The pause is really that the ordinance is not going to affect until 120 days. In the 120-day time, we can have as many community meetings, subcommittee meetings. We can bring the ordinance back for more revision in that time. So it wouldn't go into effect for 120 days. But we do have amendments on the floor that need to be discussed and disposed of, added to, So if we could just work on those first. Yes.

So the amendments, is that with the footage and the time?

Yes. Those are the...

I'm wondering if, do we have to, and I don't want to say waste, but I'm going to say waste time doing that now when we could do that within this 120 days? Or do we have to, by law, do it? Attorney Shea.

Attorney Shea. Thank you, Madam President. Attorney Shea. Okay, so we have in front of us three amendments on the floor, right? And what Councilor Govan is saying is that she wants to put an amendment that the ordinance doesn't go into effect for 120 days. Will we have to dispose of the ordinances that are, I mean, the amendments that's on the floor? Or can we just add a new amendment saying we're going to, the ordinance will not go into effect for 120 days and then come back with the amendments that's already on the floor? So the amendments that's on the floor were in the packet and they were advertised. Wow. I

At the top of my head, I'm not sure. To be conservative, I would say that we should not take them up until we've got the proper notice given. Is that the issue?

Well, the notice was given for the amendments of changing the time and changing the distance.

Okay.

She's introducing a new ordinance that says... A new motion that the, I'm sorry, a new motion that, a new amendment. Okay. A new amendment that the ordinance, if you pass these amendments or not, it doesn't take effect for 120 days. Yeah.

Yes, you can introduce that at the committee. The basic item is on the agenda, and you've had a discussion. No, we haven't discussed those items yet. Well, you could discuss it. It's brought up, and so you could do that. It's like any item that comes before you. An item's on an agenda, and then discussion starts about that in an open session, and it's all done with the public's notice of what was going to happen. So, yes, you could do that.

Helped a little bit. I do know that based on my conversation with Attorney Moore, we can introduce new amendments while the discussion is open.

Point of order. I made a motion. Yes, you made a motion. I'm not making an amendment.

That it? We're making an amendment. It has to be an amendment for the ordinance to go into effect in 120 days.

Well, to postpone it, pause it. Yes. Yes.

So the ordinance will go into effect in 120 days. Instead of 20-day time frame that they legally have, it will go into effect 120 days. So that is the motion.

So I'm confused. It's a motion?

That's how you introduce amendments, by motions. Motion. Okay.

So, yes, I'm second. Any discussion? Wait. Did you want to make your comment first? Hold on. Okay. Discussion on the motion to amend that the ordinance take effect in 120 days.

Council Davila. Thank you, Madam President. I was actually trying to speak before the motion was made, but perhaps we may have a solution in which I think it will have the same effect if we retract this motion and we introduce a new motion in which we table this matter until the next meeting, until August 24th. That will give us roughly 30 days, and then we can properly put it on the agenda. I personally, although I understand what attorneys should have said, I would prefer to feel more comfortable that that new amendment is put out in the public. Because as I see this, as you said it before, we're speaking on two items. We're speaking on the hours of operation, and we're speaking on the fee. So I will personally feel more comfortable for clarity and any potential drama down the road if we say, okay, this is going to be part of the agenda and the discussion. So we're giving ourselves 30 days, and then... At that time, if it's the will of the council, if we want it to 120 days, then we do so. Actually, we end up with 150 days extra, I mean, on top, total. So that would be my suggestion. I don't know if they're willing to draw that motion, I will make my motion to table until the next meeting, which I believe is August 24th.

Okay, so the next meeting for a regular city council meeting is September. So it's September 8th, because the August 24th or 7th meeting is a hearings meeting. So the next regular meeting is September 8th.

Okay, so it will still achieve the same, in my opinion, it will achieve the same goal.

But what is going to happen during that time frame? Are we going to have subcommittee meetings? What are we doing? Is someone making a motion for it to go back to subcommittee again? Because... We're, hold on, we're waiting 30 days to bring it back and it's not really being sent anywhere. So we need to make a decision on what we're gonna do with this item. And I'm gonna go to Councilor Delgado and then I'll come back over to you, Councilor Martin, and then Councilor Perez.

Thank you, Madam President. A little confusion. I understand what we're trying to do here. We're trying to dispose of these two items. I think we've done a lot of subcommittee meetings, and I understand that we're trying to do this the right way. It almost sounds to me like it's not a subcommittee, but we need a special committee just on this so that we can put it on agenda and just talk about these items, whether it's Amendments here because I do support a postponement and so I think you know concert Lavar clip Bruce has done a lot of work on this, but I think this Needs time and I think we approve if we approve this which I'm generally in favor of the of the distance stuff But it still doesn't get to the heart of what the issue is and we're in the middle of the season The rollout was not great AND SO I THINK THIS GOING BACK TO SUBCOMMITTEE STUFF IS JUST GOING TO MAKE IT WAY MORE CONFUSING. SO WE NEED TO FIND A WAY WHETHER IT'S A SPECIAL MEETING JUST ON THIS, BUT THIS NEEDS TIME, AND I JUST THINK TO ECHO MY COMMENTS THERE. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LEGAL MECHANISM IS, KEN SHAY, BUT IT SOUNDS LIKE WE OBVIOUSLY CANNOT TALK ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN THESE TWO ITEMS UNLESS WE'RE ADDRESSING other amendments to the current ordinance?

No. We can add any amendments we want right now on this floor today. We can add any amendments. I'm not making suggestions. I'm just telling y'all what I heard from the public. No suggestions here, but from the door instead of the property line. All those types of amendments that we've been talking about in the subcommittee meeting can be made right now on the floor. We don't need a special meeting for that. We're here now. We've heard a lot. subcommittee we've heard a lot so any amendments they said once the ordinance is open I have that in writing to from Tom Moore attorney Moore because I wanted to know how this meeting is supposed to operate so any amendments that you all want to make we can make them right now on the floor so if we wanted to make an amendment to postpone this for 120 days What that 120 days is doing is saying the ordinance isn't going into effect for 120 days. That's what that amendment is doing.

I mean, that's what I want. I mean, I think there's other things that we haven't talked about, which is there are people that have been operating for three or four years who, if we pass these items, the original ordinance is still in effect. So these folks that have been operating for three or four years, they're not grandfathered in. There's a whole sort of things that we need to... really iron out. And so for me, I guess I'm trying to figure out whatever the right thing is to make an amendment to delay the effect that the original ordinance takes into place.

And again, if you wanted to make an amendment to grandfather end the businesses that are already in existence, that is an amendment you can make. It could be second. We could discuss it. We can add or deny based on city council vote. So I don't personally want to have a special meeting when we're here right now. But if that's the will of the body, I will go with the will of the body. Because all the amendments that you all are talking about that's in your head, we can amend right now. Councilor Cook-Bruce?

Thank you.

Oh, I'm sorry. Councilor Martin, then Councilor Cook-Bruce.

Thank you, Madam President. I was just thinking, should we just vote on tabling the two amendments for right now, and then one of our colleagues can make the motion to add the amendment for the postponement, just to go right at it? I mean, that seems to be the most logical step right now.

We can go right at it right now. The motion is on the floor. It's been seconded. We could talk about approving the ordinance and then... not going into effect for 120 days. The motion's on the floor for the amendment.

But we still have to dispose the previous two amendments?

But we don't have to do it in that order. They don't have to be done first.

Well, if that's the case, I mean, I also would support the postponement amendment just because also it's already the end of the summer. Like it's a lot of the rollouts wasn't well received and wasn't, you know, you know, properly done in the eyes of a lot of people. I just think with one month left, let's just call it a mulligan and have a fresh start for next summer. And that way when these amendments roll out, then that way we can roll them out in a more proper, more, you know, transparent manner. So I would also...

So there's a motion on the floor for the ordinance to not go into effect for 120 days. That is what we're discussing. Is there any... Councilor Click-Bruce, I know you had your hand up.

Thank you, Madam President. This is a point of clarification. If we were to... I think I'm answering my own question. I'm talking it out loud. But I'm going to say it anyway. If we were... Because I think you just clarified what you just said. The motion on the floor, if we were to postpone or suspend for 120 days... Just want to be clear that DPW, Health and Human Services, cannot fine or give violations to the food truck owners.

I'm not going to say Health and Human Services. It's totally different. That's a different ordinance. So, yes. Their Health and Human Service permit is not this ordinance. This is... Yeah, that's a different set of rules. But yes, it will postpone DPW from being able to give fines or fees or tell people to move for 120 days. Right.

Thank you for that clarification. Thank you.

Any other discussion on the motion that's on the floor to postpone the ordinance for 120 days? Do we know what date, can somebody chat GBT what that date is? 120 days from today? Y'all see I love chat GBT, I talk about it a lot. November, so it'll be a whole year that we've been discussing this ordinance by November. Oh, mm-hmm. I had not heard about the ordinance until early this year. It was on an agenda before.

Yeah. Last year.

But I hadn't heard. On November 13th, actually.

Oh, really? Yeah.

Because I looked all the dates up. So any other discussion on the 120-day effective date of the ordinance so we can dispose of that amendment? Okay. I'm trying to figure out what the wording would be for that amendment. No, I'm just trying to see where it falls in on the ordinance. So we, we, what we're doing is amending chapter two 79 of the ordinance of the revised ordinance of the city of Springfield. So I'm going to say Chapter 279 of the Revised Ordinance of the City of Springfield 1986 as amended as hereby further amended by amending Article 8 as follows. So Roman numeral V111 as follows. As section four, I don't know if you're getting this, Camille, but it's recorded. As section four that says, This ordinance will not be effective until 120 days after the passage of the amendment.

Madam president.

Yes.

Maybe in the how we Can we say we're still going to be up for discussion or amendments, so making amendments?

It's automatic. Okay.

Because we want to make sure it's not going to revert back to the 500.

Well, we haven't approved those yet. We still got to discuss those.

Gotcha.

But whatever we decide today is not going to go into effect to 120 days.

Gotcha. Thank you.

Okay. So, ready to vote? Okay, we're going to vote on the amendment I just read.

Upon information, Madam President, so I hear there's a new amendment that you just read. So we have three amendments. We have the time, we have the fee, and then we have the amendment about the moratorium of 120 days. Now...

So it's really four because there's three on here because the mobile food truck time... The time says if you're on a private property, you have to close at the time that that establishment closes. That can also be amended. I'm just telling y'all what's on this paper, okay?

So, what is going to go into effect in 120 days are this amendment or the entire ordinance that we passed a month ago? So... Because this is going to be part of that ordinance.

Yeah, once we dispose of these, we're still going to discuss the other amendments that that we propose. So we're only approving one amendment right now. We still got to discuss the time, the fee. We got grandfather, councilor Hurst. One moment. He might be able to clarify.

What I'm saying is if we approve this, this amendment you just read, this whole thing would become one package. it will become one package, right? So if we vote everything in, so my question is, are we then saying that we're delaying 120 days?

Well, right now we're saying we're delaying 120 days from the old one because we haven't made any other amendments.

I have no answer to that. Yeah, because we haven't made these amendments yet. May I ask a question to the attorney, if I may? I don't know if you heard me. I just want to say I'm just doing a point of clarification and a number that precedent explain that just make extra sure so if we approve the motion to amend a moratorium adding a moratorium for 120 days that motion that new amendment is going to become a part of the package that we have in front of us right and so my question is that if we approve these amendments here Are we putting a moratorium of 120 days on this amendment or, because this becomes part of the original ordinance, were we in essence delaying the entire ordinance that we voted a month ago?

Because we haven't voted on these yet.

Right. So this isn't part of the package yet. Right. So the 120 days would go to the... Right.

I think if folks want to include the amendments, we probably should withdraw this motion and then vote on the two amendments that we have. And if they pass, then they will be part of the law that we passed previously. And then you can vote on the 120 days.

That's what I originally said, but I don't think I was saying it clear. Councilor Govan, do you mind withdrawing the motion for now and then reintroducing it after we discuss the amendments that's on the agenda?

So are we not going to talk to the food truck owners about this or the community?

We can talk to them. We can keep amending. I just want everybody to know we're the city councilor. We make the law. So we can amend this ordinance as many times as we want. I know.

But all I'm saying is like what I think Councilor Click-Bruce said, and I think Councilor Delgado said the same thing. In this 120 days, These amendments, if we vote on them tonight, maybe we find from this organization that that's not what other cities do and that's not what best practices is. It might need to be 300 feet instead of 500 or 200. Or it might be, you know, 2 o'clock in the morning, like the bars close or something like that. I don't know. So I'm just saying I feel like we're going to do this. And then I'm hoping that in between this 120 days, we will be having meetings with neighbors because we want to. I haven't heard any complaints from anyone about the food trucks, which is what I have. I heard you say that, but it was the impetus of the need for an ordinance. And you heard two complaints I heard. Someone else somewhere else heard one. So I feel like the reason I wanted to see if we could have a postponement so that we can talk to people and listen to them and see maybe we need a different amendment of 200 or 300 feet. You know what I mean? So I don't know if it's... I feel like it's... It's convoluted and we're complicating it too much.

Thank you, Madam President. I think either way, we've got to dispose of these ordinances, these amendments either way. So we can vote these amendments down if we don't like them. But these are what's on the agenda. You're introducing a new amendment. So I would prefer if we dispose of these, if we're going to vote them down.

Can we table them?

If we're going to take... Okay. All right.

Counselor, I don't got I hear what we're trying to do I think we should we should withdraw the previous motion so we can vote on these items as Counselor Hearst mentioned and so that we can then include them on a package to then postpone it So so I'm for voting on these like and getting them out of the way But first the motion will have to be withdrawn then I will

Withdraw my motion until later.

Thank you, Madam President.

Council Perez? Yes. So, on the amendments that we have on the floor, the two amendments, if we, if she withdraw her motion, from the floor, whatever comes out of that amendment, it goes into effect for the 120 days, correct? Yes, yes. Okay, I just want that to be clear.

Well, she'd have to make the motion again.

Again, but it will go into effect in the 120 days.

Yes, so we still have time for discussions, community meetings, whatever we need to have, we have until November. Thank you. Okay, you're welcome. Okay, let's talk about... If you all don't mind, amendment number one, which is... Does everybody have the packet? Does everybody have this? Is Daisy here? Can you make copies of this for everyone, please? So they can...

Madam President, I think we're trying to achieve the same goal here. I think that perhaps we should be clear that if we are going to vote on these amendments, that we are introducing the new amendment for 120 days separate. Because we can split it. We don't have to vote this in the whole package. But I think that's to be made clear. Because down the road, I don't want this body to be hit with an open meeting law violation with somebody trying to be crafty and...

So I have... So we can introduce a new amendment. We can introduce a new amendment. My mic wasn't on.

I don't know if you need me to repeat that.

No, I heard you. We can introduce a new amendment not attached to these amendments for the 120 days. And you guys can make a motion to table them. You can make a motion to approve them. You can make any motion that you would like to make. And then for the 120 days, instead of adding section four, I'm gonna do like a 1B or something like that. So it's not attached to these amendments. Okay, that makes sense? I'm just gonna wait for you all to read the amendments. All right, so if we can just focus on the First Amendment with the hours of operation for food trucks within the public way, 6 a.m. to 12 a.m., no sale or giving away of any products may occur outside of those hours. You all can read all that. And then two says the same thing, except if food truck is on a private property, they must also comply with the hours stated in Section 279-47-E, however, cannot operate past any hours of the primary business on the property. That's the two hour amendments. And then amendment three is mobile food truck vendors will not be able to be located within 200 feet of any brick and mortar food establishment properly permitted and regulated within the city. This does not pertain to convenience stores, gas stations, grocery stores, unless indoor seating for food customers is provided. A mobile food truck will be allowed to operate on a parcel that sells prepared food and may, however, have indoor seating for consumption. However, a signed letter from the property owner and business operator, if two different entities, will be required as part of the application process. So I think This clarifies because some people thought all brick and mortars, but it doesn't pertain to convenience stores, gas station, grocery stores, et cetera. So those are the three amendments on the floor. How would the council, any discussion? Councilor Govan.

I would like to make a motion to table those three amendments until the 120 days is up. And then we can have during this time, we can talk about, and talk to the people because I feel like I would like to ask the food truck vendors what they think about this right have we talked about that we haven't talked to the food truck vendors. Not really not all of them and this organization that recently came in that's a national food truck organization. I think would have more information for us. Because I feel like we're having limited information. That's the motion I would like to make so that we could continue working on this. Because this is not something that I think is helpful. Because we don't know what's 200 feet right now on Bay Street. You know what I'm talking about. He's within 200 feet of a restaurant. but he opens after the restaurant closes. So there's nuances that we need to look at. And I know that we're not going to answer every question, but I think we need to be as thorough as possible. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you. There's a motion on the floor to table, seconded by Council Perez. Any discussion on the motion? Councilor Hurst?

Just really quickly, even if we table this for 120 days, we can still make as many amendments within those 120 days as we want. So even if we vote for this amendment and folks don't like it and they want to change it to 1 o'clock or they want to change it back to 9 o'clock, then we can still put it on the agenda again and vote to amend it. So just a point of information from my colleagues.

Thank you. Yes, we can change ordinances as city councilors as many times as we want, as long as we disclose it to the public within the open meeting law time frame. So, Councilor Click-Bruce.

Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilor Govan, for your comments. I just want to... So, we did have meetings, and we tried to listen to... the food truck owners. One of the things we were hearing were the distance. I know we need some clarification from regarding whether it's from the door or whatever the case may be. I think more discussion is definitely needed, but I tried to address some of the pressing concerns and the things that we heard in our meetings, the folks that showed up being the food truck owners. So I just wanted to get that on the record because we were listening. We did hear, looking to work with the food truck owners. and to make sure, you know, it's fair. So I just want to say we have listened to them. And again, I want to reiterate, that was one of the concerns of the feet and distance from regarding the 500 feet. So I just want, those are my comments. Thank you.

Thank you. There's a motion on the floor to table item, these amendments, I guess, until September 8th meeting. So we have time to make changes by then.

Counselor. Just a point of information. So does that mean the 120 days are off the table?

The 120 days is still until November. So we could change it again in October if we want to. And we could change it again in November if we want to.

I don't understand that. But if we table, what are we tabling? We're tabling... Everything including the motion?

No, not the 120 days, just the three items on the agenda. That's the motion, to table these three.

Correct. Yeah, but it's just a little while ago.

And then she's going to make another motion that the ordinance doesn't go into effect for 120 days. Okay. So really, the 120 days is going to be on the current ordinance because nothing else is changing if we table this. So the current ordinance, 500 feet, time to 11, all that, that is what's gonna be tabled for 120 days, because we're not making any of these changes right now, right? I can wait until November to put these back on the agenda. if that's the will of the body, if you need more discussion time. But we can also have a discussion to see if we talk to the food truck ordinances in enough time to see when to put it back on the agenda. I just really don't want it to go past the November date without some changes being made. Because the ordinance is tabled for 120 days based on when she makes the motion. Yes.

So, Madam President, I'm looking to vote this. Either way, it's my anniversary. I'm trying to get home to my wife. I'll be more than willing to host as many meetings as we need to have. I've been proactive with it. I have no problem with hosting the meetings to get more information from our food truck owners and anybody else who wants to be a part of the meeting. So I'll be more than willing, Madam President. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Klick-Bruce. Happy anniversary, you're here with us. Councilor Perez, and this is gonna be the final speaking that you and Councilor Govan are having on this topic, and then we're gonna continue on with the meeting.

It's gonna be real quick. I think that we are hearing this predicament because we did listen to the people. And there has been some new introductory when it comes to the handling of the food trucks. And one of the issues that I was concerned after analyzing and assessing all the situation We also need to discuss and further notice in the 120 days the allowances of X amount of food trucks. I mean, all that came out about what I was hearing through the process. So I think for the records, we have listened to the people. And that's why we just reintroduced this. It was not that we would neglect for a city council. and we did not listen to the people. I just want to put that on record. We did, and that's why here tonight we're discussing coming back to the table. Thank you, Madam President.

Thank you, Councilor Perez. Any other questions on the motions to table items one, two, and three? Seeing none, Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Santanella.

Yes.

Yes. Councilor Martin.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Perez.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Brown. Absent, Councillor Caban. Yes. Yes, Councillor Walsh. Absent, Councillor Ernst.

No.

No, Councillor Davila. Yes. Yes, Councillor Fenton. Absent, Councillor Delgado.

Yes.

Yes, Councillor Clipp-Bruce. Yes. Yes, Councillor Edwards. Yes. Yes, Councillor Whitfield.

Yes, item approved. Items approved.

Council Govan. And now I do want to make a motion to postpone the beginning of that ordinance until 120 days.

Second.

Any discussion on the motion to postpone Chapter 279 of the revised ordinance of the City of Springfield in 1986 and So postpone it for 120 days from today's approval, not from the date that the ordinance was originally approved. Counselor Dabla.

Madam President, just a quick question for Attorney Shea, if I may, regarding this question. How are you doing? This is a good question. So if we approve, did this go into effect right now or 20 days later? The motion to create a moratorium for 120 days, would that be in effect if it passes right now or in another 20 days?

If you're passing the motion now for something to take effect 120 days from now, then it would It would take, if you pass it tonight, to take effect in 120 days.

No, no, no, no. Sorry, maybe I misspoke. So we pass a motion right now, an amendment, for a moratorium of 120 days.