--------- The city council committee on ordinances legislation will be called to order. It is 501 on June 23rd. Cler call the role please. >> Councel Kadim >> here. Councel Daniel >> here. >> Vice President Dion >> here. >> Councelor Pere >> here. >> Chair Reposa >> here. Pursuant to the open meeting law, any person may make an audio video
recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and deemed acknowledged and permissible. Item number one is citizens input in which we have none. Item number two is the minutes for the
May 6, 2026 meeting. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve made by council Canuel, second by vice president Dion. Any discussion? All those in favor? Any opposed? The eyes have it. Item 2B is the minutes for the May 26, 2026 meeting. >> Motion to approve. >> Second. >> Motion made by councel, second by vice
president Dion. Any discussion? All those in favor? >> Any opposed? The eyes have it. Item number three is proposed ordinance traffic handicap parking referred to the committee on 692026. Pitman Street East 110 110 ft south of Webster. Richmond Street West 196 ft
north of Cambridge. Smith Street West 268 ft south of Warren Street. Stanley Street north 45 ft east of Madison Street. Wade Street south 80 feet west of Fifth Street. Woodman Street north 292 feet west of King Street. Director
of traffic and parking. You want to come down and join us for a few moments? Hello, Miss MacArthur. >> Stephanie MacArthur, director of traffic and parking. >> Any questions from the committee? >> Motion for emergency preamble. >> Second. >> Motion for emergency preamble made by
councelor Kade. Second by councel. Roll call. >> On the emergency preamble, um councelor Kadim, >> yes. >> Councelor Canuel, >> yes. Vice President Dion, >> yes. >> Councelor Ferrer, >> yes. >> Chair Repzo, >> yes.
>> Motion passes. >> Motion to pass through all readings. >> Second. >> Motion to pass through all readings made by councelor Kadim. Second by councelor Canuel. Any discussion? All those in favor? >> Any opposed? The eyes have it. >> Item number four is a proposed ordinance traffic miscellaneous referred to the
committee on 52626 and 6926. Section one, parking prohibited during certain hours on Hyliff Street East, 763 feet north, Monday through Friday, 7 am to 3 p.m. Hy Street West, 763 feet
north, Monday through Friday, 7 to 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. Locus Street North, 658 ft east, Monday through Friday, 7 a.m. to 3 p.m. And Locust Street, 658T East, Monday through Friday, 7:00 a.m. to 300 pm. >> I have a question.
>> Yes, Vice President Dion. Well, she can go first. It's been >> council prayer. >> Is this just because of the school for diamond? >> Yep. It's for the no school. >> Should it be from September to June? >> I mean, that is something that if the ordinance committee wants to
>> because in the summertime they're not back and forth. I get the traffic. >> Yeah, absolutely. It's mainly for because of the placement of the new school being so far back at that [clears throat] bend at Hyestin and Locust, right? >> What's going to happen is the teachers park out on the street. So, if they're parking out in that portion, the buses are not going to be able to make it out
where they're going to be entering and exiting. >> I know Superintendent uh Bentley >> has told teachers not to park there and students not to park there because it's an easier way when they get out of school to run to their car and >> and they're more concerned with parents doing drop off and pickup where the school's going to be placed at that
point. >> All right. I just think if you did it during the school year for or do you just think that people will get accustomed to it and never back there that if we take I'm sure I'm sure that it's it's mainly for the teachers and the parents. So it's not going to be for
the neighborhood people. So even if the signage does read September through, you know, June, I don't think it's going to make a difference for the neighborhood per se. Um so we can we can absolutely put that on the signage. That's not a problem. Okay. >> I would second that. I make a motion we amend that to have from June 30th to
September 1st. >> I would do September 1st to June 30th. >> September to June to the through the summer. >> Sure. >> Yeah. Or Yeah, we can do September 1st to June 1st. >> So, not just the times that you can pos the times you can. >> Okay. I agree.
>> So, motion made to amend section one to include >> from September to June. These are the ordinances >> from September 1st to June 30th. >> Yes. >> Made second. >> Second. Second. Discussion on the
amendment. >> Roll call. >> Roll call on the amendment. Councelor Kadim. >> Yes. >> Councelor Kanual. >> Yes. >> Vice President Dion. >> Yes. >> Councelor Pereira. >> Yes. >> Uh Chair Ruposa. >> No.
>> Motion passes. Okay. Further motion on section one. >> Motion adopt. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion [clears throat] to adopt as amended. >> Yep. Second >> made by council Kim. Second by Vice President Dion. Any discussion? All those in favor? >> Any opposed? The eyes have it. Section
two. 15minute parking South Main Street East 76 feet north of Sle Street. Monday through Saturday 6:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. Sunday 7:00 a.m. to 900 pm. Miss MacArthur, can you speak on this, please? >> Yeah. So, this is for 1552 South Main
Street, AP Convenience Store. Uh, so time signage outside of the store. >> Vice President Dia. >> So, Sunday 7 a.m. to 900 p.m. [clears throat] Oh, okay. I see. Um, how many 76 feet allows for how many
cars? So, we usually do about 20 feet per space, but because of where the space is at. Yeah. >> It's not a that's not a at that point in the street, not really congested. It's before the bank and
>> Yeah. So, >> yeah. >> Okay. Yeah, I don't see a problem with that. Yeah. I >> um councils, it would be appropriate to make a motion to split these up into sections, please. >> Motion. Second >> motion made by councel annual. Second by
vice president Dion to split out sections one, two, and three. All those in favor? >> I oppose. The eyes have it. >> Motion to adopt section two. >> Motion to adopt section two made by Vice President Dion. >> Second. >> Second by council. Any discussion? All those in favor?
>> Any opposed? The eyes have it. Section three is handicap parking removals. Abian street west 30t south of Downing Street. Bowen Street West 160 ft south of Charles Street. Brow Street north 143 feet east of Fifth. Center Street North
147 ft west of South Main. Kellogg Street West 392 ft north of Hamlet. Lewis Street east 30t north of Slade. Merchant Street north 27 ft west of 18th Street. Montgomery Street south 111 ft east of Robeson Street. North Main
Street West 20t south of Weaver Street. North Main Street west 144 feet north of Mariner Street. Excuse me. North [clears throat] Underwood Street west 206 feet north of Weedo Street. Oxford Street west 143 ft south of Warren
Street. Quesan Street west 255 ft south of County Street. South Main Street west 283 ft south of Woodman Street and Walnut Street north 127 feet west of Lynen Street. >> Motion to pass through ordinance first through first reading. Motion to pass
through. First reading made by Vice President Dion, second by councelor Pereira. Any discussion? >> Just section three. >> Section three. >> Any discussion? All those in favor? >> Any oppos? The eyes have it. >> Thank you, Miss MacArthur. >> Have a great night. >> Do we need to um also pass section one
and two through three as amended? >> We did that. We did that. >> That is okay. Item number five on our agenda this evening is the proposed ordinance to amend 62-2C solid waste collection disposal generally speaking referred to the
committee on 69 20226. I will invite attorney Thomas Town to the table and Mr. Alivera please. And if the city administrator wants to come and join us feel free.
Are we missing J? >> I don't think so. [clears throat] >> Hiding over there. [cough] >> Welcome folks. If you could introduce yourselves to the committee please. >> Al all of our director of city operations. Matt Thomas, special counsel for the city. >> Ann O'Neal Soua, interimm city
administrator. >> Thank you, Attorney Thomas. Welcome. If you could uh speak to the committee on this proposed ordinance, please. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and through you to the committee. So, before you, you have an amendment uh to chap to section 62 C of the city ordinance. Now, as you know,
we've we're in the process of uh negotiating and executing a new solid waste contract for the next two years with an option of one additional year. Um and we've anticipated coming down with significant ordinance changes in
whole and in mass um that respond to some of the concerns that the council's raised over the past years. We're bringing this down by itself because this affects the contract a little bit. So um over the years there's been much debate as to whether five and six unit
residentials are really residential or whether they're commercial. And that's happened with the the larger units. What we're proposing is to amend the ordinance um and this is the language that's different. It changes it to to four dwelling units per parcel as shown
on the city of Fall River Assesses map as amended as opposed to the current language which says six units up to six units. So what does that mean practically? Well, let's assume for the sake of argument that the average person uh
creates about 1,800 pounds of solid waste a year. That's the national average. Of that, about 600 pounds goes into recycling. About 1,200 pounds goes into disposal. If we assume three persons per unit, because some units
only have one people, some only have five. There are 700 six-unit residentials in the city, of which about 75% receive solid waste collection from the city. There are 305 units of which
75 receive solid waste. If we convert to tons because that's a big easier number. The city disposes 30,000 tons a year of solid waste. The six units by being pulled out of this uh ordinance would account for
2,800 tons of recycling, 6,000 tons of disposal. the five units by coming out of the ordinance would account for 985 tons of recycling, 2,000 tons of disposal. So just in the fives and sixes, we're
talking about 3,700 tons of recycling and about 8,000 tons of solid waste. The way the ordinance is written though, it's by assessor's parcel. And so we have these things called they're classified as 109's, two buildings to one property. There were four of them
that would no longer qualify. Those four are located at 70 790 Child Street. There is a three family and a six family on that property under common ownership. 286 Pine Street, there's a three and a six on the same property under common
ownership. 2119 Kilborn, there's a three and a six under common ownership. And 19 Danforth, there are actually two six units on that property under common ownership. Those account for about 70 tons of disposal and about 34 tons of
recycling. So at the end of the day by passing this amendment we would be reducing and in an estimated fashion because you know the proof is in the pudding so to speak or here it's in the the bins. Um
we would be reducing about 8,000 tons of solid waste which if you consider we dispose of 30,000 tons. That's about 26% of what we're disposing. We'd also be re reducing about 3,800 tons of recycling.
Now, we don't know this for exact these are estimates based on what's happening. And so, how would this work? The current the contract we're negotiating has a transition provision in it that says they are to continue to collect sixes
until 30 days after the ordinance is amended. um in which case that gives us permission and time to notify all of them and get them on private um disposal. It also we've also looked at it from an
enforcement side. As you know, we've always had challenges on recycling on Tuesdays and Thursdays. Those are the days that go to Lewon Street. Monday, Wednesday, Friday is direct to zero waste in Rochester. What we have found through beginning to cross reference, and this is something
we're starting to do, is that probably 50 to 60% of our violations in contamination are coming out of fives and sixes. Now, I'm not trying to cast dispersions on them. It's because a in a lot of instances, they're absentee owners and the tenants there just are
not abiding by what should happen. It makes it tough because we notify and we cite the owner. The owner's got to pass that down to the tenants. it's among other tenant landlord tenant problems they have. But this will also help us with our enforcement.
Um just as an aside, the contract negotiations are going very well. We've met twice. I anticipate having final drafts to be signed by the mayor and the uh corporation council probably by the end of this week. Um, we're basically basic right now the discussions have
been on minor technical issues here and there, but all in all, it's going well. It'll be a two-year contract with a one-year option, and then hopefully during that period of time, we'll been able to uh restructure how solid waste
is reviewed internally. We'll have statistics to go out on a more informed basis, and the enforcement and education will have gotten better, too. It's been a long path that we've been at this now for about five years. >> About for me, >> well, for you, but for me, five years.
And I would like on behalf of the administration to thank the counselors who have been part of the process. Um, especially councelor Dion who was on the selection committee. Were you on the selection committee? And councelor Pereira who was on the selection committee >> committ and on the solid ways committee. And we appreciate this. This is it's one
of the basic services that a government is supposed to provide. when you really think about it's public safety and public health and this is the public health side. So we don't believe that the amendment is going to adversely affect anybody really that badly in a way that didn't happen already when we
already went down from the eights to the sixes and we went and uh stopped collecting the commercials. Um we don't really see a major reduction in the cost of collection because you still have to drive down the street. we will see a
reduction in the cost of disposal associated with it. Um I can answer any questions you have. >> Vice President DM >> two things. So my first question is when you say um per parcel
um offer on Roberson Street but it's I can't think of the street that goes across that it's on the corner of I can't think the name escapes me at this moment. Piff, Robersonson and and Tmont Jacuma Tmont. >> Tmont >> the four the four sets of units. Correct.
>> Those are all on separate apostles. >> Now it was my understanding and I could be wrong >> because I specifically looked at that one. >> Yeah. [snorts] But it's my understanding and I could be wrong that somehow they either there's something that all of those units let's call them
or buildings um I don't know if it's the sewer line it's something they share in common that they cannot be split up right >> so if somebody wanted to subdivide they can't >> right so the issue we needed to draw and I know what you're talking >> or there's some form of easement
>> and I will take another look at that one okay specifically because when I drive up Robersonson Street, I see that. Yeah. >> Okay. And I I wonder about that. >> The issue is we needed some way to demarcate the parcels. The assessor's maps are the way we normally do it. Now,
you could own two assessors maps side by side and they're not merged. They're separate ownership. And I think that's what the situation is there on Roberson. And so, we're doing it by parcels. And that's why the 109's get brought under it where you've got two on the same property. Even if they share utilities
and things like that, it's separate ownership still. They may share they may have easements that benefit each other, but theor theoretically under the law, it's still separate ownership and the separate part taxable parcels. If I was to apply for an abatement on one, it wouldn't necessarily get me an abatement
on the other one. I'd have to treat as four separate abatements. We're using the assessor's maps because that's what we're basing our taxation on. That's what we're basing everything on. It's a a good rule to follow um in order to create new parcels. The assessors can do it, but they need the
input from engineering. Um so it's it's it's a good bright line rule. >> Yeah. I I would appreciate though if you would take one. Um >> and I'm not believe me saying you're wrong at all because I have not honestly looked at it in a long time. But I was I've always been under the impression
that it was all owned by the same person, but they may be >> entities, but it may be four separate assessors parcels, >> right? So, it's not by common ownership. And the reason I didn't go with common ownership is you could have I could own a house and my wife and I could own the
property next door in a trust. Okay? Then we're getting into all these bad these it's much too complicated to figure out what it is by doing it by what's on the ground. It's a lot easier >> and so I will look at it though. I promise. >> No, it makes sense to me. But yeah, I would appreciate that. You know what? It
is what it is. I'll look at it. Um, and then my second thing is I think [clears throat] and I know it's not there's one woman in particular when I say this it's not popular with her and I understand it but where six families are going going to be
taken off of the trash role and nobody's going to have an option they're going to have to privatize. Um, I would like to again say that I would support owner occupied to be excluded [snorts]
because you don't have the absentee landlord issue. You have somebody who's on the premises who's responsible and who we easily can if they mess up we can we can let them know if they mess up a second we can start you know institute a third strike rule.
>> So I can I can look at that. Um, we are the third strike rule. We are going to be coming back to you where if you get three violations in a 12-month period, you're off. >> You lose your ability to get solid waste. We have to put some teeth into this. >> Uh, if we have any hope of trying to get
this under control. Uh the concern I have with that and we've looked at this uh many many years ago when councelor Kadim was on the other side of the table. We looked at this with building blocks and we're looking at absentee landlords versus landlords that live
there on the property. It is very difficult under the law to make a distinction that is not a prejuditial distinction if somebody owns it or if they live on the property. And that's why if we were to accept it out based on somebody being there, we would open up
ourselves to an argument from an absentee landlord who says, "I have a manager who lives on there, who lives in the first unit, and they act as the super for the building, and they're just as good as if I lived there. They're better than if I lived there." So, I clearly understand that. I would tend to
suggest that we not go that way only because I think it would open us up to a lot of other issues. Um, most of the places that have reduced numbers down haven't really had an exception for that. >> Okay. >> As much as you want to help the people that have bought a house, they have
their family living in it. They're doing the right thing. >> Residents who support the city, etc. >> And I can clearly understand that. I just think that it's very difficult to enforce something like that in a way that doesn't violate statutes. >> Okay. Thank you. With that, I yield. [clears throat] >> And just a question to you, uh, counselor, as far as the teeth to that
amendment, when do we expect that? I would anticipate probably in August. >> Okay. And are you writing that ordinance? >> Yes, I am, sir. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Well, let me ask you with input from [clears throat] the law department. I mean, and everybody else that's given us ideas.
Some of them have come from the counselors. So, there has been stuff in there. And you'll see it's going to be a little bit different, >> but I am writing it. >> Thank you, Council Per. >> I'm not in favor of it. >> Of what? >> Of doing this for six families, five families, and six families. Okay. So, I
have a single family home. I have a two family home. I pay my taxes. My trash gets picked up. She's got a five family home. You've got a six family home. You got to pay. You pay your taxes, but you've got to pay for your trash, too. I don't think that's equitable. I don't
think that's fair. I think the bottom line is, and nobody's going to like it, but I'm going to say it. We need to do something with trash citywide. the city's budget cannot afford. What's the budget that What's your contract that you're working on? I heard it's between
9 and 11 million. >> It's in that range. It all depends. You have to remember, council, if I can answer respond to that. >> The last contract we got was 10 years ago and it was written for pay as you throw. >> I agree. >> The day the city went from pay as you throw, if I was Mr. Marula, I would have
walked in and said, "I'm done. I default the contract." You defaulted the contract. the numbers have changed radically. >> And he didn't >> and he didn't. The issue that we're facing in the increased numbers is if you look at the um the um wages the um
>> prevailing wage numbers that were attached to that contract 10 years ago and you're going to look at the ones that are attached now, you're seeing postcoid sticker shock. >> I agree. >> Okay. Now on that point though, I understand what you're saying. It doesn't seem fair. >> No, it doesn't. But if you have an
8-unit, if you have a 12 unit, if you have an apartment building, you're still paying your taxes and you're still providing solid waste for yourself. If you have a condominium, single family condominium in a condo association, you're still providing your own you're
paying a a fee for for solid waste collection. Oh, so >> if you own a condo, you're paying a fee, a monthly fee for everything. For somebody to come and take care of the lawn, for somebody to shovel the snow, >> and for somebody to pick up the trash. Yeah. You pay for everything. That's what a
>> condo fee is. So, if you don't want to do that, you don't buy a condo >> because you know that that's in there. I just think >> this is unfair to me. I like the three strikes and you're out. Whoever it is, if [clears throat] you're not putting your trash out the way you're supposed
to, you get three notices. After the third notice, they empty the trash and they take the barrel. Then you have to go and get private. And if you go and get private, now you can say to your tenants, and I no longer own a six family. I did, but I don't own it. So, I'm not fighting. I just want to say
that because I'll have somebody on Facebook saying she owns a six family. No, I don't. However, I I just think it's not fair. Do you really want to live in a six family or would you prefer to live in a two family with less people or a one family? You know what I mean?
And their rent's going to go up if the landlord has to pay for trash disposal. You don't think that the tenants are going to take a hit on that? They are. >> And our tenants are taking a hit even though our rents are still lower than
New Bedford and and Lowel, etc. But I just think there's a better way to do this. Either we do this or we look at what it is for trash. I was in the Azoros, a little tiny section, Agora, small, maybe there's 800 people living there. They pay for water, they pay for
trash. Every community around us does that. I'm not saying gouge people, but if this is a problem, then the whole community needs to solve this problem. And it is a problem. And Morola didn't do anything until he they came in and
wanted more money on their contract when they went to uh what is it up in New Bedford? >> Capital. >> What is that? >> Capital. >> No, not Crapo. When they went to Crapo because they were going to Republic right in F River on Airport Road, a
truck would go by, dump, come back. Now they have to go up to Crapo, come back. They had to buy another truck or two to keep it going where they have trash out by five o'clock. I mean, I've been in talking to trash people for a long time. But we need to bite the bullet and do
something. We This city budget cannot afford to take $11 million out of the budget just for trash. I mean, my colleagues talk about things like our clerks don't get paid enough, >> you know, but we're spending all this
money. I just don't think this is fair. I get it. >> However it goes, it goes. But the call I received, and I think councelor Dion probably received the same one. A woman who lives in a six family, every unit has one person. She puts out one barrel
for trash and one recycling every week. So, is it going to be cheaper for her to get somebody to come and pick it up? >> I would argue she's the exception, not the rule. >> Well, maybe she is the exception. and we can't write an ordinance based on we try to account for the exception. Let me
just respond to two points. You're well within your rights to take your position. It's fine. I don't think it's unfair. I think it's a cost of owning a property. Secondly, your point about the Azors. Statistically, Europe produces per person half as much solid waste as
America does. We're a disposable society. >> We are. And we have been trying and we will continue to try. Working with the schools, working with everybody else for waste diversion. Your point about it being a budget buster is well taken. Solid waste is going to be the budget
buster >> in going into the future for every municipality. If you look at New Bedford and Dartmouth, they're fortunate to have Crapo Hill. >> Yep. >> But there there are not other communities that are like that. >> So this is going to be something that's going to cost. There will be some issues. We can always revisit this if we
have to. Um, I really do strongly suggest that we've given this a lot of thought. This is not a bareborn notion by any means. And so I would strongly suggest that it makes sense to do it and work through it and try to deal with issues in another way.
Well, I'm more from the then the the point of if people are not disposing things the way that they should and they're getting cited, then remove you empty the trash that third time and remove the barrier, [clears throat] then they have to go do it. So, everybody is
being treated the same way. You know, I have a single family home and what if I'm living with, >> you know, three other I mean, I have somebody who the daughter and three children moved in with the parents. They want another barrel. Oh, they really can't get a barrel or whatever. One of
the kids is in diapers. But if they're not recycling, they're going to get penalized and the barrel will be removed. Yes, there are little incidents here and there and every every detail is different. But I say if you're not following the rules, then there's a
consequence. And I think that's what's wrong with society. Rules are broken and very seldom do we get the consequences that people need to get. I just don't think it's fair. And I would rather have it where they're penalized that way. >> Gotcha. >> Just my thought. And also, we need to do something with trash.
>> Yeah. >> With that, I yield. >> Vice President Z. >> [clears throat] >> So I guess my question would be 10 years ago and I I to and to a certain point I agree with you. I do to a certain point
but I think I'm also looking at it as 10 years ago what percent of the multifamilies were owned by people who lived in the city versus today. There's been a big move today. We know that people from outside have come in and scooped up the property. The properties have gone the values have gone through
the roof because of it with 79 coming. train being here. Um, I don't think we're in the same situation. I don't know what the percentage is. I don't know what the percentages percentage of absentee landlords is. And I don't know what the percentage of conglomerates who
have come in and bought multiple multifamilies is. But I think that is kind of like um what has shifted the conversation. Um these people all from out of town and don't care. they're just wor they just want to come in, make
their money, get their rents, and everybody's happy. And I think for me that has shifted it and does make a difference. Um, you know, again, it's it's tough decisions are what's going to solve it and what's going to fix it. Um,
I mean, I personally would have no problem with paying X number of dollars a month. It's cheaper than getting a private hauler. I I can guarantee that. But um you know we we work with what we have I suppose. But with that I yield. >> Council Kadim,
>> can you just the the only question I have is the savings. So the 8,000 uh tons in trash and the 3,000 tons of recycling. What's what's that equate to for a savings? >> Fig about $125 a ton in disposal. >> Mhm. >> For the first year, that number is 125
for the first year, 13250 for the second year, 143 for the third year. That includes recycling too or >> No, that's only on the solid waste. Um the recycling is 115 for the first year unless it's contaminated. So we're we're
actually on the cusp of not having to do Tuesday, Thursday the way we've been doing. If Tuesday, Thursday recycling is 135 a ton. Uh Monday, Wednesday, Friday is 115. So, um, it's 115 and then I think it
goes up to 120 and then 126 I think is what the numbers are. >> So, it's about a million dollars. So, >> just about >> it's it's not ins. >> Yeah. >> It's not an insubstantial number and it
also will help us on the enforcement side because as we're seeing and I'm not trying to be porative against people that own sixes or fives. I grew up in a multi myself when I was younger. It's just we're seeing it happen more and more that the enforcement issues have
been difficult there. And [clears throat] you know, I'm not saying that the best way to enforce is just to stop doing it, get rid of them, but it will help us. And you know, we can always revisit these things, but right now I really think it makes sense.
>> So from the I think my colleague had mentioned 9 to1 million for the cost of the contracts. Mhm. >> And that's annually. >> Well, yeah. So, the thing is this, the way this contract is bid, >> you've got um and I apologize, I don't have those numbers with me, but you've
got four things that they're providing. They're providing solid waste collection and disposal. They're providing recycling collection and disposal. They're providing bulky waste collection and disposal. And they're providing yard waste, bulking yard waste collection, disposal. So, the collection pieces are
all fixed costs. the disposal pieces are all based off of whatever that cost is and that changes from year to year. Um, so I apologize council. I don't have that number off the top of my head. >> No, but I mean it's just >> you're in the right the quick math between the two assuming that it's not
contaminated about $1.3 million. So that comes off so annually 1.3 million. So you're knocking that 9 to1 million by 1.3 just by reducing it from six families down to a four family. Exactly. And the contract
is written such that they recognize that there that there is waste diversion efforts happening and waste minimization e efforts happening and we are not guaranteeing them a disposal price. Um the collection price isn't going to go down because they still have to drive
down the street but they will not charge us more on the disposal side. They will not and what they've done is it's a two with a one-year option. for the one-year option. They've already secured the disposal costs and their contract on that is that if the city picks up the
option for that third year, they have to deliver it to Republic and this is their cost. So, we we have fixed costs throughout this as best as we can um for right now. But yeah, you're right. That's that's a that's pretty good estimate. >> Okay, I yield. Thank you, >> Council Per. >> I have another question.
>> Sure. If people are going to have to get privates, is there going to be something in the ordinance where the city is divided in four sections where these trucks are going to come at certain times to certain areas or are they just going to run free throughout the city? >> No. No. That would be between them and
the private sector if they were going to get privates. >> If there were an ordinance in place privates pick up the same day as the city pick up the same day as the city now. So >> are the are privates going to know that? Well, that's why we've got the 30 days.
>> That's the idea is that as you go through your process, we'll be working our way through this. >> Okay. >> And if we have to delay the implementation by a little bit to make sure that it's implemented in a way that works, we'll delay it. >> Point of information, if I can help out on this one,
>> council vice president >> because I have had so when we when this whole debacle, that's what I call it started 10 years ago. I switched to private and I was like I am not getting off of private until the city straightens everything out because so I did do that and you can choose whatever
company you want. At the time I chose it was Cleanway. It's not Cleanway any longer. They've been bought out so I can say that. >> Um and yes, they they pick up the same day as as as um as the city. >> Um and they've actually been very good. But I can tell you that whatever the
city would charge if they chose to say per unit everybody pays x amount of dollars would be far less than what you pay a private. Um they're very good. Um they've since been bought out. They operate on a different holiday schedule
that though like for instance Junth the city didn't pick up the private did. Sometimes the holiday schedule is the same but other than the holiday schedule it's it's exactly the same. So, and they would follow that. >> Council Prairie, you have the floor. >> No. And they would follow that. Thank
you. With that, I yield. >> Anything else from the committee? >> Is there a recommendation on the committee? >> Recommend the ordinance be passed. I recommend the ordinance be passed through first reading. >> Motion made by councelor Canuel to pass
through first reading. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Second by councelor Kadeim. Any discussion? >> Roll call. >> Roll call. Roll call to pass through first amendment. Councelor Kadim, >> yes. >> Councelor Kual, >> yes.
>> Vice President Dion, >> yes. >> Council Per, >> no. >> Chair Roza, >> yes. >> Motion passes. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thanks. >> To the committee. We have Madame Clerk
here if we would like to entertain possible motion to take item eight out of order. Motion. O >> motion take item A out of voter. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Canuel, second by vice president Dion. All those in favor. >> Opposed. The eyes have it. Item number eight is the proposed ordinance amending
50-303 the salary schedule for political appointments and boards and committees referred to to the committee on 692026 for the public's edification. The um title that we are discussing is the
assistant clerk of the council. And we have our city clerk here. Good evening, madame clerk. If you want to just introduce yourself for the committee, please. >> Sure. >> Initiate city clerk. >> Thank you, Mr. Molini. >> Nick Molini, director of human resources. >> To the to madam clerk, I'll let you
speak on what this is about. >> Thank you. Thank you for the opportunity. Um, so historically, the um assistant city clerk has always attended um city council meetings. Um, there hasn't been a stipen or salary. um uh
attached to the um assistant clerk of council position, which the assistant city clerk also serves as um and with my uh recent absence from the council, you know, the uh question did come up as to why that had never been the case. And I
thought it'd be the fair thing to do to um propose that a stipen also be um established for the assistant city clerk who um attends all meetings um and um serves in my capacity in my absence. >> Motion to recommend first reading.
>> Second. >> Motion to pass through first reading made by councelor Kade, second by council. Any discussion? All those in favor? Any oppose? The eyes have it. >> Thank you, madam clerk. >> Item number six needs a motion to lift from the table. Motion. >> Motion made by councelor Kadim, second
by vice president to lift from the table. All those in favor? Any oppos? The eyes have it. Item number six this evening is a proposed ordinance for salary amendments for the director of health and human services which was tables as amended on 428 2026. Mr. Molini, would you like to speak
first before I recognize the council members? >> Yeah, I don't really think I have too much to add. you were waiting on information from me from the last time just with uh comps on how many employees um surrounding communities health directors supervised. So I did send that out um early in June uh with just a list
of FTEEs. >> Yes. Thank you, Miss Mley. Council Canuel. >> Uh I just have one amendment that I'd like to make given how much time has passed. I'd like to make a motion to change the effective date of this change from 112026 to 712026.
Is that a form of a motion counc >> motion made by councelor Canuel, second by vice president Dion to amend the effective date um at the end of the proposed ordinance from 1120 2026 to 712026.
Motion made and seconded. Any discussion on the amendment? All those in favor? >> Any opposed? >> The eyes have them. >> Motion that the ordinance be passed through first reading as amended. Motion made to pass through first reading as amended made by councelor Canuel. Second
by v by president try that again by councelor Pereira. Any discussion? >> All those in favor. >> Any opposed? The eyes have it. >> Item number seven is a proposed ordinance amending 50-301. It's a salary schedule for executive officers,
department heads, and non-union personnel. Referred to the committee on 692026. Mr. Malini, please. Thank you. So, uh, this had come up during the budget process. Um, I think during the budget process, hard to pinpoint exactly when at this point
about the salaries that have exceeded the ordinance, um, due to cost of living increases. So, what you're seeing here is we identified um those positions that were exceeded the ordinance as of when this was sent down um due to the ask me
that these employees have typically followed. Um and then the positions that would exceed it come 7126 based on the 2.5% cola that uh they follow with ask me. So what we did was we took those positions, we took their current salary and added 2.5%. So the intent of this
was not to do large increases. This was literally just to catch everybody up to follow with that cola for 71 um 26. So this the amounts that you're seeing here are exactly what they would be as of the additional 2 and a.5% on 7126. It's
still our intent to come back to you with a a complete restructure of these salaries with mechanisms in place so that we're not exceeding ordinance whether that be an escalator or steps um or steps that follow a defined cola
every year so that we're not running into this problem every two every three years. But what we didn't want to see was people uh either lose money or um you know start to get impacted by inflation. The the idea of a cost of living adjustment is to help keep them
from losing money every year. So when the budget came down before you, anyone um that was over that uh not to exceed amount stayed at that not to exceed amount. Anyone who would go over it as of 7126 was frozen at at that cap. So,
you'll see some didn't get that full 2 and a half% um some it may have been $50, some it may have been a couple hundred, but we just we kept into that cap um in hopes that we could work with you to get this through now as a band-aid solution until that full restructure comes down to you. >> Thank you, Council Can.
>> Thank you. So his the position we just passed through first reading or recommended pass through first reading. The director of health and human services. You did comps for that position showed us, you know, why that should be amended. Um I think we should
be doing the same methodology for all of these positions. I don't know that we should just be arbitrarily raising it without conducting the same equivalent comp looks as well. I think um I understand what you did and how you did it, but I I can't get on board with the methodology here that we're just going
to add 2 and a half% from where someone's at because what the market may pay for any of these positions. I don't know what the market pays. I think we should be looking at that before we say yes, we should improve it. No, we we should not. So, uh with that, I can't support this right now. Uh I think, you
know, looking across this, some of these are only moving on, you know, $154. Others are moving $4,000. that's it's kind of all over the place and I think it just based on the methodology that you've applied here but I personally would like to see you know I think just
for any of these positions um equivalent comps as well and what the market's paying and to you know I I don't know I I don't know the context of whether or not these numbers are appropriate you know moving one of these $154 may you know may not be appropriate with the
market maybe I don't know um so with that I'll yield to what my other colleagues have to say. >> Thank you, councel. >> I'll make a motion to table to >> We have still council to speak. Vice President Dion. >> Yeah. Well, my question was going to be so how far again and he's correct.
There's $153.95 here. Um, is that just to satisfy FY26? Is that going so it's going to have no effect on FY27? >> I'm sorry. This would be for 7126. So, it would be for FY27. >> So, it's it'll satis for the whole year.
>> Correct. >> That whole fiscal year. Correct. >> Um so yeah, and I guess that was my concern. Um when do you when do you think you're going to be prepared um for us to have a a full picture um something
substantial to to consider? Um and and I will say right off the bat, I I'm not sure I'm okay with an escalator. Um, I think an escalator just makes it possible for it to just keep going up and up and up without necessarily coming back to the council. The do not exceed
is a solid number. Um, steps is a different issue, but an escalator I can I don't know that I'm on board with that unless somebody can explain it differently than what I'm thinking. Um, >> I mean, you know, next next week is
fiscal year 2027. So, obviously to to be in line um these changes need to be made again. We're back to and it happens all the time. Okay, next week it changes. So, this week we have to vote on it and we've
been waiting months to discuss this. Drives me crazy. Um, so yeah, when so when can we have a more comprehensive plan? When can you come back and say, "Okay, not to exceed this is what we're looking for. This is what we'd like to see. This is what we'd like to see the numbers uh set at so we have something
more concrete to deal with." Yes, is my question. >> To councelor Canuel's point, I think part of this is that we want to do an analysis on all of these positions. And if we do what we what we think we would like to do here with a type of gridlike system that factors in longevity, uh I
think it's going to take a little while for us to look at where positions line up on that grid with like positions here, uh comparables outside of the city. So I do think this is going to be a little bit of time, which is why we were coming down first with the band-aid approach so that no one was losing
money. Um but I I mean I'm going to be honest with you. I think this is going to take a little bit of time and right now there's just >> so I but I guess that's my question. What is a little bit of time? Is a little bit of time a month, two months, three months, six months? What's a little bit of time? >> I would say a few months. I can't give
you a a hard deadline for that. >> At the max >> at yeah the absolute max. I would like to be down here before that. >> So we're saying 3 to 6 months. So we'll be halfway through FY27 before we have any resolution to this. I mean, I think
part of this is that we know that there's going to be some work to do once it comes to this table. Again, to to your point on the escalators, that may not be the best system and there may be some limitations that we need to put in as part of whatever ordinance change we do to keep that from ballooning. That's the other thing was we don't want salaries to come in and start ballooning
once we, you know, do those comparables that we can't just come in and have there be an increase of 10, 20, $30,000. It's got to be done in a um logical manner. So, um, yeah, I mean, if a few months if we could come down and and
this at least gets us through where everyone's at the two and a half% for all of um 20 FY27 budget, it gives us a little bit of time to do this the right way. >> I mean, I feel like time has been wasted already that there
has been time. I feel like we've been having this discussion for months already. Um, I feel like we've had this discussion in the past. So that kind of bothers me a little bit when we're talking another three to six months yet. Um but for now I'll yield. Thank you, >> Council Kadim.
>> Thank you. So I support what's before us and I I hear what my colleague saying and I I don't disagree. Um [clears throat] the problem is is I I I think 3 to six months is an aggressive approach. I I think when you start looking at human services and the staffing levels, I mean, how many folks
do you have in human resources? >> Uh five. >> Five. Right. So, you're doing payroll benefits, you're doing negotiations. So, to find a time to actually truly do a uh a valid uh comp study on on all these salaries, especially with positions that
may not be um in other communities, is is a challenge, right? So, I I would say at least a minimum of a year to be able to get it. And I and I don't disagree. We've been talking about this for a while. Uh but it's a significant undertaking. If it's going to be done properly, you'd have to go right through this. So um you know one one thing I
would I would suggest is that maybe we try to outsource this as opposed to having to do it internally. Um, so I I would suggest that the administration look at hiring a community I mean an organization to come in just do a comp study on all our positions, right? Even our union positions as well. Um, and
come back down to the council for some funding mechanism on on that so that we can just do it once and for all because we've talked about this on the union side, we've talked it about for the non-union. I think that needs to be done and it's um it's [clears throat] a very comprehensive uh work that needs to to get done. It it takes a while. I mean,
just one of these positions will take you anywhere from two to three weeks to to get done. So, just take that, multiply it by the number of positions that we currently have. And and the and the hardest part is is waiting to get responses from other communities. Uh, a lot of communities are not responsive in
terms of what they're paying for salaries and things of that nature. So, it just becomes a challenge. So, I'll support this, but I I'd also just urge the administration to come up with a game plan moving forward. Uh, and if there's funding that's needed, come back down to the council. and I for one will support that endem that endeavor uh to
get you what you need to to get this kind of rectified and back down to the ordinance committee. Without a yield >> and and I'll echo my colleague as well. I mean my anticipation would be this would be in place for the FY28 budget at that point. So this way any changes or things that need to be had will be ready
for that point. So [clears throat] council at Canuel. >> So just back to the methodology that you're applying you said it was 2 and a half% right or is it different >> two and a half% So like if I pick the administrative assistant of code enforcement right now
is a not to exceed a 53 32427 the increase that's listed here would amount to 7% higher than where it is today >> from the current salary.
>> Uh from the current not to exceed. >> So you're saying the current salaries exceeded earlier? Yes. >> Okay. Okay. Council lady. >> So, um I'm thinking what if we
um agreed to this, voted yes for this um with the amendment or caveat that the administration get back to us sooner than later with a plan so that we know something is in place. and that we will
be moving forward and I put that in some form of a motion if somebody wants to figure it out. With that I yield. >> I think my recommendation we we could we could you could file a resolution for
the committee to maybe in six months discuss the current progress of that of that system possibly >> for salary study. for a salary study >> six months just have a discussion on moving forward with a salary study >> or or see where they are in the process.
>> Could I could we avoid that if I commit to update you by the end of summer on where we're at instead of doing a resolution or an amendment that >> this is something that we want to do and >> it's the will of the committee. >> I'd be okay with that. Yeah. A I guess I'm looking for some type of commitment,
something more solid than what we've had so far. Yes. I I I would be amicable to that. With that, I yield. >> Council prayer. >> I would rather have an outside firm come in and look at everybody from top to bottom. Our clerks, our union, our
non-union. You and I have spoken, Nick, about how we have lost people because salaries are greater elsewhere. And someone will start here. We'll do all the training and do everything and then they leave us. So, I think that's important. And if you can't do that with
just the people in your office, I would say within a month, let us know what administration and I would I would put this to to the interim uh city clerk. In a month, let us know what the mayor's decision is on that because we could certainly fund something like that to do
straight across the board. >> Thank you. As councelor Kadim mentioned, it is a daunting task, especially when you have to do comps, >> right, >> with cities comparable to the size and with Nick's department, it it is difficult. What he's done already and
just prepared the sheet of all the positions and the different ideas of whether it be escalators or grade levels has taken a lot of time to get done. So, >> can you just pass that within a month? >> Yes. >> Let us know. send a letter to the
committee. >> We've also looked at software too, >> potentials for software that are available that may make the task a lot easier as well. >> I think that'll help us when we look at these individual ones, but definitely an outside consultant to do a full study would would be a very good solution.
>> Absolutely. >> With that, I yield. >> Anything else from the committee? >> Motion to pass the first reading. >> Motion to pass the first meeting made by council kadim. Second by council prayer. Any discussion? >> Roll call. We'll call to pass through first reading. Councel can uh Kadim,
>> yes. >> Councelor Canuel, >> no. >> Uh, Vice President Dion, >> yes. >> Council Perau, >> yes. >> Chair Reposa, >> yes. >> Motion passes. >> There's nothing else in front of us today. M. Motion to adjourn made by councelor Kadim, seconded by councel
Per. All those in favor? Any opposed? The eyes have. And the committee on ordinance legislation is now adjourned. Thank you. Thank Part: 2
This for city council public hearing will now be called to order at 6:03 p.m. Madame clerk, roll call, please. >> Council Scad >> here. >> Camarra >> here. >> Here. >> Dion >> here. >> Hart >> here. >> Peekom >> here. >> Pereira
>> here. >> Rapo >> here. >> President Ponte >> here. Pursuant to the open meeting, Laura. Any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and are
deemed acknowledged and permissible. >> Motion to open the public hearing. >> Motion to open the public hearing has been made by councelor Raposo. Seconded by council Canuel. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it. First item is the jointly owned pole location. Massachusetts Electric Company doing
businesses National Grid and Verizon New England Inc. for one jointly owned pole location as follows on Eastern Avenue. The petition is proposing to install one jointly owned 55 ft class H1 pole P50-50 approximately 100 ft south of the center
line of the intersection of Barn Street between Pole 50 and Pole 52 on Eastern Avenue. This is in accordance with plan number 31285764. Calling all proponents. >> Good evening, Mr. President. >> Good evening, Mr. >> Council members. Uh my name is Aaron Roy
representing National Grid, 1250 Braen Point Road in Somerset. Uh tonight um we have um national national grid is proposing uh to install one new jointly owned pole intermediately between pole
50 and 52 eastern a. Um this is part of an ongoing reliability project we're working on in the city. Uh this will allow us to install that reliability device and um help with outages and um the overall um
um the overall um reliable um infrastructure that we're working on in the city as well. So >> thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Calling all other proponents wishing to speak on this item. Hearing none. Calling all opponents. That's all you have for sure tonight.
>> Thank you very much. Thank you sir. >> Calling all opponents. Hearing no further proponents and opponents. Motion to close. Public hearing has been made by councelor Raposo. Seconded by councelor Hart. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it. >> Motion to adjurnn would be appropriate.
>> Motion to adjurnn. The public hearing has been made by councelor Raposo. Seconded by councel. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it. Ready. Or of a city council committee on finance will now be called to order at 6:06 p.m. Madame clerk.
>> Council scadim >> here. >> Chimera >> here. >> Canuel >> here. >> Dion >> here. >> Hart >> here. >> Heckham >> here. >> Carrera >> here. >> Here. >> President Ponte >> here. Pursuant to the open meeting Laura, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting
or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible. First item on our agenda this evening is citizens input. One person signed up to speak, Bruce Souza, 181 South Main
Street regarding ebikes. Come on down to the floor. Three minutes. on the city. You >> could just speak into the microphone. Mr. Souza, >> these ebikes on the sea sidewalks are hazards to people like I who have a seizure disorder and people in
wheelchairs and walkers. The other day I was out, I almost got hit twice. They have no regards for anyone walking. And even when you tell them because they're a motorized vehicle, they belong in the road, they just look at you and laugh, something needs to be done before
someone gets seriously hurt. And I know, I guarantee you, it won't be me. I'm asking the council, please, for the benefit of people like my wife and Danny and other people that
have disabilities to do something about this menace. They're flying up South Main Street at 20 miles an hour plus. I ride a regular bike and if I go on the sidewalk, I don't do anything over five.
And that's like to go into a store to get a drink or anything. This is ridiculous. I expect more from my council than this. You know,
I hope this doesn't fall on deaf ears cuz I am scared. >> Thank you, >> Council C7. Councelor Pereira, >> Mr. Souza, did you say it was Souza? >> Yes, Mr. Souza. >> Yes,
>> Mr. Souza, what we can do is file a resolution that we come up with an ordinance for a law for those bikes because you are right. a lady who frequents city council meetings and I saw her at a a subcommittee meeting uh Mrs. Rigo,
one of the electric bikes hit her car and and you're right. I've had complaints from people, especially in the downtown area. Those bikes go like 48 miles an hour, some of them. >> I clocked one at 28 the other day. >> Yeah. Well, I know they go fast. Um but
it's not falling on deaf ears because I believe all of us have heard about that. So, thank you for coming and sharing your concern. At break, we'll file a resolution to go with that. >> The other issue is when I rode the bike, I couldn't ride on the sidewalk because it's a human power vehicle, diesel,
electric, and gas. >> We'll have to stop that and let the chief be aware of it, too. And the chief is here. So, >> yes. >> And we had I had talked to the chief about it a couple of weeks ago, >> a concern I had. But thank you for coming down. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. Hold on, Mr. Sizzo. Hang
tight. You yield, counselor. >> I do. >> Yeah. Thank you, councelor in seat six, councel Pekkham. >> Mr. Souza, thank you for coming down. I can tell you that I held a public safety meeting last week to address a resolution that council Pereira had filed in 2021 in regards to ATVs. We
did, I believe, change agree to change language in that. I'll go with the same one. I believe it was to go with the language that was already in the ordinance. So, we are addressing it. We did have a conversation with Chief [ __ ] who is in the ordinance. He was uh in the audience. He is in the audience. I apologize. who was at the public safety
meeting. So, we are addressing it. It is um a very big issue right now. I'm getting calls on it. I'm sure other councils are as well. So, we are aware and we are trying to rectify it. So, I thank you for coming down. I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor in C3. Council Lanual.
>> Thank you. I just want to echo the comments of my colleague in C6. As a member of the public safety committee myself, uh Chair Pekkham did have a meeting last Tuesday concerning this. We had u several people I think two or three people come down during citizens input as well to weigh in on the ebike
situation. So your comments certainly not falling on deaf ears. We are looking at I know the chief who's in the audience is uh was at that meeting as well and and looking to uh address this as best department can. Some of it's I think uh the from the time the ordinance was last written to where we are now the
technologies changed a little bit and I think we need to adapt to that as well and people are making making modifications you know to their vehicles as well. So but with that thank you so much for coming down appreciate your remarks and we will continue to advocate to uh address this. Thank you. I yield. >> Thank you counselor. Thank you Mr.
Souza. >> You're welcome. >> Thank you. Next item on our agenda is a resolution to convene with the chair of the board of elections and the administration and a representative of the forver commission on disability to discuss election cycle trends and new polling locations.
Um it's item two resolution was filed by council vice president Dion and councelor Kadine. And uh if you could just begin by introducing yourself for the record, beginning with the interim city administrator. >> And O'Neal Souza, interim city
administrator. >> Ryan Lions, chairman and director of the elections department. >> Dan Robboad, member of the for disability commission. >> Would you like to begin, Mr. Lions? >> Yes, Mr. President. Thank you. So, back on May 5th, I had a conversation or a
tour with uh Mr. Pelli, the chairman of the disability commission, and Mr. Robel, a member of the commission. We conducted a site survey of our 27 polling locations. Actually, probably was about 22 of them in total um throughout the city, and we had um a prolonged conversation about some of the
overall assessment um throughout the city of Fall River. And I'll let Mr. Robelard speak about some of the concerns on behalf of the commission that they had um in regards to some of the overall accessibility. >> Uh pardon me, the commission uh believes
that we should be out of uh all housing authority locations. Uh we're working to get out of the fire station as soon as possible. Uh that's something we've been working on for about 10 years. uh that's coming down as part of the next round uh
if the home rule petition goes forward and uh we uh I I think uh most of us would like to see us eventually get out of schools but there's only uh there's only one piece of the puzzle here tonight and the
commission wholeheartedly endorses it and there's a letter from Chairman Peli uh in the packet. Thank you. >> Thank you. uh council C4, council vice president Dion, one of the sponsors of the resolution. >> Good evening. So I guess one of my
questions is in terms of um this whole rule petition and and different um changes that have been made has has any part or all of this um been brought before your board of commissioners? Yes, I had the conversation with my
commission on May 27th and it was unanimously unanimously, excuse me, um approved by the board of election commissioners. >> Um >> including the conversation about potentially the city council designating um the Liberal Club as a voting center in the city. >> So when you say a conversation, it was a
meeting or just >> It was a meeting of the election commission on the >> 27th and and they agreed with everything. >> Yes, counselor. >> Okay. And then my second question is because obviously and you know you're aware some things I agree with some things I don't. I think some changes have been great. Um have you done any
type of study or um evaluation because we've had a number of changes and I think people have gotten confused. I think some people have been disenfranchised because now I was here now I have to go way over there type situation.
um what effect that has had on the voter turnout because we know the voter turnout over the years continues to decline that that goes without saying, >> right? >> But do we have any way to judge how all of these changes might be contributing to that as well?
>> It's hard to say to answering that question, counselor, because when we judge election to election, it's a little bit difficult. The turnout with the municipal election cycle over the past three elections from 2021, it's been it was 24% in 2021 and in 2023 and
in 2025 it was roughly 20%. The turnout was actually a little bit higher in 2025 after the city council had approved the consolidations. So, it's difficult to say, you know, quite honestly, with the turnout being virtually identically the same, because the trends with voter turnout for municipal elections, it's
really sad to say, have continually gone down from the traditional 33%. It would always match a midterm state election, which we're going to be having this year, for example. Um, so for it to decline to be about 20%, we have never seen that in the history of the city of Fall River. When it comes to a state
election with a presidential race, all bets are off. As you know, the turnout was usually between 50 and 60%. Um, this year, I do anticipate it's going to be about 30 to 35% vot voter turnout just because of all of the attention on this year's midterm state election. But for
municipal elections in comparison, we've never seen at 20%. But to see it virtually identical after the city council had approved the consolidations of the polling locations, it's kind of hard to say when the trends are virtually identical from one election, one municipal election year to the other.
And I guess my last question would be um in terms of the liberal club, is there a fee associated with that? >> There is not counselor. >> No fee. Um and I understand the fire department issue uh and why the commission would be
on board with getting out of there. I understand that. >> Yeah, that's that's been an ongoing battle since we first met. uh August 1st, 2006, going back to when uh former chairman uh Bill Fontaine, who was a firefighter, uh
first brought that up. And we did a half of a tour because the place is inaccessible and it it's the worst possible location you could ever have for voting and it should have been uh excommunicated years ago.
I guess I guess my my concern is moving to the Liberal Club. We now again are going to take voting out of highrises out of and and we've done that with a number of
them. um the elderly how you were people before only had to come downstairs vote and go upstairs and now a lot of them don't vote in person anymore because it's become either too difficult too challenging they don't have transportation that concerns me that is
the part I have a problem with that again we're displacing these people who live in um like duelan apartments for example now is going to be switched over to the liver club um so I don't know h you know how you would address that. But is >> I I will be going there counselor to
have the conversation with the residents at Duelan Apartments as well as all of the housing authority locations to make them aware of the forthcoming changes. My department will continue to offer transportation to the residents who would like to be offered transportation from their address to the new consolidated polling locations. Um but
also Julen Apartments is probably the one I think the commission had the biggest concern about when it came to overall accessibility. and Julen Apartments for the larger precinct um was very difficult because there was no available public parking to voters on election day. When it came to the complaints coming into my office about
that location, it was off the charts um from election year to election year because we would offer advice to voters that we really couldn't give to them by telling them to try to park in the lot owned by Stop and Shop and cross the street. So, this really alleviates that concern. And on top of that, in terms of
talking about excommunication, this helps to, you know, bring the two the double precincts out of the fire station, moving them into Blessed Trinity and Blessed Trinity into the Liberal Club, as well as alleviating the enormous parking concerns at LNO Elementary by moving them into the Liberal Club, which is a the gold room,
as you know, counselor, the square footage of that is larger than all of the five locations put together. And the parking lot is very large at the Liberal Club, so it's very accommodating. And there was a site survey conducted by Mrs. Murphy, the compliance officer from Secretary Galbin's office, and it passed
with flying colors. >> Okay, with that, I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman. Seat three, Council Canuel. >> Thank you. I just have a question about how these changes do come about. We have an election commission, but I was having trouble finding uh votes uh by the
commission to make these changes. Does this go through them or does this just go through the department? It >> does not. We don't have the legal authority to vote on designation. That is the legal prerogative of the city council. >> Okay. When the election commission
meets, how often do they meet? We'll start there. >> I probably have two or three meetings a year. >> Okay. When you guys meet, do you guys have like a public input of any type? >> Yes, we do. >> Okay. I guess where I'm going with this is like especially with the Liberal Club which just got put to us today on an
amended agenda. There's really limited opportunity for the public to weigh in on what is a very substantial change here before us. Um and I think I'm looking for how this is getting vetted. I mean what so the election commission there are
five right? I believe four >> four. Why I guess I I guess my question would be why don't they vote for this first where it would be put on an agenda right posted citizens input where people
before it ever reaches us have an opportunity to give that >> it was part of my agenda counselor for that meeting on the 27th that was part of my agenda specifically um advertised to talk about the consolidations that included um those south end precincts >> the liberal club Yes.
>> The 27th May. >> Yes. >> Okay. Okay. That was my question. I had trouble finding it. >> I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you. Um um Mr. Could you indicate to the council um on the whole um
discussion that we had yesterday and for the public's edification on the urgency behind the possibility of of having this in the agenda being amended. The only reason I amended it, um, if you could please, >> one of you, >> sorry, Mr. President, what was the question?
>> I I before before our agenda this evening, we had to amend the agenda to look at the Liberal Club to get a home world petition passed through Senator Rogers's office. I believe they were going to start working on it. Can you just brief us on that while we're talking about it, please? >> Yes. Discussions had been made earlier
this year with uh Chairman Lions and the mayor >> regarding a potential use of the Liberal Club. In speaking with the secretary of state's office, the mayor and uh Chairman Lions was found that there would be a need for a home rule petition. Um Chairman Lions worked very
closely with the Secretary of State's legal division after they tooured the location to come up with the language for the home rule. Uh it was thought initially that it would not be able to go up to the legislature because they're out of session and then it would have to
wait until they go back into formal session. But Senator Rogers notified the mayor this weekend that that was not the case. And if we wanted to proceed, he would gladly sponsor it. And we have a sponsor in the house where this would be able to go up there. Even though it's
not formal session, this home rule petition could go through so that the changes will take effect and make it easier um for those voting in the September elections. >> Thank you so much. Councelor in seat 2. Councelor Chimera. >> Thank you, Mr. President. So,
Mr. L, do you remember how many councils ran for office? >> 14. >> No primary. 14 candidates. How about school committee? >> There were 10. >> No primary. No one for office. preliminary comm gentleman in Berkeley won the seat. He was the only one on the ballot. The reason we have such low
voter turnout is because we have low candidate turnout. No one wants to run for public office like they used to years ago. No one wants to vote because there's no candidates to go vote for for the most part. So when you have a contested hot election, people are going to come out run for office. If there's a
lot of people running, more people on the ballot, more people going to come vote. Unfortunately, the way this country's been going in all countries everywhere, people are just not engaged as they used to be, not happy with the politicians like they used to be, things are a lot different now. And there's no
appetite for people to run for office and no appetite for people to vote for elected people who are running for office. That's the key. If you get more people to want to run for office, then you'll get more voter turnout because there'll be more people to go vote for. It's a broader range. 35 candidates compared to 14. What do you think the voter turnout's going to be?
>> A lot higher. It's a numbers game. >> So until we can change that and until, you know, people decide that it's a worthy position to be in. I've run for office plenty of times and I think it's something worthy and noble to do and get involved in your local community. Pay attention to what's going on. If you
have the opportunity and you feel like you want to run and get elected and you do that, but for most people, they don't want to do it anymore. It's it's uh look what happened. We we lost three school committee members. Why? They just didn't want to run for office anymore. I mean, it happens. So there's there's not a lot
you can do to get someone to go vote if there's not a lot of people to go vote for and they're not enthused about voting for the election. So I mean Donald Trump brought in a bunch of new people that have never voted before. Uh record numbers. Other than that, I don't see any happening in the local city anywhere in
the state. It's that numbers are dwindling everywhere. It's not a forever issue. >> It's an issue in every community, every especially every state, everywhere. The numbers are dropping. They're dwindling. So will the candidates with that I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor. Anything further from anybody else?
>> Is there a motion to table because there is still some discussion to consuel? >> Uh I just want to um I did find the agenda uh through the city of for calendar. I would just like to make a request. I I think just when I see how other boards and commissions operate,
they generally will post the agenda and the minutes later uh to their commission page. And I think that's what's missing when I go to like the election commission. If I'm trying to find when the next meeting is, unless I know the exact day on the city calendar, I'm not going to find it other than emailing you
if I was interested. But I would uh think just in the interest of helping residents who may be interested in potential changes just if we can on that uh election commission page get the agendas added and then the corresponding minutes later once they're approved if possible.
>> Of course. Sure. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Anything further? There is still more discussion to be had on other locations. So is it the will of this council to table this or >> motion to table has been made by councelor repos seconded by councelor Pekkham. All those in favor opposed. The eyes have it.
>> Thank you Mr. Lions. Thank you >> everyone. >> Thank you Mr. Lions. >> Thank you >> Mr. Robel. Thank you. >> Next item on our agenda is transfers and appropriations. Members of the administration, come to
the table, please. And as they do, I'll introduce the item number one is going to be in full counsel, which is going to be item five in full counsel. Mayor, in the following appropriations in accordance with provisions of chapter 44, section 54,
the Massachusetts General Lars, the mayor is recommending the following appropriations to the city council. Number one, 3 million uh $670,000 be the same hereby appropriated to sewer transfers from the FY25 sewer retained
earnings. Item number two, 5B1,770,000 uh here in the same hereby appropriate for water transfers from the FY25 water retained earnings. That's 5A and 5B. We can take them both together if you'd like. In opposition to that hearing? None. >> Opposition
>> questions. If you can introduce yourself for the record. >> Uh Paul Ferland, the administrator for community utilities, city of Fall River. >> Ann O'Neal, Souza, interim city administrator. >> Emily Arbiki, CFO. >> Councilman C4, Council Vice President
Dion. >> Yeah. Um both on the agenda are listed as retained earnings to sewer, retained earnings to water. What does that mean? >> For what? For what purpose? Above and beyond what? From retained earnings in
water to water and retained earnings in sewer to sewer. >> That's the detail that's attached with the item. >> The agenda only lists a certain part, but all the the attachments should detail out exactly what everything is for. >> Okay. So, >> uh, for the public's own edification,
just give us a brief overview on that. That'd be great. >> Thank you. Do you want to >> Mr. Furlin? >> Yeah, if if you if you'd like. Um, >> so what we're looking at doing here, we had uh retained earnings that were certified that uh came to this council earlier this year. Um, we're looking to take uh and rather than bond out for
projects or uh or find other uh avenues to fund these projects through operational budgets or or things like that, capital within the operational budget. Uh we're opting to take some of our retained earnings that has been certified in both uh water uh and sewer,
two separate buckets uh and use those to fund these uh capital improvements. >> And using these retained earnings and this dollar amount you don't feel will be impacting your budget moving forward in any negative way?
>> No, I don't feel it'll be impacting. So if you look at uh if you look at the retained earnings um that what we're using these for uh one thing that we're doing in both water and sewers transfers to the stabilization fund. Uh so I've talked to the uh previous councils
before about the stabilization funds. Uh we do have some funding within stabilization fund for both water and sewer. Uh we uh should be building that stabilization fund up. um department of revenue uh recommends that 10% of your
uh c of your yearly operational budget you also have in retained earnings. So that's what our goal is uh with that. The other things like I said were uh some capital cost uh and then we are leaving uh funding within the retained
earnings balance uh for cash flow for use within the FY27 budget. Okay. >> Thank you. With that I yield. >> Thank you. Councilman seat one. Councel Kadine. Thank you. Uh so I appreciate the use of the I guess the retained earnings to um purchase capital needs
and and fix your capital requests and things of that nature. However, I I guess I'm just a little concerned about the dollar amount that's being used by by the free cash. So um 80% of the retained earnings I'm sorry I said free cash. Retained earnings for water is
being used for capital items. Um, and then we've got close to 74% being used for capital items and sewer. So, I guess when we look at the stabilization account, there's only 8% in the uh water stabilization account. We're at 6% in
the uh sewer stabilization account. Is there currently a policy in place in terms of how retained earnings are going to be uh utilized for sewer and water? >> There is not to my knowledge. It's part of what I, you know, we've talked about
revising the city's um policies, financial policies and procedures. Um it's it's in that for me to kind of set something, but other than the generic, you know, one that we have for um I'm sorry, the general fund. We don't necessarily have a set policy for this
at this point. So, I think the goal is the 10% like we've >> So, I guess how soon because I know we've been talking about that for a couple years now in terms of just getting the financial policies. I think we've been talking about that uh when Mary Sahadi was here as as the CFO. From from my standpoint, I think if you're
looking at and I didn't account for and I heard what you said um cash flow for the next fiscal year, which I I do agree with. Um but right off the bat, I think when we start talking about enterprise funds at a minimum, you know, I I personally would think that you'd use a third of your retained earnings going
into your stabilization account to build up that account. You'd then use a third of that for capital so you know what you can use. And then um I would say that a third should be used for rate reduction, right? I mean because at the end of the day I and I know if we stop borrowing
it's going to impact rates but I think a third of the retained earnings should be used for some type of form of rate reduction so that we know regardless of what we get for retained earnings that we've got percentages and and you know obviously the the percentages don't need to be there if you want to you know
throw a percentage to uh carry over to make sure you're not running a deficit from the from the next fiscal year and that you've got some some rollover on the retained earnings and that that's that's fine. And I just I just get concerned because if we have a significant and I know what you you're trying to fix the capital needs that you
have, but if we have a significant um issue that takes place either at the water or the sewer plants, then you know we we've got to try to figure out to be able to have those rainy day funds. And I know we've been doing a little bit in terms of building it up and I and I like the fact that you're throwing some significant money uh this year into into
the stabilization counts for both. I just think that the spending um amount is is a little too too high for me. I mean, I'll I'll support it this year. Uh but just moving forward, I I I want to see uh from my standpoint as one counselor a policy that's going to
establish how these retained earnings are going to be spent on a on a given year so that one, you know, what what to be what can be spent and we know as a council that the stabilization account is being built up. Um but when we start seeing and discussing the budget, we
also have a component there to be able to use for rate reduction as well. So um we know that a third or whatever percentage you folks come up with will be used to to offset the rates for the uh the users. So that's that's just my take on this. I'll support it. Again, I I still think that the you know the
spending and the 80% and 74% of of the uh retained earnings is a little high for me, but I understand the capital needs that your departments have. So with that, I yields. >> Thank you. Anything further? Uh just as a quick um point of clarification follow-up question on the capital items.
In our last quarterly update uh in the sewer department, there was $362,000 for the Jefferson Street land acquisition that is considered idled money. Is any of that in use for capital needs in your department, Mr. Furland? >> Uh that would be that would have to be
reallocated by the council. Um >> yeah. Is there a plan to discuss that? Because that that was sitting idle in in your capital plans and I know this council in the past has been pretty critical of that. So, can you guys put your heads together on that please and and see if we can use that to offset
something for some capital needs that you have? >> Yep. We'll take a look at it whether we uh use it to reduce another authorizations that we have in place that this council just recently approved or some other plan. But we can >> Did you plan to reuse that $362,000? So, so to be clear, I don't think that
that author that authorization is an authorization. It's not a cash that we have idle. It's an authorization that's idle. So, I just want to be clear that when we come down, you know, we can move it around, but I don't think that it's actual cash that's >> Yeah, I recognize that, but it's still usable money. Absolutely. Yeah, understood. Anything further on this
item? >> Anything else on the transfers? >> Thank you very much. >> Motion to finance. Well, >> question. >> We going to talk about the other transfers or >> uh we did. Uh yes, we have uh that was >> number seven. >> Number seven. Yep.
>> I was just introducing water. Six. Six and seven. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Mr. Furland. Item six, the mayor uh appropriating $1.4 million from the FY25 surplus revenue for fire salaries.
Councelor in seat for councel Pekkham. >> Six. >> Six. >> Sorry. Six. Councelor in seat six. Councelor Pekham. Sorry. >> Good evening. >> So the appropriation for salary is 1.4 million. Um what are we going to do next year and the year after?
>> So we budgeted for it moving forward. So, this this transfer is due to the fact that in July um after right after the fire happened, we committed to adding in um I think it's the four additional bodies for those trucks without essentially having the funding in place. So, we we had talked about the
fact that we were going to spend at this. We had estimated it was going to be 1.5 million that we'd be short to fund this. Um we've been I think you know having some conversations throughout the year about you know where we were at, where we were trending and what that would look like. So next year it's fully budgeted for. If you notice,
I mean the fire um salary budget went up I think upwards of $2 million this year. So it's built into next year's budget. So we knew we were going to fund this um overtime with one time. It's now not mostly in their overtime. Now it's hired bodies that are in there. So instead of
being an overtime shortage, we hired in salary positions that cost less obviously to cover it. >> Okay. >> All right. With that, I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you. councelor and see for council vice president Dion. >> So I guess my question is and it'll be
the same for number seven but um essentially so we've known about this for a year that we were going to be short. >> Yes. >> Um and we came up for a solution to it the week before the fiscal year ends.
>> No. So this has been discussed for I mean I think throughout the fiscal year that we were going to have this and that we were going to overspend. there was money that the state had talked about in the early beginning in July about coming in that that wasn't I'm going to say actually a reality. It was just money that we typically get
given early. They did spend through that and so then on top of it they we started in January having the conversations about hiring right when the safer grant was you know not being given at that point we started moving towards hiring but the timing of the hiring and when that was going to fall to what the
overtime was still going to be. We had been I'm gonna say trying to calculate and figure out exactly what it was. So I thought the conversation the whole time was been we're going to be short. We know we're going to be short. We're going to cover it with free cash this year, but we're going to have a better idea of the amount by the end of the fiscal year rather than coming down for
each amount that we think and estimate and then overestimate or underestimate and then keep coming back for more. It was we estimated and said we were going to be 1.5 million short and by waiting we've now come up with 1.4 million. >> Okay. So, I guess again I'm going to ask
um did we know that it was 1 f clo so roundabout 1.5 um two weeks ago, three weeks ago, a month ago? >> Yeah, we estimated 1.5 in July when we added on those additional bodies. >> So, so I guess my point is this is where
I'm going and obviously I'm going to support it because I'm not going to have people work for the city and not get paid. not their fault. But I feel like this once again is one of those your backs are against the wall because if you don't say yes, people don't get paid. So, we kind of have to say yes. Um
I certainly hope next year in both departments we do avoid this situation, we do realize what our obligation is and meet our obligation. Um you know, if if if we decided tonight, well, you know, we don't like the fact you only gave us seven days, we're
voting no. It would be a it would be a bad situation. >> Yeah. I want to be clear that this deficit in fire specifically is purely from adding on those additional positions. >> No, no. And I understand that. >> So without that, we wouldn't have been in this. And I think that from the administration's view and from I mean
mine at this point that's something that we were I'm going to say willing to do regardless of you know the transfer. >> And I fully understand that. I fully understand that. But that action happened a year ago and here we are one week away from the next fiscal year before we're going to we're going to fix
it I suppose is the best word. That's all that that that's just it's more of a comment than anything. Um and you know it's one of my usual frustrations and with that I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you Councilman C3. Council Kenuel. >> Thank you. I'll echo the con uh the
comments of my colleague in C4. Um this was known it was going to be one and a half million July 1st of last year. We started running out of that money what January I believe. So I think we should have came down, you know, in the early part of the year with at least a partial
appropriation because other spendings from free cash have come down before us. Um I I think I'd like to make decisions in totality and we've had transfers to the health insurance uh right 3 million plus another two million requests uh
where those were less urgent matters I think but this is obviously has to happen. Uh I'm disappointed my colleague didn't say our backs are up against the wall. You have no >> This is one of those situations we don't have a we don't really have a choice here, right? Because what's the what
happens if we don't approve it, right? >> Deficit spend on it at this point. >> Yeah. So, we we have to do it and I'm going to support this. Um but I don't like how this has played out. Um if we are starting to negative spend in February, I think a partial request
should come down. If we're not fully sure of the amount, put some an educated guess and we can make adjustments after the fact. But I think, you know, to get these requests burning free cash one by one by one and this one was definitely known and not presented to us. We didn't
have a balance. All right. We we you show us another request. Here's here's the request. Here's the fund balance. This one should have been might as well be encumbered at that point, right? Uh because this >> What do you mean? this was going to have to happen because you were deficit, you were spending it,
>> right? So, yes, I I thought we had talked about this during each of the quarterly reports with this department. I know that we've had a couple of other, you know, conversations with fire down here on different items and I thought that we had been discussing these amounts and where we were at and we're being transparent. So, I I apologize and I understand that now, you know, I
should have sent that order sooner, but I thought that our conversations were keeping everybody a breast of the situation. So, I apologize for that. >> Thank you. That's all I have. How you >> Thank you, Council Con. Council, >> thank you. So maybe I don't recall those recollections and it's possible. I could
I could be wrong, but um our backs are against the wall and and we can take action. We can vote no. I mean, there's nobody losing any money. It's a deficit spent. Everybody's been paid, so it doesn't impact um any firefighter. Not not in the least. Uh this is reminiscent about a year ago. We were talking about
the trash contract. It was the exact same thing that we had before us. We were supposed to get notification. we were supposed to get uh some type of advisory. So, I will ask that back in July, you know, the governor came down, gave us all this money that really wasn't money that was supposed to be
coming. We knew or at least the administration knew it was supposed to it was going to be a $1.4 million. What did you do internally in terms of the fire chief? Did you tell the fire chief to slow spending on his side uh for his expense budget to offset anything? Has any department Did you put in a a
spending freeze anywhere? Because we knew we had a$ 1.4 4 million deficit that we had to hold up. I mean, there there are other options as opposed to coming down to the city council asking for free cash to cover a $1.4 million. >> So, we we knew that we had the free cash that was going to be able to cover this.
So, that was the plan. So, you know, if we wanted to do year-end transfers, you know, we could have done that instead. And and to be honest with you, there is other funding available in the general fund that we can do a year-end transfer instead of a free cash transfer, >> right? The the issue though at hand is is that you knew you had free cash, but that was that was a decision that was
made on a one-way street, right? So, it's it's a partnership. So, you need the appropriation from the city council. There was never a conversation. You just assume that you're going to come down to the city council and the city of council is going to appropriate free cash. Is that correct?
>> Yes. Yes. I I I don't recall the specific conversations about where the money was coming from with each counselor, >> but we did nothing internally with other departments to do either hiring freezes, spending freezes to to reduce the 1.4. We're just going to use free cash. Is
there is there anything else that we need $1.4 $4 million, any capital items, anything else like that that potentially is now going to go to the wayside because we've decided not to try to work within the operating budget that we had.
>> No, we we from the beginning of July before the capital plan was put forward, before it was planned for, we knew that this was coming in that we were going to have to cover it with the free cash this year. So, no, we when I had built the capital plan that's before you, it was not it's not taking away from anything that's in there because we already knew
about this at that point in time. So, no. >> So, we took the easy road and said that we're going to spend $1.4 million in free cash. That's the road we took. I mean, I think at the time, councelor, when the request was made to go to the
Formian trucks after the Gabriel House fire and the budget was already put together for FY26, that was the only option that we had. >> Is that one expense? the the the option is that the CFO could have sent out a letter to all the departments saying that we are putting a a spending freeze
on expenses right to figure out what we needed only you know major expenses or emergency expenses would be would be done there there were a number of options that can be done working within the operating budget and then coming back down identifying to the council I just again I think we we take for
granted the city council that you know and and the council is going to do what it always does it's just going to approve it anyways right so it's like I'm speaking to speak. It's just as one council, I'm going to vote no on this because I think there are other options that should have been uh taking place. I think we should have had a fund advisory as I mentioned before coming down before
us. You know, to have last minute transfers in the amount of $1.4 million is just, you know, excessive. I think there there should have been a discussion with other options that we had put into it. We made a commitment to give the fire department what they needed, which was above and beyond the operating budget, right? What was in
there? That means you need to go and look everywhere else. Right? Like I I just don't understand. And it's a reoccurring. And so now we've got a reoccurring expense. We're throwing this in. And I know you built it in uh for the next fiscal year. We're assuming that it's it's built into the the next fiscal year, but it's just I
don't know. It it leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I've had this conversation. It's just it's like repeating a a bad dream over and over again. >> We we did add 16 positions into fire department for next year. So we we absolutely it's not, you know, potentially factored in. is factored
into next year's budget. That's it's not really a question. I promise that part. >> So, I guess if we had a 9C cuts, the the governor cuts the budget and our funding cuts, what would we do? >> Would we not send out a notification to department heads saying, "Hey, >> any hiring non-essential hirings are going to stop. Spending is going to
stop. Did we?" So, and we did none of that, right? So, that that's that's my issue. We we talk about, you know, having a financial policy. We've been talking about that for a year. Um, we haven't gotten anything with that. we had more transfers before us uh without any policies in place to to suggest how
we're going to handle our our money. And I I just I don't know. I I just think we're living on the edge when it comes to how we fund uh transfers and and expenses before us. That that's it. And and we're going to hit a fiscal cliff at some point and we're not going to be
prepared to to deal with it. That's that's my concern. So I will not be supporting this. With that, I yield. >> Thank you. Council C7. Councelor Pereira. I I agree with what my um colleague in seat number one is saying. Usually when you start a budget, you start in January, February. You I'm
meeting with department heads. You tell department heads, hold on. You know, you're going to pay your salaries, but if there's anything that you need to spend, let me know first. See, I don't even know how many turnbacks we're going to end up getting from anywhere. Usually, it's just vacancies or what have you, but I agree to just say, well,
we'll just go to free cash and get it out of, you know, surplus cash. you can only go to that well so many times before that well is going to be dry and then you have nowhere to go. So I agree maybe there needs to be prior planning and it could have come to us uh before that even if it would have come to us
months ago about using free cash. Ideas could have been given to Miss Aki. Hey, what else have you done? What else can we do to try to save money from just pulling from free cash? Um that's that's my concern as well. Um because yes,
we've hired more. I know EMA EMS pays for five of the ones five of the firefighters. Correct. in the 26 budget. Yes, >> they pay for five of them. Okay, with that I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you. Constit. So, just for my own clarification, what
ended up h happening to the money that the governor said she was going to give us for the minimum mandate staffing? >> It was a I'm going to say confusion and communication that happened that day. So, we get a grant every year from the state um for police and fire overtime
eops. So, we get that every year. The way it's been given is typically in January for a calendar year basis. So when everything happened in July, the amount that was committed to was really saying that we were going to get that January money in August.
So it was no additional money. It just shifted from getting it in January to getting it in August. But it was the same amount exactly $100,000 less for fire this year because 100,000 was shifted over to police in the grant from the state. So we actually had 100,000 less but early. So what was normally
spent, you know, what was given in January that was spent throughout the entire calendar year of 26 was spent between Joe I'm going to say I think it was the end of July but August to December. >> Yeah. So we got like an advance. >> They didn't that's all it was was an advance.
>> They didn't sell it that way on the news. >> Correct. And when we had conversations following up afterwards about it, you know, it was clarified with us and we had asked for a public statement clarifying it and were told that we weren't getting one. >> Thank you for that. It's election season. People should remember that.
>> Secondly, um when you had mentioned that you could go to the general fund to find this money >> that I could >> the one the transfer >> that I could. Yeah, >> you could. >> Yeah. >> All right. So I'm going to thank you council in seat one because I'm now a no vote on this because I would like you to go back and find the money other than going to free cash and depleting our
savings account. >> Okay. >> So with that I yield. Thank you. >> Anybody else? Councilman sew one council. >> Thank you. So I I I guess I'd like an explanation for that. So if you can go to the if you've got money in in this year's operating budget, why are you asking for free cash?
>> So there's there's other turnbacks that happen every year with every department and all of that. So, because we also have this snow that we were looking to cover that we, you know, would pull from that we don't have an amount from the state that's coming in. So, I don't know how much is left to cover and how much we want to cover. So, >> there's
>> there there's money coming in for the snow deficit. I just got it today. >> I think Senator Rodri's got for river $64,188.52 and that was for the winter uh cleanup. >> Thank you, Conc. No, but you you your statement was that
you could cover it within the this year's general fund with transfers. We >> I'm sorry. We could potentially cover it. I'd have to pull the numbers. I don't have them all in front of me right now, but there's a potential that we would have that in the turnbacks to be able to cover it. I just would have to run through the numbers again to figure
out exactly what everything is. We do have we do have significant turnbacks that are in other departments. You know, some of the spending that hasn't happened. I can tell you alone in um judgments and claims we've got almost $200 plus thousand. >> I guess I'm just going to ask for clarification. Your statement was that
you can cover it in the general fund that you have $1.4 million. Then I heard you don't have it. You're not sure that you don't know where the snow and ice is. So, do we have it in the general fund or do we not have it in the general fund? If we have it in the general fund, why are we doing free cash? And why are we doing transfers for the other items
within the general fund? >> I don't have an answer that you would like right now. I don't know how to I I know that I'm saying too much and everything is being confused and I don't know what to say to you anymore. I'm sorry. >> I don't know what I don't know what you want me to say. >> I can I have I just want you to tell me where where we where we are. You made a
statement saying that we have money in the general fund. So, I just want you to give me clarity as to whether or not >> you have actually looked at the operating budget, know where we are, and we have $1.4 million and if you make that statement to cover other transfers that are needed at year end that are going to take place in two weeks.
>> Correct. We do have at least 1.4 that is available, but that would mean if we cover this that I don't know how much is going to be left to fully cover snow or not. So, yes, we do have 1.4 that we could transfer. >> It is June 23rd. How do we not know what we need to cover for snow and ice?
>> Because that number that she just said she got today, I still have never received. So, I don't >> you have you have an expense. Do you have you have the total cost, >> right? But that's that snow and ice technically does not actually have to be covered this year. I know we have been talking about the fact that we would like to and we plan to so that we don't
have to carry it over and raise it because we can. We don't want to. So technically I don't have to cover any of it. >> I I get it. I understand. I know how it works. But you wouldn't want to cover it within the operating budget. So >> correct. >> So it's it's not about the answers I
want to hear. Right. It it's I I just want where we are. I'm not getting a snapshot. You're you're telling us that we have it covered. We're not covering. If you tell me we have enough to cover it, that would mean to me that you have covered all your expenses, which would include snow and ice to make the
transfer so you don't have to raise and appropriate it for the next fiscal year. >> Right. So, you're giving me the mixed messaging. I'm just trying to figure out what's >> I don't have all of that detail and data in front of me because I wasn't prepared for that to be what was spoken about tonight. So, I apologize for that. I don't have all.
>> So what what do you prepare for when you come down before the city council for transfers? Can I ask that question? >> I prepare for what's in front of what's what it is discussing what we have in free cash, how much has been spent, how much is that >> you don't think that there's ever going to be a question about where we stand for the general fund budget on any of
these appropriations when you have appropriations coming from one department to another department. You don't think that a city councelor is going to ask you where do we stand at the end of the year? >> So I I do have that from the stuff that is being transferred in. So, for all of the salaries, I have what that surplus looks like, but I don't have all of the
expense surplus in front of me because that's not part of any of these transfers. It's a it's a $500 million budget that I don't have every detail of it printed and ready and up to date. >> Who has who has the detail of the $500 million budget? >> I want to say I have it, but you're
you're asking me to have it in front of me at this table. I don't have it now. >> You submitted you submitted did Mr. President, who submitted these transfers before us? >> The administration did. >> The administration. So, you submitted these transfers down before us. We have them before us. We're asking questions and the administration is not prepared
to answer the questions about transfers, which include transferring from one department to another department. And at no point are we supposed to ask the question, where do we stand at year end? I mean, year ends in two weeks, right? So, I'm not saying that we need to be to the penny,
but I would know exactly where we are and if we can cover snow and ice regardless of the reimbursements that are coming in. Uh, from my standpoint, the the reimbursements are just additional, you know, it's a bonus. I don't understand why the CFO is frustrated. You want you want to see
frustration. The frustration's on my end. You can put your hands in your on your face. It's just >> I am I am sorry that I It's Snow and Ice is not before you. So, I don't have that data in front of me. It's not that I don't know where we're going to be at your end. I didn't print it for the tonight. It's not that I don't have it
at my desk. It's not that I don't know this information. So, I guess my recommendation to you would be if you don't have that information, I would not tell the council that we can cover $1.44 million in the general fund if you do not know that that's the case. With that, I yield. >> Thank you, Councilman C4, Council Vice
President Dion. >> So, I first would like to start with apologizing. And what I'm apologizing for is I don't normally reveal my vote until I vote. And I said I was going to support this and I'm not. So, I apologize for changing my vote and and
A lot has been said here that has ch that has done has made that happen. But I also want to point out that yesterday my colleague in seat three and myself were in a meeting in the mayor's office for the budget. During that meeting, it
was told to us that we were getting a 500 or500 and some odd million uh thousand um reimbursement from the state for snow removal. And you just said you never
heard it till now till the counselor in seat 7 revealed that she got the communication. It was told to us >> point of order >> yesterday had a different number than what 5,000. >> Correct. So there's a point that she's trying to make is that we don't have the actual numbers.
>> She got it from Senator Rogers today. >> Just to clarify, it was posted on >> regardless. Council, her point is told $500,000 yesterday. Today it's $600,000. It's a different number. >> Content C. Thank you for your point of clarification. Content C4.
>> Okay. Different number or no different number. When the statement is made, I knew nothing of it until now. >> I didn't say I knew nothing of it. I didn't know the final numbers. I don't have a final number. We haven't We They've been saying this whole time >> the last All right. Listen,
>> it just keeps ch we don't have a number. We have an estimated number. So maybe the response should have been I believed uh what last I knew it was 500,000, not 600,000. I don't know. But it made me believe that you were saying you hadn't heard it. I'm sorry. I apologize if I'm wrong on that, but I want to make it
clear that I'm not supporting this either. And with that, I yield. Uh, Miss Souza, is there a way that we can um um as a as an administration to our colleagues point to be a little bit more prepared for these meetings as we go forward? Any any comments on that?
>> Well, I think that's all this council is looking for. I don't think the questions are unrealistic either. >> I mean, absolutely, councelor, but again, the the transfer that came down was from the FY25 surplus.
I understand that the turnbacks, Miss Hopky does know the numbers. she doesn't have them here with her right now. Um, we can get those numbers to you. Absolutely. And at this point in the year, yes, she would be aware of what
the turnback amounts will be. We still have some time in outstanding bills, of course, but I mean, no, that isn't difficult to ask for, but that isn't something that she came prepared for this evening or nor did I. >> Understood. Let's just make sure that we're more prepared to answer
counselor's questions as we go forward on all transfers, >> especially when comments are made that we can take the money within the operating budget and use it. That had to have come from some kind of statistic. >> Anything further for discuss? >> I'm sorry, Miss Soua. >> No, I said absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you so much. Councilman Cat
6 council Pekco. >> Yeah, I have a question I would like to see. Do you have something in your office that shows what it's going to cost us at the end? You have to be close. It's got to be >> cost. Council P is talking about the reimbursement for the for our snow. You must have that somewhere in your office
to show >> how much we're short. >> Yeah, I mean the budget. Yeah, the those numbers are in the current budget book. We we spent I think it's 2.6 in expenses for snow and we were budgeted at 400. So the gap is that
>> math. So I I mean we do know what we're short. >> We don't know necessarily what's coming in. When did you get the communication? Were you notified that Senator Roderdick had gotten his money? >> No, >> we knew that in general the state has put aside that they are going to put in money. There's a formula. I actually
talked to my D yesterday about all of this and I asked him if he had numbers and he said we don't have numbers yet by community. There is a formula that they are using that is similar to chapter 90 the way they do it by road mileage that is breaking up the first portion of the money. I think it's about 200 million
that is being broken up through the chapter 90 formula. There's another 100 million I think he said or another number right that is being broken up for the impacted most impacted communities but there has not been guidance even shared with our DRR let alone with the
communities on how that other portion is being broken out by that biggest impact amount. So with that being said, when I was asking for guidance and asking for numbers, we haven't been given final numbers. My state representative from on the do side has not given me final
numbers. He said that they have not seen any numbers at all. He knows that there are some postings that are happening with other communities um with representatives that get those numbers and they've been sharing on social media, but they do not have even an internal complete list of that. He thinks that those numbers are estimates based on that chapter 90 formula.
>> Okay. I think as a I think our colleague in seat six's clarific clarifying question was the comment that was made on the $1.4 million that you say you could run through the operational budget. Where did that number and statistic come from? >> Correct. I was just going to touch upon that again. So where why were you so
freely saying and you were confident that you could find the 1.4 without going to free cash >> because I know that we and looking at covering that $2.6 million deficit. I know that there is funding available to potentially cover up to 2 million of that. So, I know that the 1.4, but
again, I can't say that there's 2 million plus 1.4. You're right. And I So, I shouldn't I shouldn't have confidently said it in that way, but because that transfer to cover the snow and ice isn't before you. Technically, that is all still available. So, I I apologize and I I'm learning to not
misspeak on these things, but I >> Well, it's not being it's not that you misspoke. It's you're trying to take take a million and a half out of our savings account when you might have the money in your checking. In any normal family household, that wouldn't make sense. If you're going to pay your bills, you pay it from your checking and
you keep your reserves aside, right? >> So, I don't disagree, but my my view is our savings is our stabilization, not the free cash. And so that's just and again I'm not disagreeing with the view of it as part of the savings. I just >> what were we at for free cash four years ago?
>> So it chang every year it's a new calculation. So we typically spend it and put it into either stabilization or into different things and then we start back at you know we usually have left in there I'm going to say anywhere from 50 to you know $300,000. So when we recalculate the next year, it's kind of
starting over again of okay, now what surplus is left in your fund balance? And then we go through that again. So it's I don't I don't know to say it's a new number every year. It doesn't necessarily roll over as long as we're spending from it and appropriating from
it. I should say it's kind of a new calculation each year that happens. I mean, it's always a new calculation each year, but >> Okay. All right. With that, I yield. Thank you. >> Cut in seat three. Council annual. Thank you. So the budget book shows that FY26
projected snow removal is 3,397,000. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. Senator Rogers to the point my colleague in seat uh seven made publicly posted today that forward will be getting $64,188.52.
So that's $2,266,56848 we still need to cover then is the math we're looking for. >> Say that number again, counselor. >> 2,266,56848. >> I literally don't have a I don't I can't disagree. I haven't calculated anything that you're saying. Are you factoring in
what's budgeted as well? >> Yeah. If I take the 3 397 minus out the 526 243 that gives me 287 0757 and then I back out what Senator Rogers posted on Facebook today for
2.26. >> Okay. >> Yeah. I mean I I've been planning on covering you know anywhere up to 2.5 to 2.6 million. So that you just reduced that number to 2.2. So yes. >> So you think you can cover that number
the 2.26 26 million plus an additional 1.4 which is what's being asked for here. >> No. So that's that's what I was saying that I was not clear on and I apologize for. So I know that I can cover 2.2. So that the statement is can you cover 1.4 knowing that I've been looking at
covering 2.2. Yes, I know I have at least 1.4. I'm saying that I probably shouldn't have said it that way because I don't know if I have the 2.2 plus 1.4. I might, but I don't have that in front of me to speak off of the back of my hand. So, I I would need to pull that. And
>> so, it sounds like if the council doesn't support this, you'll take the 1.4 from other areas that haven't been spent, but then we'll need to for the spend from the free cash for the snow portion of it. >> We can't spend from free cash after June 30th.
June June 30th, everything from free cash has to be appropriated or it can't be used. It'll roll into the next year. So, I don't want to say it can't be used, but we can appropriate it from it after that. We can do year end transfers up to July 15th. >> And do we need to make a transfer to snow to cover?
>> Do we need to? In a very technical sense, no. Should we? Do we all want to? Yes. But technically, we don't need to. I think we should and I think it's the best way to move forward with it, but we technically don't have to. >> So, if we should, in your opinion, why don't this is the final regular meeting
of the city council this year. Why didn't we send something? because we didn't know how much Senator Rogers was going. >> Correct. And then on so we were going to do the rest from year and transfers. Once we got that number from the state, my goal was to do the rest of it with year and transfers because I could I was we would get that be be getting that
after this meeting now, not even after June 30th. We'd be getting it after this meeting. >> For Senator Rogers to post that number on Facebook today means that that number was baked yesterday and our agenda was modified today, wasn't it? >> The mayor called him. I mean, I've I've looked in the emails that I received
today because I was out of the office this afternoon at outside events, but I do not have an email from the state giving us that number. I'm imagining that this came from Senator Rogers's office and they posted the money that was received and how it was broken down,
but I do not have I just looked at my email while I was here. I do not have a formal notification that that amount. I know rep uh Senator Rogers has reached out to the mayor at a number of occasions and told him there would be money coming because Faro was one of the
hardest to communities, but I have heard ballpark figures. I've never heard a definitive. >> I think to the point my colleague in C4 made yes uh yesterday, you know, we were quoted it was at least going to be half a million, right? So we knew or that was
the number around there that we were looking at. So I think we that still is well over a million dollars. I mean we're talking, you know, if if it's a 2.2 gap and we were expecting in the vicinity of 500,000, we're still, you
know, well over 1.7 short. >> So I still think, you know, some transfer being the last meeting, regular meeting of the year should have been before us, you know, if if we should be transferring from free cash. Well, we do have the ability to do the transfers till July
>> and we were going to do that from so that's the point of the timing and and deciding what's coming from free cash versus year end transfers. Either way, we're talking about having set amount of money that we can appropriate from. So, if you want to switch, you know, doing the 1.4 to snow and do the 1.4 to, you
know, it either way you're you're talking about this is how much money we have available. Which line do you want to dump it into? It's the same money that we have available either way. I think it just goes back to the point I was making that when it comes to these free cash transfers, it's one by one by one by one. Let's do three million now.
Let's do two million there, 1.4 million here, and now we're going to have to do one in July for snow. So, it's one by one, >> but it's not but from free cash in July for snow. We can't do it from free cash. So, I mean that again, I'm I'm learning how you guys want to operate, but the
free cash transfers in my experience haven't always come down as at one transfer. These are the things that we know, these are the priorities, and sometimes we wait till the end for some of the other ones to see what's left over, to see what emergencies come up, to see what things are needed or not needed, and what flexibility we have and don't have.
So, I I apologize, but that's my understanding of how it's been treated and how I think it should be handled if that's not what the council wishes. I'm I'm learning apparently the hard way that that's how and I'm going to try and do better moving forward, but that's all I can say at this point. I I don't
>> So, did I hear you correctly? You say we can't use the free cash for that in July. >> June 30th is the cuto off to appropriate from free cash. >> So >> it's a state law. >> So if the council doesn't vote for this appropriation on the fire, the 1.4 million, it will force you to take from
other areas. How are we going to pay for the snow bill? If it's not from free cash stabilization, >> it would be from either year end transfers and technically again we don't have to cover it. It could roll into next year >> because of deficit. >> Yep. a large rather large deficit. >> Correct. Which is why we wanted to cover
it. So if we can cover it, I would like to cover it. And if we can't, I I because this is, you know, if we're going to pull those year end transfers into fire instead, I I my hands are going to be tied and we're going to do the best we can, but we're only going to be able to do
whatever we can do. So I don't know. So again, to not end up in that situation, this is what I have put before you and I apologize if that's not what everybody wishes it was, but I this is what I have. >> Okay, that's it for my questions. I yield. Thank you. >> Anything further?
>> Hearing none. That will conclude that item. Item seven, mayor and year end of year appropriations totaling $475,750 from the following account. City Council's expenses $2,750. Reserve for employee benefits $223,000.
Administrative services salaries $100,000. Financial service salaries 50,000. Facilities salaries $100,000. Two city council salaries $2,750. City clerk salaries 23,000 and police
salaries 450,000. Questions? councelor in seat one. Councelor Kadine, >> thank you. Just, uh, quickly on the police salaries, what was that as a result of >> So, um, so
>> Chief, >> I'd rather have him. >> I agree. >> Chief, just introduce yourself for the record. >> Good evening. JT [ __ ] chief of police for Far. >> How are you?
>> Good. How are you? >> Sergeant Peter Doo, administrative assistant for the city of Fall River Police Department. >> So, could you just explain what the 450 is? >> So, it's a combination of um in this particular budget for last fiscal year,
we were reduced in overtime costs or overtime funding as well as some buyouts and we were reaching the point of being at full capacity as far as funded vacancies. So, um, with that said, that's the difference that is needed to cover for essentially the buyouts that
happened in fiscal 26. >> So, will the buyouts the 450 essentially? Is that >> it would cover the majority of the buyouts? Yes. >> Okay. >> But it's also we're in over we're going to be running overage on our overtime budget as well because there was an anticipatory collective bargaining agreement that would have potentially
put some savings into overtime. Uh, but with that said, we had some significant events that happened. Uh obviously we had the blizzard happen. We had um some a critical incident that happened in February with an officer involved shooting that resulted in uh investigation overtime beyond the tour
of duty overtime. There were other criminal investigations that were lengthy that costed more money. And we also had that July incident not only with the Gabriel House fire uh but we had that barricaded suspect on uh Langley Street. >> So I guess then more of a statement than
anything else. So I I know we don't have retirements built into the upcoming budget, right? So that are we anticipating like a $450,000? >> Yes. So for the last meeting we went and
uh I worked with Sergeant Duz and we recognized that we're going to be in that same vicinity moving into fiscal 27. There isn't any money in that line for fiscal 27. Um and we are as of yesterday uh we are exceeding the
vacancies that or we've filled all vacancies and are actually in into starting to use that cops grant uh moving into the next fiscal year. Um so that's that wiggle room is not there.
>> Okay. I thank you. Any other questions? That will be all for transfers I believe. Thank you. Motion to adjourn the committee on finance made by councelor Raposo, seconded by councelor Pekham. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor oppose.
The eyes have it. Hey, hey, hey. City Council meeting will now be called to order. Madame clerk at 7:14 p.m. Madam Clerk, roll call, please. >> Council speed >> here.
>> Camaro >> here. >> Can >> here. >> Leon >> here. >> Hart >> here. >> Heck here. >> Carrera >> here. >> Rapos >> here. >> President Ponte >> here. If everybody in chamber can please rise for a moment of silent prayer. Thank you. And a salute to the flag
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. >> Pursuant to the open meeting law, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium.
Patis are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unpersceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible. Madame clerk, good evening. >> Good evening. >> The first item before you is a communication from the mayor and a request for the confirmation of the
appointment of John Sylvia, chairman of the board of park commissioners as their representative on the community preservation committee. >> Motion to confirm. >> Motion to confirm the appointment has been made by councelor Pereira, seconded by councelor repos. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor?
Opposed? The eyes have it. >> Item two is a communication from the mayor regarding House Bill H5482 extending the operating hours for liquor licenses and public alcohol consumption throughout the summer. >> Motion accept. >> Motion to accept the item and place it
on file has been made by councelor Raposo. Seconded by councelor Pereira. Is there discussion? Councelor in seat 4. Council vice president Dion. >> Yeah. I would just like to um honestly say I'm very dismayed at this whole thing. I wish we had taken the same route that Bedford did and not and not
allowed this and not pass this. And um you know they I years ago and I mean many years ago they always used to say nothing good happens after 2:00. Well, I think less good happens after 3:00. And I'll just leave it at that. And with that I yield. >> I thought it was midnight. Counselor at
scene three. Councelor >> Canuel. I think it's just >> I just want to echo the compliments of my colleague. I I think this was a bad idea. I I know it can potentially bring a few extra bucks, but the the riskreward here isn't for me on this. So,
>> uh I'm not a fan of this. I wish we had some oversight of this. We don't, but nonetheless, I'll still oppose this acceptance. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Constit. >> I'm in favor of it. The only reason that they did this was because of the World Cup soccer games. So because of the time
change in different countries and the games being played, there are some games won't end till 3 in the morning. So that's the reason if you're out watching the sports at at um you know any one of our restaurants or whatever that has that playing because it's expensive to I
guess watch it from home and it's 2 o'clock and they're tied. It's kind of I think then you'd see you'd see some action then if I couldn't see the rest of it. But it's only until a certain time. It's not they're going to do this forever.
>> Point of time limited to help some of the uh >> some of the consular C3. A point of clarification. >> The game doesn't go on till someone beats them. It ties can end that way. >> Some of them are on at two in the morning in different countries that they you that's when you can watch them here.
That's why they wanted to continue it. Huh. Anything further? Anything further on this item? Constant C2, Council Kamar. >> Yeah. No, I I agree as well. I don't think they should extend it. And I want to make sure people understand that they said they extended it to 3:00. That's for the licenses that have 2:00
deadline. People have like the IPA places that the breweries that close at 9, they can extend it till 10:00. If they go to 10, they can extend. It's one hour longer than what your original license that you have. The entire city is not going to be open till 3:00. Everyone has a a license to serve
alcohol and I think people are confused by that as well. But I mean listen at what point do you stop drinking after watching the soccer game? You do have to get home after the game, right? So I I don't agree with it as well. I think you know there's no point into it but it's might be a little opportunity where some
restaurants can make a little extra money but if Algeria is playing I'm not going to be up at 2 o'clock in the morning watching that game. I don't care if it is the World Cup and I love to watch soccer. >> With that I yield. >> Thank you. Anything further? Motion to accept the item >> place on file >> and place it on file has been made and
seconded. Roll call >> on accepting and placing on file the communication. Council scadine. >> Yes. >> Camar. >> Yes. I'll accept and place on >> no. >> Dion. >> No. >> Hart. >> Yes.
>> Peekom. >> No. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> Yes. >> Present. Ponty. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. 68. Three names. Item three is the communication from the mayor and the revised proposed fiscal year 2027 municipal budget.
>> Motion to take 3B out of order. >> Motion to take item 3B out of order. Has been made by councelor Dion. Seconded by councelor Pekham. Is there discussion? There is not hearing none. All those in favor? >> I opposed the eyes have it. Item three. Madam clerk, if you can introduce that
item. >> Yes. Item 3B is the uh proposed fiscal year 2027 U appropriation order for the emergency medical services enterprise fund. >> Councelor in seat for council vice president Dion. >> Motion to take the budget line by line.
The appropriation line by line. >> Motion to take the emergency uh EMS appropriation order line by line has made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by councel Pekkham. Is there discussion? There's not. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it.
>> Madam clerk, >> do we have it before us? >> It is. It's item three uh in our agenda. >> 3B. >> 3B. >> Three. 3B. >> Right here. >> Yeah. I was looking at this document. Sorry. >> Look.
>> Do the Does the council have the appropriation order? >> Yes, we do. >> Okay. I just want to make sure. >> Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. >> Be it ordered that the following fiscal year 2027 appropriations be provided through the emergency medical services
rates under chapter 53F and a half in the aggregate amounting to 17,944,935 be appropriated as follows. Item A from the EMS rate of revenues for EMS salaries in the amount of 9,925,27.
>> Is there an action? >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve the EMS rate revenue EMS salaries has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councel Canula. Is there discussion >> hearing? None. All those in favor? >> Opposed?
>> The eyes have it. from the EMS rate revenues for EMS expenses 2,599,485. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by council. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor?
>> Opposed? The eyes have it. >> From the EMS rate revenues for EMS capital, $241,200. >> Motion to approve. Motion to approve has been made by councelor Dion. >> Second. >> Seconded by councelor Canuel. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in
favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. >> From the EMS rate revenues for EMS transfers indirect costs 5,119,391. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve has been made by
councelor Dion. Do we have a second? >> Second. Seconded by council. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I opposed hearing. None. The eyes have it. >> From the EMS rate revenues for EMS debt
$59,833. >> Can I ask a question? I'm sorry. >> Sure. >> And we are going to go all the way to the bottom. Correct. We >> Okay. Yeah, we have to. Can I just point >> I'm a little conf I'm gonna >> point of order. Constant seat one. My colleague to the left of me brought
up a good point. Um, I know it's only a dollar, but it it says it's supposed to be 17 944 935, but the column on the right has 36. >> So, I don't know where the dollar is going to come.
>> It's only a dollar, >> but it's still we're approving a dollar deficit. >> All right. I I we can >> we just got to correct it at one of these lines. That's all. >> We're going to have to reduce it by a dollar. If if we just keep going >> and and and and in approving the um
transfer line item just now, I can still make reductions when we get to the indirects >> or do I have to? >> Uh the indirect costs um were just approved. >> Well, that's why I'm asking because we get to the indirect the bottom. I wanted to
>> Are you talking about the amount of 5 million119390? >> Yes, she just approved it. >> Yeah. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, we just approved that. So, do you not want do you want a motion to reconsider? >> I want to make a motion to reconsider because I want to reduce that number when we get to the indirects at the bottom.
>> Motion to reconsider has been made by >> second the motion to reconsider. >> Mr. President, the error is >> the indirect >> on the indirect >> 391 and then below it's 390. >> Let's just let's just keep this organized if we can. Thank you very much. Let's just keep this organized. We
have a motion to reconsider that has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by council of Pekkham, which is the reconsideration of the EMS rate revenues for EMS transfers indirect costs in the amount of 5 million119391 has been made and seconded. Any
discussion on the motion to reconsider on the motion to reconsider? Oh >> hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? >> The eyes have it. The item has been reconsidered. Madame clerk, reintroduce the item, please. from the EMS rate revenues for EMS transfers indirect
costs 5,119,391. >> Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject the indirect costs has been made by councel or vice president Dion. Do I have a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by councel Pekkham. Do I have discussion? >> Harry. Non. Roll call. Uh councelor seat. I'm sorry. Councelor seat 8
councelor repos. >> Can can we get an explanation to the rejection? >> Yeah. Um the reason >> Mr. President. >> Absolutely. Council C4. >> The reason I want to reject this is because as we get as we go down when we get to the indirects, I'm going to make motions to reduce um the indirects. And
if we approve it now, that can't happen because we will have already approved the appropriation. >> Which one? Which one's particular council? >> I am going to reduce I'm will be making a motion to reduce the pension line, the health insurance line and other for a
totality. So just just point of clarification that so I don't think she wants to reduce reject. She wants to reduce. >> She wants to reduce. >> Yep. >> Okay. Motion's reduced. >> I just >> What is your what is your amount you want to reduce counselor? >> So in totality um because I've seen also
the numbers have been adjusted since our original program. >> So just to be clear for the record, the motion to reject off the table. >> The motion to reject is off the table. >> Y I'm asking her she made the motion. Are you taking the rejection off the table? >> I'm going to remove that motion. Make it a motion to reduce. >> Motion to reduce in the amount
>> in the amount of $1,50,000. >> 1 million >> I believe is 050 is 900. Well, let's see. Eight nine 1 million. Yep.$1,ion50,000. >> Motion to reduce the EMS rate revenues
for the EMS transfers and direct costs by 1 million50 $50. 50,000 >> 50,000 1 million50,000 has been made by council vice president Dion seconded by councel Canuel is there discussion >> councelor in seat 8 councelor
>> I'm going to ask the same question can we get some rationale why the reduction please >> council in seat 4 would you mind >> I don't mind so would you like to know what so after a lot of research a lot of study a lot of questioning um
I believe that the numbers are inflated. The health insurance I would like to reduce by a 100,000 pensions 850,000. They went from 1.1 to 2.3
which is absurd. Um it's based on numbers instead of salaries which skews the numbers. And under other, I would like to reduce it by a hund. Actually, I'm going to reduce that by a hundred,000, but if you don't agree with
the pension, I can reduce that by another 333,000 because of the five firemen that that account should not be paying for. They're in the fire department. They're no longer on squad. It's $336,000 that should not be under other. So, um I
suppose I could do the pensions at 5 515,000 and other by 436,000. >> To be clear, the item on the table right now is 1,ion50,000. >> So, that's the rationale behind it. I don't know how else to explain it.
>> Thank you. That's but that's the motion on the floor. 1 million50,000 to reduce. You still have the floor. >> I yield. >> Thank you. Any further discussion on the motion to reduce hearing? None. Roll call.
>> Mr. President, should a dollar be added to that amendment to offset the 391 instead of the 90? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> For the record, Madam Clerk, can we introduce the uh total amount for the red reduction of the indirect costs? That would be the motion on the floor is
to reduce that item by $1,50 and >> $50,000 50,000 and $1. >> Motion to to be clear the motion has been made by council vice president Dion seconded by councel Pekham. Uh sorry excuse me councel Canuel. Let the record
reflect. Any further discussion? Roll call. >> Council Scadm. >> Yes. >> Chimera. >> Yes. >> Canuel. >> Yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. Hart. Yes. >> Pekkham. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> Yes.
>> President Ponte. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. 9 years. >> The next item would be the EMS rate revenues for EMS debt in the amount of $59,833. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve has been made by
councelor Dion, seconded by councelor Canuel. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. >> Okay. And is it the will of the council to vote on the new total? >> Yes. >> If I could just have a few minutes to
absolutely calculate that, please. Don't forget that dollar. Okay. The uh new amount uh to be raised uh through departmental receipts uh would be 16,894,935.
>> One more time. 16 million >> $894,935. >> Motion to approve that number. >> Second. Motion to approve the amount read 60,894935 has been made by councelor Canuel, seconded by council vice president Dion.
Is there discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. The next item is recommending that the following sums be appropriated to operate the EMS enterprise
direct salaries 9,925,027. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve has been made by councelor Dion, seconded by councelor Pekham. Discussion >> hearing none. All those in favor? The eyes have it. for direct expenses $2,599,485.
>> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councel. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. >> For direct capital $241,200. >> Motion to approve. Second.
>> Motion to approve has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councel. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. >> And for direct debt, $59,833. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve has been made by
council vice president Dion, seconded by councelor Hart. Discussion hearing. None. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it >> with a subtotal of 12,825,545. >> Motion to approve the total amount 12,8.25545 25545 has been made by
council vice president Dion, seconded by councel. Is there discussion hearing? None. All those in favor? Oppos? The eyes have it >> for the indirect health insurance in the amount of 1,547,435. >> Motion to reduce by $100,000. Motion to
reduce by $100,000 has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councel Pekkham. Is there discussion hearing? None. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it >> for indirect pensions 2,36,975.
>> Motion to reduce by $614,000. >> Second. Motion to reduce by $614,000 has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councelanual. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor?
>> Opposed? The eyes have it. >> For other indirect 1,264,980. >> Motion to reduce by $336,000. >> Second. Motion to reduce by $336,000 has been made by council vice president
Dion, seconded by councel Pekkham. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. >> The eyes have it. >> Okay. Now, I'll just need a few minutes to calculate these as well. So the new subtotal with the reductions
is $4,69,390. >> Motion to approve that number. >> I'm just going to just double check that. Okay. >> Thank you. 1692. >> I verified it. >> Oh, then Mike did. I feel comfortable. Uh um that number again is
>> 4069390. >> Motion has been made. Uh motion to approve that uh that number has been made by councelor Canuel, seconded by councelor Dion. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. And the total appropriation um
for the EMS enterprise for operations would be 16,894,935. >> Motion to approve the EMS stabilization account as amended. >> Stabilization >> stabilization >> enterprise. I say motion to approve the EMS
>> enterprise account. Motion to approve the EMS as amended enterprise account as amended has been made by councelor Dion, seconded by councel Canuel. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? >> The eyes have it.
Be it ordered that the annual budget for fiscal year 2027 from various funds is 484,255,787 of which the amount of 471 million410,187 be raised from ordinary revenue and municipal receipts for appropriation as
follows. Motion to take the uh appropriation line by line. >> Motion to take the appropriation order line by line made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by councel Pekkham. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it.
>> A1 for the purpose of excuse me section A for the purpose of general government. A1 from the general fund for mayor salaries $314,83. Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject has been made by councelor Dion, seconded by councel
Pekham. Is there discussion? >> Hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed. >> The eyes have it. >> Motion to take A2 to 10 together. >> Motion to take items A2 to A10 together. Has been made by councel, seconded by councel Pekkham. Discussion hearing.
None. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. Item clerk. A2 from the general fund for mayor expenses, $20,250. A3 from the general fund for city council salaries, $258,664.
A4 from the general fund for city council expenses, $170,700. A5 from the general fund for city clerk salaries $381,990 from the general fund for city clerk expenses $35,875
A7 from the general fund for election salaries 367,638 A8 from the general fund for elections expenses 104 $4,300. A9 from the general fund for veterans
benefits salaries, $31,77. A10 from the general fund for veterans benefits expenses 1,651,55. >> Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject made by councelor Dion, seconded by councel Pekkham. Is there
discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? opposed. >> C2 opposed. >> Councilman C2, a roll call vote on roll call vote, please. >> On rejecting line items A2 through A10. Councelor Scadin, >> yes. >> Chimera, >> no.
>> Can >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Raposo, >> no. >> President Ponti, >> yes. >> Motion carries, six yays, three nays.
Motion to take B1 through three together. >> Motion to take items B1 through B3 together. Made by councelor Dion. Seconded by councelor Kadim. Discussion. Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. Madam clerk. >> Section B for the purpose of
administration. B1 from the general fund for administrative services salaries 1,544,380. B2 from the general fund for administrative services expenses 3,632,85
B3 from the general fund for judgments and claims $350,000. >> Motion to reject. >> Second. >> Motion to reject has been made by council of vice president Dion. Seconded by councel Canuel. Discussion. Councelor in seat three. Councel Canuel. >> Thank you. Uh I noticed that there are a
few uh folks opposing the rejection on the last one. I do want to point out to the counselors uh my colleagues that with the changes to the EMS enterprise fund there's now 1 million >> 50
>> 50,000 and a dollar I think right was >> um now that is a deficit in the general budget that needs to be adjusted for and so we have to approve a balanced budget which we it's possible based on the reductions to the EMS indirects
With that, I yield. >> Well said. Thank you. Councilman seed 8 council proposal. >> So, just for clarification, if that's the case, we're rejecting the entire budget. Correct. >> Is that the will of the council? >> Um well, right now the will of the council has been councelor to take each item individually. Um that was voted on,
but apparently from what I'm being from what I'm seeing so far, that's the case. >> He council se you yield council 3. I do. >> I'm sorry. Constency 4. Council vice president. >> Yeah. I just want to know even though it may seem um a little crazy, we have no
option. This is the way we're we're dictated that we have to address the budget. If we don't go line by line and and reject each individual item, in the end they will say we did not take action. So we're trying to do this properly and correctly. With that, I yield.
>> Yeah. Thank you. Councilman Cday Council report. And the only reason I asked the question is if we're going to go through the exercise of making any additional cuts or not, but it doesn't seem like that's the case at this moment. No argument. I'm not going to make any motions for cuts. I'm reject I'm making a motion to reject. >> That's all I needed to know.
>> Thank you, councelor. Anything further? Council seat one. Council >> if we're just throwing out deficits there. Uh we're also we just heard the police chief talking about the fact that he has $450,000 in retirement buyouts that is not included in the the budget. So that's just another expense that hasn't been included. I mean, we can go
down the list, but I just we'll we'll throw that out for tonight's issues. With that, I yield. >> Thank you, councel. Anything further? Okay, Madame Clerk, uh the uh item on the floor, the motion on the floor at this time is >> to reject items B1 through B3.
>> Motion to reject again items B1, B2, and B3 has been made and seconded. Roll call. >> Councelor Scadm, >> yes. >> Chimera, >> no. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no. >> Peekom, >> yes.
>> Pereira, >> yes. >> Rapos, >> yep. President Ponti. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven yays. Two nays. >> Section C for the purpose of financial services. C1 from the general fund for financial
services salaries in the amount of 1,892,473. >> Motion to reject. Motion to reject the item has been made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by council. Discussion. >> Roll call. >> Council scadm. >> Yes. >> Camarra.
>> No. >> Canuel. >> Yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> No. >> Peekom. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> Yes. >> Present ponte. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven yays. Two nays.
C2 from the general fund for financial services expenses. $344,990. >> Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject. Made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by council of Pekkham. Is there discussion? There's not. Roll call. >> Council scadm. >> Yes.
>> Camarra. >> No. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> No. >> Peekom. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> Yep. >> President Ponte. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven yays. Two nays.
Section D for the purpose of facilities. >> Motion to take items D1 to three together. >> Motion to take items D1 to D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D three together made by councel the Kadim, seconded by councel Pek discussion hearing none. All those in favor the eyes have it. Madam clerk
>> D1 from the general fund for facility salaries 1 million $9,797. We're doing we took we took them together so you could just read. >> Okay. >> D2 from the general fund for facilities
expenses 2,181,465. D3 from the general fund for facilities capital has no appropriation. >> Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject made by councelor Pekkham, seconded by council vice president Dion. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? I oppose. The eyes have it.
>> See to council. We'll do the roll call. Roll call vote. >> Council Scadm, >> yes. >> Chimera, >> no. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no. >> Pekkham, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Reposo, >> yes. >> President Ponti,
>> yes. >> Motion carries, seven nays, two nays. Section E for the purpose of community maintenance. >> Motion. >> Motion to take E1 through three together. >> Motion to take E1 through three together. Made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councel Pekkham. discussion hearing. None. All those in
favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. >> Item E1 from the general fund for community maintenance salaries 5,655,974. E2 from the general fund for community maintenance expenses 17,891,532.
E3 from the general fund for community maintenance capital has no appropriation. Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject made by councel uh Peekom. Seconded by council vice president Dion. Discussion >> hearing none. Roll call. >> Council Scadm. >> Yes. >> Chimera. >> No.
>> Can >> yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> No. >> Peekom. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> Yes. >> President Ponti. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven days. Two naysay. >> Section F for the purpose. >> Motion to take F one through three
together. >> Community. Motion to take items F1 through three together made by council Pekkham, seconded by councel Canuel. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it. Madam clerk.
>> So section F for the purpose of community service. F1 from the general fund for community services salaries 2,894,654. F2 from the general fund for community services expenses, $672,631.
F3 from the general fund for community services transfers, $30,000. >> Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject made simultaneously by council vice president Dion, seconded by councelor Pekham. Discussion. Roll call. >> Council Scadm, >> yes. >> Camar,
>> no. >> Canuel, >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no. Peekom. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. Yep. >> President Ponty. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven Yay. Two Naz. >> Section G for the purpose of education.
>> Motion to take G1 to through three together. >> Motion. Take items G1 through G3 together. Has been made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by councel Pekkham. Discussion >> hearing. Not. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it. >> Can you do roll call, please?
>> This is just taking it together. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. Okay, >> I I'll acknowledge the roll call. >> Yep. Thank you. >> G1 from the general fund for school appropriation, 212,582,416. G2 from the general fund for school transportation
12,350,48 from the general excuse me G3 from the general fund for education assessments 10,225,442 >> motion to reject >> Motion to reject has been made by councelor Pekham seconded by council vice president Dion discussion roll call
council seat one council kim >> so I know we're not going to go through with and I know some of my colleagues have some talking points on some of this stuff, but for the school transportation, we still have an issue and haven't gotten a concrete uh discussion and it wasn't addressed. Uh the city administration is saying it's
$1 million or uh actuals coming in. Um and I think in the budget it's $16 million. Schools have $17 million. Having conversation with folks on the school side, they still maintain that they need $17 million. So, I I just hope when this goes back to the administration, both administrations, I
have a conversation before this comes back to us on what the real transportation number is because I haven't been able to get a solid number. Uh, with regards to that, with that, with that, I yield. >> On the record, if Madame Clerk, if you can just clarify that for the record uh to the mayor um and um side on that,
that would be great. I think that's important for the council to get that clarifying number. Nobody knows the transportation amount truly. Mr. President, >> Councilman Cday, Councelor Repos, >> and just through you, um, I did request some additional information from the for public schools. Um, and I asked the
clerk to hand it out to everybody today, um, from the interim superintendent of schools. It's a report from Mr. Almeida, um, with some some additional information regarding the school side position on transportation. >> Was there an amount? Just for the record, I'm not I don't have it in front of me.
>> Uh, it's it's the same amount. It doesn't change. is just the breakdown of it's essentially um a report for four years expended in their budget for FY27. >> What is the same amount? >> What's the total? >> Uh so total to so
it states total amount in budget for FY27 is 17,66,700. But there's also a number above that that states what a 5% increase would look like based on current spending. Um, again, I asked for this because I wanted some additional information based on our conversation last time at at the council
meeting. >> Thank you, councelor. >> Anything further for discussion on the item? Hearing none. Madam clerk, reintroduce the uh motion if you can, please. That's on the floor. >> Motion to motion on the force to reject items G1 through G3.
>> Motion to reject the item. Hearing no further discussion. Roll call vote, please. >> Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> no. >> Can >> yes. Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Propos,
>> yes. >> President Ponti, >> yes. >> Motion carries, seven yays, two naysay. >> Motion to take items H1 through H8 together. >> Second. >> Motion to take items H 1 through 8 together made by council.
Seconded by councel, excuse me, vice president Dion. Discussion hearing. None. All those in favor? >> Oppos? The eyes have it. >> Section H for the purpose of community protection. H1 from the general fund for police
salaries 24,780,499. H2 from the general fund for police expenses 2,130,62. H3 from the general fund for police capital has no appropriation. H4 from the general fund for harbor mass
salaries $4,500. H5 from the general fund for harbor ma master expenses $31,000. H6 from the general fund for fire and emergency services salaries 20
million21,736. H7 from the general fund for fire and emergency services expenses 1,187,798 H8 from the general fund for fire and emergency services capital has no appropriation. >> Motion to reject. >> Second.
>> Motion to reject has been made by council vice president Dion, seconded by councel. Is there discussion? >> Harry, none. Roll call. >> Council Scadin, >> yes. Camaro, >> no. >> Canuel, >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no.
>> Peekom, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Raposo, >> yes. >> President Ponte, >> yes. >> Motion carries, seven yays, two nays. Section I, for the purposes of other governmental expenses, I one from the general fund for debt
service. >> Motion to take one through four together. >> Motion to take I one through four together. made by council vice president Dion, seconded by >> councelor Pereira. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. Madam clerk,
>> I1 from the general fund for debt service 13,719,946. I2 from the general fund for insurance 52,42.4 $42,162. I3 from the general fund for p pension contributions
45,191,673. I4 from the general fund for reserve fund $63,13. >> Motion to reject. >> Motion to reject made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by >> second council >> a pekkham. Discussion. >> Roll call.
>> Council scadm. >> Yes. >> Camaran. No >> Canuel. >> Yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> No. >> Peekom. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> Yep. >> President Ponti. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven yay. Two nays.
Is it what is the will of the council with regards to the next um items? Fline items. >> Question. >> Motion to reject. Motion to reject the uh would be the funding >> the line items funding sources. Yeah. >> All the funding sources. Motion to
reject all funding sources made by council kadine. Seconded by council vice president Dion. Discussion roll call. Uh and for the record uh it would be from the stabilization fund 4 million from surplus revenue free cash 150,000 from the EMS rate revenues for insurance
1,547435 from the EMS rate revenues for pension 2306975 >> from the EMS rate revenues or other indirects 1 million264980 from the water rate revenues for insurance 618,839
from the water rate revenues for pension 1,195932. >> Oh, I should have done this with a ruler, madam clerk. I was trying to help you out here. >> Which one? From the water rate revenues and other indirects 813438
from the water rate revenues for insurance 154,615 from the water rate revenues for pension 292, 624 >> sewer. Those are sewers. >> I'm sorry. Sewer rate revenues, I'm sorry. Sewer rate revenues for pension
292624 from the water rate revenues. Sewer sewer >> sorry for the sewer rate revenues for other indirects 500,000 >> pensions >> 7 >> 61 I was just trying to give you a breakout click I instantly regretted
that u motion to reject has been made by council and seconded hearing no further discussion roll call >> and if I could just add from ordinary revenue and municipal receipts $471,410,187 >> that's also as part of that motion Do it be clear for the record to reject.
>> Yes. >> Yes. by by councel Kadim and seconded by council vice president Dion for the record. Roll call. >> Council Kadim. >> Yes. >> Chimera. >> No. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> No.
>> Pekkham. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Propos. >> Yes. >> President Ponti. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Seven yays. Two nays. Would it be appropriate to take the entire general fund operating budget amount and reject that as well? Council
seek for council vice president Dion before. >> Um I was going to suggest where as we have rejected the budget line by line that we now make a motion to reduce the appropriation to zero.
>> Motion to reduce the appropriation to zero dollars in the municipal budget has been made by council vice president. Seconded by councel Pekkham. Is there discussion? Roll call. >> Council Kadim. >> Yes. >> Camar.
>> No. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> No. >> Pekkham. >> Yes. >> Carrera. >> Yes. >> Propos. >> Yep. >> President Ponti. >> Yes.
>> Motion carries. Seven yay. Two nays. Is it the will of the council to adopt the appropriation order as amended at a zero? >> Yes, that would be a motion to adopt the appropriation order as amended with the reduction of zero being that number has been made by council vice president Dion. Seconded by council, is there
discussion? There is not. Roll call vote. >> Council Scadm, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> no. >> Canuel, >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> no. >> Peekom, >> yes. Pereira, >> yes. >> Rapo, >> yes.
>> President Ponti, >> yes. >> Motion carries, seven yay, two nays. >> I guess as a point of information, um I know there's nobody from the administration down. I'm not sure if they're going to be sending down a continued appropriation or not, aka a
112 budget. Um, right now we don't have a meeting scheduled between now and the end of the year. So, it's going to be up to them to reach out and figure that. I did make a suggestion >> that they have that as a backup, but I don't think they're prepared for that tonight in any way, shape, or form. So, >> Mr. President, can I council >> seat one?
>> Just quickly, I know the um some of my colleagues rationale was the fact that the budget is in balance. I just want to be clear and I was clear with the mayor. Uh, we still do not have legal counsel in the city council budget. So, I will not be supporting a budget that does not include that. So, I was upfront with the mayor from day one. So, even if this
budget comes back balanced, I'm still a no vote unless there's um legal counsel on the city council line item. With that, I yields. >> Thank you. Constitual. I'd like to make a motion that we have a special meeting for next Tuesday night, June 30th, at 6 PM for topic of the budget, which will give the
administration the opportunity to consider the votes that have taken place tonight and provide a final opportunity uh before proceeding with a potential 1112th budget. Motion to call a special meeting has been made by council Canu for next Tuesday at six o'clock to give
the administration time to present us an appropriation order of sorts or a continued appropriation has been made by councel. Do I have a second to that motion? >> Second to that motion. >> Con 88 seconded the motion. Is there discussion on the motion? Council seat
two council raises his hand. >> Yeah. How do we know they're going to have appropriate time to do that? Yeah. >> Well, I mean, it's a foolish thought to think that in a week they're going to come back with another budget, make all the changes that are going to satisfy us when one council already said, "Put the 40,000 in. I'll support
the budget." Don't put the 40,000 in. I'm not going to support it regardless if it's bouncing out. What's the What's the point with that? I yield. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman Seat 3. Council Canuel. >> Well, I mean, the mayor, you know, called me today and told me how devastating a 112th budget would be. And that's what's going to happen if the
council doesn't adopt any and the administration on their part doesn't send anything down. I would you know there are seven calendar days here left. So I you know I I'd hate for us to all make plans and then not have a quorum because you know we we
didn't have a date or time predetermined. I would fully expect and and maybe we can invite the acting city administrator down to tell us whether or not uh she feels it's reasonable to have something back to the council by Tuesday. Is that a motion to wave the rules, counselor? >> Yes, please.
>> Motion to wave the rules has been made by councel Canuel, seconded by councelor Raposo. Discussion. >> Yeah, on the motion >> on the motion to bring her down. >> Yes. >> Council in C2, Council Chimera. >> What do you expect her to do? Anyone that she's already done in a matter of a week? Now, >> I just want to >> when when it's already been
predetermined that if the $40,000 is not in the city council budget for a log, >> that's all that C that was councelor and seat ones. >> Well, there's others that feel the same way. Councelor, don't let's not be naive. If the mayor told you how crucial it was to not go to 112 budget and you decided that you were not going to take
that consideration and go to it anyways and if you regret that then you just deliver the consequences of what votes you took like everybody else does. That's all it is. But I don't think you know having them come down and explain to us hey can you fix this in a week it's going to happen because no it's not going to happen. >> Just letting you know. >> I have the floor
>> that you Thank you. >> C3 you have the floor. >> Thank you. I met with the mayor council D was there for two and a half hours yesterday. I think the first hour and almost half the meeting was dominated by the EMS concerns that I shared. Council
Dian had concerns as well. Obviously, there's been action taken tonight to address a large portion of that when it comes to the indirect piece. Um, that has a ripple effect on the rest of the budget that has to be sorted out. uh the council did not take action tonight to specify where you know that money will
be have to be shifted around but I think we've heard you know right from the table tonight that money is generally available to be shifted around. So I'd like to see them come up with where these this extra million50,000 uh can be moved around and where that
can come from. Um, but uh I do want to see uh if all I'm asking from Miss Suza tonight is not whether what those adjustments are, but whether or not she feels it's reasonable to have it back to us by next Tuesday.
>> On the motion to wave the rules, I want to just get that done so we can have her come down. Has been made and seconded. Is there discussion on waving the rules? >> Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. Come on down. Councilman C3, you have the floor.
>> So, Miss Souza, um the mayor obviously said to me today, it's very devastating if we move to a 112th budget. To me, we still have time on the clock. We still have a week before that potentially happens. And so, uh, I'd like to see the the council
proactively not wait for something to come down and then, you know, last minute call special meeting. I I'd like to proactively offer up next Tuesday as a date that we can meet again on the last day of the fiscal year if you feel you guys as administration can come back
to us with a new final budget. >> No. >> How's that? >> Great. Um I mean the at the last meeting when there were parts of the budget that
were re um rejected and suggestions were made those suggestions came to the administration the mayor reviewed them acted as he felt was appropriate and sent it back. Um, now if you're asking tonight after this rejection to go back
again and address items that if there are there specifics or you're talking a whole entire budget. I know the if I may the indirects were an issue. The transportation was an issue and the
city council $40,000 that was placed into the law department has been an issue. Um, I've been party to the majority with the exception of one counselor I believe I didn't sit in on and the feeling was the
budget couldn't be supported if that $40,000 was not put in the law department line item. >> Just point of clarification >> council se two >> by by more than one counselor. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> So I I I mean if you're asking can we go back and and work with numbers?
Absolutely. If that's the point, which is where the hangup is, and that's the ask to go back again and make that request to the mayor that that money be moved from law in the FY27 budget to this city council line
item. But if if we could get some direction as to what you're looking at because numbers can go back and be >> to be clear about the action that the council took tonight is the council voted to reduce the indirects from EMS
enterprise fund stabilization EMS enterprise fund uh by 1 million50,1 >> which means that the city side the city general budget now has $1,ion50,01 that it was expecting that it no longer
has because >> just like water and sewer that was approved a couple months ago. The enterprise fund now has been adopted tonight. >> Correct. >> So that is a clear change that has to be made. Right. >> Otherwise, you know, we don't >> we have a balanced budget. >> That's right. >> Correct. On that point. So I would say
Eddie, you know, you you've read the request from myself and uh some of the other colleagues on their concerns. Obviously the EMS was half of my time yesterday and we talked through that and obviously um you know mayor called me with some options and I I think you know
obviously we do possess the power to do what the action we did >> to reduce. >> Yeah. So with that you know >> if I could just get some clarification if I could council president. >> Sure. through the clerk. As far as a
continuing appropriation budget, would that need to be approved by the council? >> Yes, madame clerk. >> So, does a um does a department of revenue um memo that highly circulated that states that the submission of a
continuing appropriation budget by the mayor uh makes it go into effect that the council action would be to reduce or reject. But absent that action, the continuing appropriation goes into effect upon submission to the council.
>> What appropriation from last fiscal year or this fiscal year's? >> It's based on uh I'm looking at um the there were changes to >> based on need. >> Yeah, there was changes to the law several years ago where a 112th no longer is 112th of the former year
appropriation. >> Right. Right. It is a continuing appropriation which would be one 12th of what was submitted and then frontloaded with any expenses that are paid in the month of July. So an appropriation would need to be submitted by July one for
expenses through July August one if it if the budget still has not been approved and then um September one. >> So but just to be clear that will still need to come before this body to adopt. Correct. >> It's not automatic.
>> It has to be submitted, right? Yes. >> But absent council action >> to reduce or reject, it goes into effect as submitted. >> So, just to be clear, so there's no confusion, if the council didn't reduce or reject the item specifically, then it would, I guess, automatically go. But
we've already rejected the budget by a 7 to2 vote. So now it's going to be up to the administration to get us that I guess the word isn't a one 12th. a continu continuation of an appropriation, a continued appropriation. Counselor in C3, you have the floor. >> So, I I'll I'll change the question. The
question I'll ask is, would it be the administration's preference that we proactively schedule meeting with the expectation that you'll send something back down here or do you have no intention of doing that and we just move? >> Yeah, I mean, I can't speak for the mayor. Um, I he's at a school committee
meeting tonight, so I haven't spoken with him. Um absolutely the amount that was reduced in the indirects in the EMS budget does need to be addressed in the city's budget. Um so that would need to be addressed in there. But there were mentions of other deficits which in the
budget that if we had an idea of other than transportation and the indirects what specific items you're looking at then I can bring that back to the administration. Absolutely. >> So I'll leave it at this. I I My motion
will stand and however it goes it goes. I think we should put it on the books. If they don't send something down, I say we cancel it, but I would say for everybody's scheduling purposes and knowing what's at stake here, I would motion for the special meeting and that I yield. >> When when I was coming to the floor, uh
the CFO said she is not available to be here next um Tuesday night, >> but she could still submit something. >> Yeah. I mean, if if you don't want her to be present at a special meeting. >> So, I have it on Thursday.
>> Look, here the reality is the motion is before us is what it is. If I don't get or the clerk's office doesn't get anything, there's no meeting happening. So, >> that's fine. >> So, so but I I respect your motion and that's fine, but I'm just saying I I'm going to support it, but if there's no
appropriation, we're canceling the meeting. We can put it on the books to avoid open meeting law violations. That's fine, too. But >> if they don't send us uh anything down, it ain't happening. >> Well, I there will have to be a continuing appropriation to come down or a budget. Absolutely.
>> Yeah. Something needs to come down before us before July 1. Yes. Correct. >> So to councelor in C3's point if it's now Tuesday, it's Thursday. If you're going to have to you guys going to have to figure that out. >> Yep. >> Yep. Council C3, you have the floor. >> I yield. >> Thank you. Councilman C2, Council Kamar. >> No, no, no. I'm all set.
>> Okay. Thank you. Constant C6. Council Pekkham, >> you're all set. councelor and C4 council vice president Dion >> um I don't think we took our action we rejected the budget plain and simple we
know the budget is not balanced that has to be taken care of I don't believe it is our job now they always talk about administrative legislative administrative don't overstep your bounds well for us to tell you how to fix your budget we'd be overstepping our bounds our job was to reject it not fund
it now it's the administration's job to do their job and they either are going to do it or he's not going to do it. However it works out, it doesn't matter. I think it's kind of I agree with my counselor in seat two. I think it's kind of a point. What is the point? You know,
if they choose to send something down, they can notify the clerk, notify the president, we can set up a meeting. Above and beyond that, I think we should just do the vote and decide, are we going to follow the the uh motion or not? And with that, I yield. >> Thank you. Councelor in seat seven.
Councelor Pereira. >> I frankly don't care where the $40,000 for the council's legal money would be. I don't care if it's in the law department. If you want to use the $40,000, I'm sure the law department's going to give it to you. The money is
there appropriated for city council. So to say it's got to be in city council or come on, you've got your $40,000 to do whatever you want with an attorney. I don't care where it is, but it's clearly outlined. And if you're going to have a hard time getting it, let me know. I'll
be on your side to get fight with you to get the money because you're going to get it. I think that we should be asking the question to the CFO with the money that was reduced from the budget. How many days will it take her to figure out where she can plug this money in? If she
says, "Hey, I can do that tomorrow. I'll rearrange some figures. I'll do it tomorrow. Have a meeting on Thursday." We're asking the interim city clerk when they're going to bring the budget down. She can't answer for the mayor or for the for the CFO. >> You have enough positions. You don't
need >> I don't know. But should we wave the rules and have her have Emily come down and say, "Emily, when do you think you could fill in this the budget with this amount of money that was reduced?" If she says, "Hey, I can sit and do it tomorrow. I'll do it all day tomorrow.
I'll have it for you Thursday night or I'll have it for you Friday. or have it for you Saturday, whatever. But >> there will be a lot of work going into a continuing appropriation as well with all the expenses that would need for the month of July.
>> So, yes, there can be another budget prepared. I'm sure that the mayor would do that, but my only question is, is there still a point where we're going to come back and then we're going to be up against it on the 30th where if the
$40,000 is still not in the city council line item. Is that going to be rejected? Again, >> just want to make a point if I may. I'm so sorry to interrupt you. The point isn't just the $40,000. >> I understand that. Okay. >> I understand that, but I mean there has been clear
>> conversation with the administration that that is a point of contention and that if that is not the case, the budget will not be supported. So we can we can we have to change absolutely the budget because of the change in the indirects
in EMS which affects the general fund. Absolutely that can be done. I'm certain can do that fairly quickly. But again to bring it all back down and then come back with a continuing appropriation. She's got to work she can work on both
simultaneously I would imagine. But again, time frame wise, I I can't I can't answer that question for her. >> Well, I don't know if we want to ask her if she can do it or what. I don't care about the $40,000 where it is. I know we
have the $40,000. I'm happy with that, but it doesn't make a difference to me what drawer it's in. That's just me. If that is going to stop people from voting on this budget, no matter what she does, I can't answer that. I know it's not going to make a difference for me. If it
makes a difference for other people, then they should say it because why have her work if it's a community and it doesn't get changed >> then that's you know we're at an impass. There's the cooperation we talk about an
impass over where $40,000 goes. Not important to me. With that I yield. >> Thank you. Councelor in seat one. Councelor Kadim. >> Thank you. So, I just want to um actually use councelor and seat 7's uh I guess offer to help fight uh I didn't
get the $40,000 and I want you to help me fight for the $40,000 right now. >> So, I don't know if you want me to call you afterwards or you want to do this now. Uh the mayor, we want to talk talk about the delay in the budget. I think the mayor met with everybody every sing but >> one I think. >> Yeah, not everybody.
>> No, I didn't go. >> Okay. So, everybody but one individual. So, I I think everybody has already spoken. So, the folks that said that they wanted the 40,000, the mayor said he's not doing the $40,000. So, the question is where's the cooperation? We cooperate all the time. $40,000 to get
sent over because cooperation council refuses to give us $40,000 and there is a big difference as to where it is. So, please, I am asking you help me fight for $40,000 for the city council. So, I am calling in that card right now on the record. Thank you. I council.
>> So, if I get the $40,000 to come into the city council budget. >> I I'll approve the budget. >> Then you're going to approve it. >> Absolutely. >> All right. I'll go talk tomorrow. >> Thank you. >> I'll go for me, Sean. It doesn't make a difference. >> It makes a difference to me. >> 40,000. >> Right. It makes a difference to me.
>> Last time we had 40,000 in our budget. We never used a penny. So >> So it makes a difference to me. It makes a difference to the mayor. It makes a difference to Alan Ramsey, right? Corporation council. So there clearly is a difference because if it didn't make a difference, we wouldn't be fighting with that because the mayor would have put
$40,000. and he just tells me that, you know, corporation council is stubborn. Well, he's the mayor. He's choosing not to put $40,000 into the budget. He's the one that sends the budget down. So, if you can help me get $40,000 into the city council, I appreciate. >> I will help you get that. >> Thank you, councelor. You yield. Thank you. Councilman in seat 2, councelor Kamar.
>> I yield. >> No, I'm also >> Okay. Thank you. Councelor in seat 8. Councelor Raposo. >> Yeah. I was just going to say, can we give can we give the city administrator a few minutes maybe to call the mayor and find out what how he wants to proceed? I mean, we're at an
>> We have a whole council meeting tonight. If she wants to step out when we're going through council and then give me a nod before we adjourn and anybody wants to do another motion, that's fine, too. >> I I think it's appropriate to do it now >> and get an answer where you want to recess now. >> Yes, absolutely.
>> I believe the man's still at the school committee meeting. I I don't know. >> Who's that meeting? We're at the meeting. We're going to wait for >> motion to move the question. >> There's There's no question to move. Councelor in Cat 8, you all done? You >> I'm good. >> All right. Councelor in Cat4, Council Vice President Dion. >> Okay. In in this whole convoluted mess,
I don't want to lose sight of the fact that there's still an issue with transportation that needs to be straightened out >> that we need to know both sides agree on a dollar amount. So, there's one of your indicators, transportation. If I may, uh, councelor Raposa did send an email
today asking me to assistant in getting the information from the school department, which I did see came this afternoon. I unfortunately haven't had a chance to look at it. Um, I saw the CFO wasn't included in it, so I forwarded it to her, but there was information. So,
our action in rejecting the budget, allows that conversation to take place allows both sides to get together, >> figure out transportation, come back to us with a number that both sides agree on, and I'm sure we'll all say, "Great, we finally did it." And we'll approve it. >> Great.
>> But you know the sticking points, you know what we're looking for, you know that the budget's not balanced because we reduced the indirect and EMS. So, you know what needs I believe you do know what needs to be fixed. So with that, I yield. >> To be clear, there was a the motion to
leave the uh move the question is actually appropriate. I stand corrected because there is an item to call the special meeting. So I forgot about that. So uh there's a motion to call the question has been made by council, seconded by council adon. Roll call
>> on moving the question. Council kadim. >> Yes. Camarra >> where we moving it to independence debate. >> I don't know. Friday, Saturday, Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, >> both in the question. >> Yes. >> I can't >> Yes. >> Dion,
>> yes. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Rapo, >> no. >> President Ponti, >> yes. Is there a motion? That was a motion to call the question. Now there's a motion to call the special meeting on Tuesday. Next Tuesday. What is that date?
>> June 30th. >> June 30th at 6:00. That has been made by councel Canuel, seconded by councelor reposo. Discussion council seat to council camar. >> Yeah. So gets back to what started this whole thing. What are we going to do? Council C4 just says go back look at the
transportation figure out the number come back that we can all agree on and then we'll support it. They haven't been able to agree on it for how many months now? >> Almost a year and a half. Didn't agree on it last year. So what makes you think in a week we're going to all of a sudden agree on the number? Because what? because it's June 30. It's coming up now. It's we have to agree on a number.
>> No, none of it makes any sense. Look, we took the votes. >> Everybody did what they wanted to do regardless of what happened. >> I don't care if people voted for against it. Doesn't matter. But you live with your consequence. Live with your choices you made. Live with the consequences. The unforeseen circumstances that are
going to come out of this, just going to deal with them. It's all it is to say now, well, you know, it was very important. The mayor did not want to go to 112 budget, so we shouldn't do this. Well, we did it and we had a chance to make the reductions tonight. We didn't do it. We say let the mayor make the let
the administration make the reductions. We could have done it here. It's part of what we could have done. We chose not to. I'm okay with it. You know, I mean, to say, let's go have come down and have another meeting only to reject it again because we don't agree with the numbers. To me, it doesn't make any sense. We've been at this for too long. We started
this process very early. Kudos to you for doing that, getting it all lined up so everyone could know where we were. And now we're going to go to the last day of the year to vote on it when we started it extremely early and it's plenty of time to air out our differences. Sometimes you just got to realize they're not going to get aired
out. End the story. With that I yield. >> Thank you. Councelor in seat 8 council repos. >> The only thing I'm going to say is I mean there's still there is still a week to be had. I think this is the last last chance of an olive branch for something to be changed and we can take advantage of that opportunity. So I'm going to support my colleague in C3 to to try to
get a meeting. um try try to make it happen. I think she knows she knows what needs to be said and what needs to be had. Again, I I would really want them to have a conversation of what the plan is because we're taking a vote for a meeting that may not even be able to happen. So, um I'll yield.
>> All right. Uh roll call on the special meeting. >> Council Kadin, >> no. >> Chimera, >> no. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion, >> no. >> Hart, >> no. Pekkham,
>> no. >> Pereira, >> no. >> Raposo, >> yes. >> President Ponti, >> yes. >> Motion fails. 3A, six names. >> Next order of business. >> Thank you.
Item four is a communication from the mayor, a planning board report, and a resolution regarding the proposed amendment to expand the waterfront downtown housing development zone, also known as the central market housing development district zone and plan
amendment. >> Motion accept place on file, adopt the resolution. A motion to accept the item, place it on file of the planning board report, and adopt the resolution has been made by councelor Raposo, seconded by councelor Hart. Discussion >> hearing none. Roll call.
>> Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> yes. >> Can >> no. >> Dion, >> no. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> no. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Reposo, >> yes.
>> President Ponti, >> yes. Motion carries. Six yays, three nays. Item five is a communication from the mayor and the following appropriations. 5A in the amount of 3,670,000
from FY25 sewer retain earnings to sewer transfers. >> Motion. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by councelor Raposo. Second. >> Seconded by councel Canuel. Discussion hearing. None. All those in favor? >> Oppos?
>> Nay. >> Roll call. >> Council Kadine. >> Yes. >> Camarra. >> Yes. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion. >> Yes. >> Hart. >> Yes. >> Peekom? >> No. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo? >> Yes.
>> President Ponti? >> No. >> Motion carries. Seven yays. Two nays. Item 5B in the amount of 1,770,000 from FY25 water retained earnings to water transfers. >> Motion to adopt. Second.
>> Motion to adopt has been made by councel Canuel, seconded by councelor Raposo. Discussion. Roll call. >> Council Kadin, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> yes. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Pekkham,
>> no. >> Pereira, >> yes. Rapo. >> Yes. >> President Ponti. >> No. >> Motion carries. Seven years, two nays. >> Item six is a a communication from the mayor and an order appropriating 1,400,000
from the FY25 surplus revenue to fire salaries. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by council Chimera. Seconded by council Hart. Is there discussion? >> Roll call. Councelor Scadin >> objects.
>> Councilman seat one objects. Any other object? Councelor in seat six objects. Any no further objections before this council? Next order of business. Item seven is a communication from the mayor and end of year appropriations in
the amount of $475,750 from city council expenses $2,750. Reserve for employee benefits $223,000. Administrative services salaries $100,000. Financial services salaries $50,000.
and facility salaries $100,000 to the following um line items. City council salaries $2,750, city clerk salaries $23,000 and police salaries $450,000. >> Motion to adopt.
>> Motion to adopt made by councelor >> Canuel or councelor Reposo, sorry, seconded by council vice president Dion. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? >> You guys have it. Item eight is a communication from the mayor and
resolutions for tax increment exemption agreements for um item 8A is the Jefferson realy LLC at 37 Park Street. >> Motion to adopt. Second. >> Motion to adopt is made by councelor Raposo. Second by councelor Hart. Discussion. Roll call.
>> Kascade. >> Yes. >> Chimera. >> Yes. >> Can >> no. >> Dion. >> No. >> Hart. >> Yes. >> Pekkham. >> No. Pereira >> Raposo.
>> Yes. >> President Ponti. >> Yes. >> Motion carries. Five yays, three nays. And item 5B is for the Second Street Trust at 377 Second Street. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by
councelor Reposo, seconded by councelor Hart. Discussion. Roll call. >> Council Scadm. >> Yes. >> Camar. >> Yes. Canuel, >> no. >> Dion, >> no. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> no.
>> Pereira. >> Raposo, >> yes. >> President Ponti, >> yes. >> Motion carries, five years, three nays. Item nine is a communication from the mayor and a memorandum of agreement for the Fall River EMS unit, ASME, Council
93, Local 1202. Motion to approve. >> Motion to approve and adopt. Made by councelor Dion. >> Second. >> Seconded by councelor Pereira. Discussion. >> Hearing no further discussion. All those in favor? I >> opposed. The eyes have it. Sorry, I was used to roll calls tonight.
Item 10 is a communication from the board of election commissioners in an order authorizing polling places for the state primary election on September 1st, 2026 and the bianial state election on November 3rd, 2026
as well as another order designating polling places and changes to polling places for these elections. >> Is there a motion to adopt both orders? Motion >> Motion to adopt both orders has been made by council Pereira. Seconded by >> second >> council Kadim is there discussion
hearing? None. All those in favor. >> Council C3. Do you have your hand up? >> No. >> Okay. Uh motion to adopt has been made and seconded hearing. No further discussion. All those in favor? >> Opposed? >> Council a roll call vote please. >> Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Camar, >> yes.
>> Can >> no. >> Dion, >> no. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Beckham, >> yes. Pereira, >> you unpack. >> Yes. I thought you said >> Raposo. >> Yes. >> President Ponti. >> Yes.
>> Motion carries. 78. Two. >> This is one heck of a yes. >> Whereas the city of Fall River and the Fall River School Department last signed an indirect cost agreement in 2017. Now therefore, be it resolved that the administration and the school department
convene to discuss finalizing a proper indirect cost agreement. >> Is there a motion? >> Motion to adopt. Motion to adopt has been made by councelor Raposo. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Seconded by councelor Pereira. Is there
discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? >> I >> opposed. The eyes have it. Whereas the Route 79 the V Street Carter improvements project is nearing completion and whereas there is an anticipated construction of new
buildings in this area resulting in new restaurants, businesses, housing and parking lots within this development. And whereas the existing city code does not address all aspects of this potential new construction and the creation of allowances and restrictions
on these new installations should be discussed ahead of time. Now therefore, be it resolved that the committee on ordinances and legis legislation convene with various parties, including corporation council, the director of engineering and planning, the director of inspectional services, and the
director of traffic and parking over the course of multiple meetings to discuss the changes that may occur within the Route 79 Deval Street corridor area. and be a further resolved that at the will of the committee on ordinances and legislation, corporation council draft a
proposed ordinance or multiple proposed ordinances to address all development, traffic and parking concerns within the area of the Route 79 the V Street corridor improvement project. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by councelor Raposo, seconded by councelor
Hart. Discussion the sponsor of the resolution councilman seat 7 councelor Pereira. I just have some concerns that we're not going to do enough there and after things start happening, people are going to start complaining. So, let's try to be proactive. The houses that they built or condos or whatever that
they built on Dery Street that if you had a an SUV, you can't park your car in the garage. That was pretty pretty crazy. And it was done within the zoning board and and the laws that they had and that's ridiculous. So, we just don't want to see that happen again. With that, I yield.
>> Thank you, counselor. hearing. No further disc 3. Council Canuel, >> I just want to express my support for this. I was actually in discussions trying to figure out the right resolution when I found out that councelor Pere had already filed uh two resolutions related to the things I was
looking into. So I appreciate her filing and look forward to this uh being further discussed in committee. >> Thank you. Councelor hearing. No further discussion. Motion to adopt has been made and seconded. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. Whereas the city of Fall River is actively engaged
in the Route 79, the Vall Street corridor redevelopment project, aiming to reclaim the waterfront, attract private investment, and improve quality of life. And whereas the proliferation of large intrusive outdoor billboards, both electronic and otherwise, can
degrade the visual character of the city, create traffic distractions for motorists, and negatively impact residential property values. And whereas the current city code governing outdoor advertising signs and billboards does not adequately reflect modern aesthetic
standards or the specific economic development goal of the newly redesigned waterfront corridor nor quality of life for residents within view of these billboards. And whereas updating and strengthening regulations on the size, height, lightning, lighting, spacing,
and placement of billboards will protect public safety and enhance the visual appeal appeal of our gateways. Now therefore be it resolved that the committee on ordinances and legislation convene to review the existing city ordinances concerning outside billboards
and advertising signs and be further resolved that the committee investigate and draft specific amendments to establish stricter guidelines for billboards citywide with particular restrictions, prohibitions or special permit requirements tailored to the
Route 79, the V Street corridor development zone and be a further resolve that the committee report its findings along with recommended ordinance revisions back to the full council for implementation. >> Motion to approve. >> Motion to adopt has been has been made
by councelor Dion, seconded by councelor >> second >> uh Pekkham. Discussion of sponsor of the resolution council seat 7 councelor Pereira. >> I I just think that we have to be careful. It's not just about down by Deval Street because you can't do spot zoning either. But we did have
ordinances before. I want to say it was when Jasel was here and Kathy Viveres was city administrator. They wanted to put a million billboards. There was only one place that we could have put one was on Center Street. >> They taught that. Somebody parks there
now. But I know people are complaining about the billboard that's down near Almax. But that's done. It's not going to be removed. It's going to stay there. It was approved. So now moving forward, let's see if we can put those up where. And I'd also like to commend Joe Cavalo
for all the work he's done on finding ordinances and and um different communities of what they've done with billboards. He's reached out to all of us. He sent emails to all of us. Um he's done a really good job with that. So made my work easier looking for stuff.
So with that, I yield. >> Thank you. Councilman C4, Council Vice President Dion. >> Yeah. I just I think this is great. Um it ironically there were three of us that contact the city clerk's office saying we want to write a resolution on billboards and council seat seven beat
us all to the punch. >> I'm retired. I have time. >> Um and we all actually wanted to sign on but we were all on ordinance so we didn't do that because we didn't want to have violate any open meeting laws. But
uh no I think you know it's important. Do we want to do we want our waterfront to look like Newport or do we want it to look like Las Vegas? I love Las Vegas, but if I want Las Vegas, I go there and visit. I don't want it on our waterfront that we just that the state, the federal government, and the city invested
hundreds of millions of dollars to destroy it with obnoxious bright signs. And with that, I y >> Thank you. Anything further on this item? Hearing none. Motion to adopt has been made and seconded. Hearing no further discussions. All those in favor?
>> Opposed? The eyes have it. >> Item 14 is a citation for Mary E. Gooff, retired captain, US Army nurse corpse, dedication and commitment to Fall River veterans. >> Motion to accept and place on file has been made by councelor Raposo. Seconded
by councelor Canuel. Is your discussion hearing? None. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have >> item 15 is an order for a jointly owned pole location for Massachusetts electric company DBA National Grid and Verizon New England Inc. for East and A for one
new jointly owned pole location. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by Councel Canuel, seconded by Council Pekham. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? >> You guys have it. Next, we have an order for the police chief's report on licenses for a taxi
cab driver for Steven B. Rebello. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by councel Pekkham, seconded by council vice president Dion. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. Item 17 is an order for an auto repair shop license renewal for Timothy Pinto
SM Automotive LLC DBA ents at 196 Oakrove Avenue. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt as made by councel Pekkham. Seconded by council vice president Dion. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed. >> The eyes have it. Item 18 is an order
for an order repair shop license transfer for license number 168 located at 697 Pleasant Street from Wilson Frank Elias DBA Onetop Auto Center Inc. to Jefferson Moises DBA OneTop Auto Center
Inc. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by councel Peekom. Seconded by councel Canuel. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. Item 19 is an order for an auto repair
shop license transfer for license number 217 located at 400 Stafford Road from Francili J. Grizz DVA Shez Automotive Center to Brandon Roachcha DVA She's Automotive Center. >> Motion to adopt. >> Motion to adopt has been made by council
Pekkham. Second >> seconded by councel Canuel. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor opposed. The eyes have it. Item 20, >> the number of claims for corporation council. >> Motion to refer the items to corporation council has been made by councel Pekom,
seconded by councel kadim. Discussion hearing. None. All those in favor? Opposed? We eyes have it. >> Item 21 is a communication from a city resident regarding traffic and parking conditions on Progress Street. >> Motion to accept public safety. Motion
to refer the item to committee on public safety made by council repos. Second by councel Pekkham. Discussion >> hearing not. All those in favor? >> Opposed? >> The eyes have it. >> Motion to take items 23 to 34 together. >> Just do 22 first. >> Oh, I'm sorry. I just crossed that off.
>> Item 22 is an application for a license to conduct a one-day bingo at the Children's Museum of Greater Fall River on October 22nd at 4500 North Main Street. >> Motion to approve. Motion to approve has been made by councelor Raposo, seconded by councelor Canuel. Discussion hearing
none. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it. >> Motion to take items 23 to 34 together. >> Motion to take items 23 to 34 together made by councel Kadim. Seconded by councelor Raposo. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed. The eyes have it.
>> I have to approve items 23 to 24. >> Motion to approve items 23 through 34 after reading has been made by councelor Camarra. Seconded by councelor Hart. Discussion hearing. None. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. Madam clerk for the record.
>> Those are city council minutes for public hearings held May 26th, June 2nd, and June 9th of this year. Committee on finance held May 26, May 28th. June 1st, 2nd, 3rd, and 9th. Regular meeting of
the council held May 26, 2026. Special meeting June 3rd and regular meeting June 9th. Thank you. Next order of business. >> Item 35 is a notice of casualty and loss at 183 Winthrop Street. >> Motion to accept and place on file. >> Motion to accept and place on file has
been made by council of Pekkham, seconded by councelor Raposo. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. Item 9A is the item that was added um this afternoon is a communication from
the mayor and they propose a home rule petition regarding the use of the gold room at the Liberal Club to serve as a polling location for the 2026 state elections. >> Is there a will of the council to pass it through an emergency preamble? >> Yeah. Motion to pass through emergency preamble. >> Second.
>> Motion to pass the item as an emergency preamble has been made by councelor Pereira, seconded by councelor Hart. discussion. Roll call. >> Council, >> why are we putting it through the House of State House? >> Because it have to go through its proper
readings still. Madam clerk, >> uh the the item was filed after the agenda closed on Thursday and um section 2-125 of the city code outlines that the council should vote on an emergency preamble when an orders are filed after
the closing of the agenda because it relates to a special act. I just want to confirm make sure that there's no issue when it gets to the state house. >> Thank you. >> There wasn't a reading. I apologize. That's correct. Thank you, Madam Cler. You yield, counselor. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Roll call. >> Council Kadim, >> yes.
>> Camarra, >> yes. >> Canuel, >> no. >> Dion, >> no. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Carrera, >> yes. >> Reposo, >> yes. >> President Ponty, >> yes. >> Motion carries, seven nays, two nays for
the emergency preamble. >> Motion to adopt all readings. >> So made. >> Oh, really? Motion to adopt as all readings would have been read. Has been made by councelor Raposo, seconded by >> second. Council Pekum discussion roll call >> on adopting the home rule petition.
Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> yes. >> Canuel, >> no. >> Dion, >> no. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Reposo, >> yes. >> President Ponti, >> yes.
>> Motion carries, seven, two nays. The committee on ordinances and legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted unanimously to recommend that the accompanying proposed ordinance accompanied by an emergency preamble be passed through first reading, second reading passed to be
enrolled and passed to be ordained. This is a handicap traffic ordinance. >> Motion adopt emergency preamble. >> Motion to adopt the emergency preamble made by councelor Raposo. Seconded by councel Hart. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? >> Roll call vote, please. Roll call.
on adopting the emergency preamble. Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> yes. >> Canuel, >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Carrera, >> yes. >> Raposo, >> yes. >> President Ponte, >> yes. >> Motion to pass through all readings. >> Motion to pass through all readings made
by councelor Rapo. Seconded by councel Pekkham. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed? The eyes have it. The committee on ordinances and legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted 4 1A to recommend the
accompanying proposed ordinance be passed through first reading as amended with council proposal voting in the negative. This is the miscellaneous traffic uh proposed ordinance for se for streets high and locust streets. That's section one on your agenda.
>> Is there a motion? Um, >> so moved. >> There was there was a motion and there was >> there was an amendment on that. >> Motion to pass their first reading would be appropriate. Has been made by councel >> with the amendment. Correct. >> As amended. Right. >> Motion to pass their first reading as
amended. Has been made by council kadim. >> Second. >> Seconded by councelor Pereira. Discussion. Roll call. >> Council. >> Yes. >> Camarra. >> Canuel. >> Yes. >> Dion. Yes.
>> Hart. >> Yes. >> Peekom. >> Yes. >> Pereira. >> Yes. >> Raposo. >> No. >> President Ponti. >> No. >> Motion carries. Six yays, two nays. >> The committee on ordinances and
legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted unanimously to recommend that the accompanying proposed ordinance be passed through first reading as amended. This is uh also for miscellaneous traffic and it is section two on your agenda. >> Motion to pass through first reading.
>> Motion to pass the first reading made by councel reposo. Seconded by councel Pereira. Discussion hearing none. All those in favor opposed. The eyes have it. >> The committee on ordinances and legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted unanimously to
recommend that the accompanying proposed ordinance be passed through first reading as amended. This is also for miscellaneous traffic and is section three on your agenda. >> Motion to pass for first reading. >> Motion to pass the item through first reading made by councelor reposo. Seconded by councel canuel. Discussion hearing. None. All those in favor?
>> Opposed. The eyes have it. The committee on ordinances and legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted 4 days 1 nay to recommend that the accompanying proposed ordinance be passed through first reading with council Pereira voting in the negative. This is the proposed
ordinance amending the solid waste collection and disposal uh section 62-2C. >> Motion to pass the first reading. >> Motion to pass the first reading has been made by councelor Raposo. >> Second. >> Seconded by councel kadim. discussion.
Roll call. >> Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Chimera, >> yes. >> Can >> yes. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom, >> yes. >> Pereira, >> no. >> Raposo, >> yes.
>> President Ponti, >> yes. >> Motion carries, eight days, one name. Committee on Ordinances and Legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026. Voted unanimously to recommend that the accompanying proposed ordinance be
passed through first reading as amended. This is the salary amendment for the director of health and human services. >> Motion to pass through first reading as amended. >> Motion to pass through first reading as amended. Has been made by councelor Raposo, seconded by council vice president Dion. Is your discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor? Opposed?
>> The eyes have it. The Committee on Ordinances and Legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted unanimously to recommend that the proposed ordinance be passed through first reading. This is the salary schedule for executive officers, department heads, and non-UN
personnel. >> Motion to pass the item through first reading has been made by councel Kadeim, seconded by council vice president Dion. Discussion >> hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? Uh, I'm close. Roll call vote.
>> Council Kadim, >> yes. >> Camaro, >> yes. >> Can >> no. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Pekkham, >> no. >> Pereira, >> no. >> Raposo, >> yes.
>> President Ponty, >> no. >> Motion carries. Five, four nays. The committee on ordinances and legislation at a meeting held on June 23rd, 2026 voted unanimously to recommend that the accompanying proposed
ordinance be passed through first reading. This is for amending section 50-303 salary schedule for political appointments and boards and committees. >> Motion to pass through first reading. >> Motion to pass through first reading has been made by councelor Raposo. Seconded by councelor Canuel. Is there discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor?
>> Opposed? Nay. >> Council in seat six opposed. There no other opposition. The eyes have it. >> That's all we have. Mr. President. >> Motion to adjourn. Council counselor in seat seven. Council >> Pereira the audience with the salary the
salary schedule for executive offices department heads. We did vote on that. And there's going to be something else they come back with. So I want to uh reconsider my vote on that. >> Which item was that counselor? >> Um >> salary schedule for executive officers. >> Yes.
>> And what was her? I'll make a motion to reconsider. >> Motion to reconsider has been made by councel Kadim. Is there a second? >> Seconded by councel heart. Is there discussion on the reconsideration? >> Hearing none. All those in favor? >> Opposed? The eyes have it. >> What would you like to vote? >> Just put me as yes.
>> Uh motion to pass the item through first reading >> made >> has been made by councelor Raposo, seconded by councelor Pereira. Is there discussion? Roll call. >> Passing through first reading. The proposed ordinance
>> for the salary schedule for executive officers, department heads, and non-union personnel. Council Skadim, >> yes. >> Camarra, >> yes. >> Canuel, >> no. >> Dion, >> yes. >> Hart, >> yes. >> Peekom,
>> no. >> Pereira, >> yes. >> Reposo, >> yes. >> President Ponti, >> no. If they don't get the >> motion to adjourn motion has been made by councel Hart, seconded by councel Dion. All those in favor the eyes. Have
a good night. Thank you.