--------- Order the meeting of the Gardener City Council and the Planning Board to order for the purpose of a joint public hearing regarding an amendment to chapter 675 of the Kota City Gardener. The joint public hearing notice reads as follows. Pursuant to general laws 40A subsection
5, notice is hereby given that the city council and planning board will conduct a joint public hearing on Monday, April 6, 2026 at 7 p.m. in the city council chamber, room 219, city hall, 95 Pleasant Street, Gardener, to consider
amending chapter 675, the zoning code of the city of Gardner. The proposed amendment involves changing item 11772, an ordinance to amend the code of the city of Gardner, chapter 675, thereof entitled zoning, to remove article 9, thereof entitled signs and advertising
devices, and move it to a new nonzoning chapter to be numbered chapter 665. Information regarding these amendments and associated maps are available for viewing in the city clerk's office, the department of community development and planning, or on the city's web page,
www.gardner gardener-mma.gov. All persons interested in this matter and desire to offer testimony are invited to attend the hearing. TTCF, city clerk. The clerk will now please do a roll call. >> Councelor Brooks, >> present. >> Council Craig Cormier,
>> present. >> Council General Owitz, >> present. >> Council Harder, >> present. >> Council Heath, >> present. >> Council Heg, >> present. >> Council Kazinskus, >> present. >> Council Math, >> present. Council Tone, >> Council Tibbo Munos, >> present. >> President Tyrus,
>> present. >> Mr. Paul Cormier, >> present. >> Mr. Steven Cormier, >> present. >> Mr. Eric Flint, >> present. >> And Mr. Bob Sorts, >> present. >> Both bodies have quorum. At this time, I'd request a report from the mayor or
director of community development. >> Thank you very much, Mr. President, thank you to Councelor Mack for ask inviting me to be a uh co-sponsor of this ordinance before you here today and provide the administration's uh opinion on the ordinance change that is before you here today. Uh as I said in the uh
subcommittee meeting that met on this ordinance item before you. Uh there are no actual uh verbiage changes in the language that before you. the the ordinance that's before you would take the signed section of the zoning code that currently exists
in chapter 675 and remove it from the zoning code and place it into a regular general ordinance of the uh city code. And the reason for that uh is based off of the feedback that we've received from several different businesses who have been looking at opening businesses here in Gardener who have opened businesses
here in Gardener and talking about the different regulations around signage for the businesses that they have and how that's really stunted, stalled or added costs to the developments as they've tried to open up here in Gardener. Uh, as we know through the process that we're currently going through right now, the process of amending a zoning
ordinance is designed to be drawn out because you're looking for increased public input. You're looking for increased uh feedback, but at the same time, you need to balance the public good of getting that, you know, feedback in a longer period of
time versus the experience that's on the ground being happened with the businesses that we have at the moment. And when you balance those to get the greater public good that we have in the end of basically trying to get more businesses in here because it does help us financially. It does help our residents here find ways to stay here uh to work, live and play here. Something
as simple as putting a sign on a business to advertise that business can really make or break a project during its balance sheet phase uh or make someone realize that a business is even there and help that business last longer. Uh and I'll give you a couple of examples as to what really brought this
to life. Um, back in the 2010s, uh, when Tiffany Crossroads first opened, the 99 restaurant had its, uh, groundbreaking in 2018. So, we're going back around that time frame. Uh, Tiffany Crossroads ran into a lot of issues with the dimensions that have honestly not been
updated uh, for quite some time for the dimensions of the signage into the plaza, the dimensions of the signage that could go on the buildings uh, for the businesses that were there. uh adding uh some extra time for cost with engineering, cost with design work, cost with the sign companies to rework the signage that had to be done both for the
entrance in and out of the plaza itself. Uh the signs that could be visible to advertise for the plaza uh and the signs that could go on the businesses that are there. Uh you go back a little bit before that in the 2015 2016 uh time frame, we had the uh Bank of America uh
kiosk that was put in at the Price Chopper lot and the way that the signage around the Bank of America kiosk could go. Uh then in the 2020s, we launched our side and facade improvement grant program that we did through the American Rescue Plan funds. We ended up having to
advertise that we had that sign grant a lot more than we had to do the facade grants. And the reason being for that is uh the feedback we were getting in real time from property owners in the city because the property owners had to be the one to sign off on both the sign and the facade applications was that it was easier under zoning to update the
facades to make the buildings look good than it was to deal with the sign regulations that we had and the review process and everything that had to go with that. It made it so that we uh went through the facade money that was about four or five times more than what we had set aside for sign money in about a
month, month and a half where it took us two years to go through the sign improvement program where businesses we offered uh 2 uh $2,500 per sign to help uh advertise for a business. And we ended up having money left over in the account that got turned back to the federal government because we did not
have people who were interested in that program with the biggest feedback being like, I'd love to do it. I really need a new sign. I just can't go through the process that was there. Uh that we saw with businesses that wanted to do perpendicular signage downtown rather than just uh parallel to the road. We
saw that with businesses that were looking at uh doing illuminated signs and have signs that had some type of light on the back that wouldn't be on all night but just have some type of light that's currently prohibited uh under the current zoning code because you can't have certain illuminations on a sign after a certain time frame but
the businesses end up staying open past that. So they had to go to the old sign where the light shown on the sign rather than the sign itself being lit. There were uh Sawa uh Asian Beastro that uh just opened over on West Broadway was three inches over what the zoning code
allowed uh and had either had to spend money to order a new sign, had to go through a variance process where they had to hire an attorney and spend money that way or just saw the sign 3 in off but that would ruin the lettering uh that was on the sign process that was there. So the sign ended up being almost a year after it was uh ordered before it
was eventually hung up again. And the regulations are there for a reason. I don't think anyone thinks that we should get rid of all regulations when it comes to signage around the city because the the ordinance is there for a reason and we want to make sure things look clean and look good and are done the right way. But that doesn't mean that we're
operating in the best gardener open for business atmosphere. And by moving this from the zoning code into the general code, it allows for a easier turnaround time that we can take that live feedback that we're getting from these businesses
and in some cases a reason why some businesses don't choose to come to gardener because if you can't properly advertise for your business, why would you open your business? And making it so that we can update that in real time so we can be more willing to work with people on a more timely basis. There's still opportunities for public feedback
as this would still have to go through the regular legislative process if it was to be changed. Uh there would still be opportunities for public input in that uh this would still be a public meeting whether it be before uh standing committee, the city council uh the opportunity to uh contact either the
mayor's office or counselors throughout a process for uh input that way. It just makes it so that it's a more uh flexible way of updating the sign code that we have here in the city to make it so that uh we really are uh being amendable to the business community that is taking an interest in gardener but has slowed over
recent years and this based off of the feedback that we've been getting as that slowing has happened. This is one of the main things that comes up in almost every conversation that we've had. So I'm happy to answer any further questions uh that people may have on the matter or uh uh take any feedback to. Thank you. Thank you, >> Mr. Mayor.
I declare the public hearing open and ask councilors or planning board members to hold their questions until citizens have had the opportunity to speak. Does anyone wish to be heard in favor of the proposed zoning amendment? Does anyone wish to be heard in favor of the proposed zoning amendment?
Does anyone wish to be heard in favor of the proposed zoning amendment? Does anyone wish to be heard in opposition of the proposed zoning amendment? Does anyone wish to be heard in opposition of the proposed zoning amendment? Does anyone wish to be heard
in opposition proposed zoning amendment? Are there any questions or comments from counselors or planning board members? >> Council Mac. >> Thank you. Um, as the, uh, co-sponsor of this um, ordinance with the mayor, um, I
just want to highlight again that I think in a lot of different ways, city hall is be trying to become more businessfriendly. Uh, we are trying to, uh, streamline the permit process. Um, and by doing this, we need to focus and make city hall much more supportive to
businesses and not uh, resist or become a hindrance. Thank you. >> Thank you, counselor. Does anyone else wish to be heard on the matter? I declare the joint public hearing closed. Thank you. Part: 2
Call to order the Monday, April 6th meeting of the Gardener City Council. The clerk will now please call the role. >> Council Brooks, >> present. >> Councelor Craig Cormier, >> present. >> Council General Lawitz, >> present. >> Council Harder, >> present. >> Council Heath, >> present. >> Councelor Heglin, >> present. >> Council Kazinskus, >> present. >> Council Lac, >> present. >> Council Tami.
>> Council Tibo, >> present. >> And President Tyrus, >> present. Those who wish me now rise for the opening prayer and pledge of allegiance. >> Almighty God, we thank you for bringing us together this evening. Inspire us to worthy seeds and sound decisions and direct us towards the attainment of good
city government. We pray to bless and protect all the people of our city and to so guide and inspire us that we may liberate unity and harmony. Amen. Ice 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. >> Announcement of open meeting recordings. Any person may make a video or audio recording of an open session of a meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium subject to reasonable
requirements of the chair as to the number, placement, and operation of equipment used so as to not interfere with the conduct of the meeting. Any person intending to make such recording shall notify the chair forth with all documents and exhibits used or referenced at the meeting must be submitted in duplicate to the city clerk
as they become part of the meeting minutes. Is anyone recording tonight's meeting? No response. We'll begin with the reading and approval of the February 2nd, 2026 and February 17th, 2026 regular meeting minutes. Council Cormier,
>> move to wave the reading of the minutes and accept them as printed. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Cormier, second by councelor Kazinskus to wave the reading of the minutes and accept them as presented. Is there discussion? >> All those in favor? I. I. All those against no. Motion passes.
There are no public hearings. There are no communications from the mayor. Petitions, applications, communications. Item 11801, district update from State Representative John Zlotnik. I'd like to call the rep up to the podium.
>> Uh, thank you, Mr. President. It's a pleasure to be here again. Um, I think this is the third year that we've had this uh tradition of uh coming to update you all as uh we begin our budget process and uh you won't be far behind. Um so happy to uh deliver the latest uh
from the state legislature, specifically the House of Representatives as to what we've got uh going on. Um so the first thing I want to talk about is chapter 90 and the recent changes uh that have been made to it and the changes that quite
frankly uh need to be defended uh in this year's debate and uh if history is any judge will need to be defended every year after that as well. Um so chapter 90 as a refresher is the uh state uh local aid for u roads is kind of what we
commonly think about it as. Now, um I'm going to give you the a bridged version of my lecture on chapter 90 um because I have a lot of uh thoughts about uh kind of the concerns about it. But the reason I say now it's about uh local road paving is that when it started it was to
help uh local communities purchase um large pieces of equipment that they otherwise wouldn't be able to afford. Uh you know, things for like DPW and road maintenance. It wasn't necessarily for paving. Uh however uh in the decades since as municipal budgets have
continued to be uh squeezed uh by various factors uh in most municipalities chapter 90 is if not the lion share the only source of money that goes towards um local road maintenance. I know until relatively recently uh the
city of gardener almost exclusively relied uh on funds from chapter 90. Um so that creates a few problems. first because when this formula um this is a formula fund uh money goes into it from the state. We we appropriate an amount
um that then gets distributed to all the cities and towns through this formula. Uh the formula takes into account three things. The amount of road miles that exist in your municipality, the amount of people that live within its bounds, uh and the number of jobs that exist there. Um, as you can uh see, this tends
to disadvantage less densely populated communities um and less um uh less densely populated communities uh rural communities and communities that are um less jobheavy but maybe more residentially heavy, right? Uh bedroom
communities and the like. Um and it's been a careful balance uh between those three factors uh for many years. But uh up until last year, for at least the 12 uh previous times that I participate in the debate, um absolutely no changes uh
were made to the way that program worked or the way funding was given out uh except for a year here or there that saw an unusually large uh annual increase. Um other than that, it has stayed basically the same. Um uh myself uh and
other members of the rural caucus have been pushing for uh many many years to make adjustments to that because like all of you know all too well um more rural communities are affected by how little road miles are taken into account uh in that formula. Right? So places
like uh you know gardener and everybody more rural than us um you know get shorted a little bit year after year um because road miles aren't taken into account. Now uh because it's a formula based uh system any flaw and any shortfall in that formula um gets
exponential over time right it compounds that interest compounds uh year after year um to lead us to the point that we are today where almost uh all cities and towns but especially rural ones uh more acutely um you know tend to have uh
lingering issues with their roads or they often times have to uh really get uh strict about prioritization. Um they have to um you know make a lot of tough choices about what gets done. So last year um after I'll say many stalled negotiations about how this should be
redone um the compromise that was born out of this um like I said after many many years was to not touch uh the old formula um because as you can imagine many towns and cities uh benefit uh greatly uh from the old uh formula. Um
so rather than changing that old formula, we said, "Okay, we're going to keep that the same and we're going to keep that the same for the money that we have been putting in um but we're going to create a new line of funding uh that will um much more benefit uh road miles
uh for places like ours." And so now we basically have at least last year two parallel funds. Um and the second fund really benefits uh places like gardener which is why if you recall last year the chapter 90 aotment for gardener uh went
up more than double um in uh in a single year probably probably the single largest increase in that fund uh that the city's ever received. Um you know however um it's not uh a permanent thing. um it is something that uh year after year we're going to have to fight
for and negotiate. So I put that as uh the first thing I wanted to talk to you about because obviously I'm sure it's a lot of concern for you especially now that we're in the midst of pothole season. Um but it is something that we are going to have to keep an eye on uh to make sure that uh we don't backslide.
Um because already in a uh supplemental budget we took up recently, there was a number of members who tried to push to go to an exclusively population-based uh formula for uh road funding, which luckily was defeated, but just the fact
that it was um put forward I thought was concerning after, you know, many many years of fighting uh to get road miles more uh credit. um you know so it is something that we have to stay uh very vigilant about.
Um keeping on with um state funding formulas uh the next big one is chapter 70 which provides state aid uh to the local school district and is uh the biggest uh uh the biggest source of
revenue uh for the city of gardener. Uh the city of gardener gets about 70% of their school budget from the state in the form of chapter 70 um which is the bulk of the uh school-based aid that goes to cities and towns. Uh there are a
number of smaller accounts that um uh you know kind of target specific areas. Um but this is by and large the biggest and by and large the biggest source of funding uh for schools in garden. Um this is the final year FY27 for the
implementation of the student opportunity act. um similar to chapter 90. uh chapter 70 is formula based and when almost 30 years went by from when that formula was first uh put into law
uh to when reforms were finally passed um the compounding of those shortfalls are things that many of us in this room experienced uh towards the later end of our careers in Gardenner public schools and some of the um creativity uh that
different teachers employed um uh to to get through I particularly remember Kathy Ram by hand redrawing maps in the history department that survived from before the collapse of the Soviet Union that she used color pencil and marker um
to uh perpetually update. Um so obviously those are things that we want to avoid to make sure that students have the material and the support uh and the personnel um to be successful. So, um, back before COVID in 2019, the legislature passed the Student
Opportunity Act, um, which has, uh, benefited districts like Gardner, um, uh, quite, um, uh, quite considerably in terms of the amount of financial support that the local school district gets from the state. Um, districts like Gardner
were uh, one of the goals of the of the bill. I'm proud to say that I worked on the bill as I was on the education committee at the time. Um, but we looked at communities like ours that had been um kind of perpetually underfunded by the state um to try and make those uh
big jumps. Um so like I said, this is the final year of S SOA implementation. Um, one of the things that we included in the S SOA that I fought particularly hard for because I felt that it was um, really the most important part to avoid
the situation that we were just coming out of. There was language in the SOA that stipulated that in the final year of implementation, we would start a process to review the chapter 70 formula again. um because uh we anticipated and
has turned out to be the case that um the changes that we made did inject more money into the system and I think more equitably um uh spread it out to the districts that really need the support. Um but uh it was never meant to be a a
kind of one-time cure all and that language was I think very important to include um because hopefully very soon that process will start to continue making uh further recommendations on how that funding uh should be distributed, how much funding there really needs to
be um and where it needs to be uh targeted. just as a quick example that I I really like to use. Um so when the formula was written in 1993, uh the original formula, technology was not a part of what was considered to be
expenses for a school district. So there was zero dollars uh allotted from the state that you could use towards technology. Well, anyone who went to school after 1993 knows that technology was very much a part of the classroom. And by the 19 late 1990s, early 2000s,
uh it was a major component uh especially at the high school level. And so schools had to uh you know beg and borrow from other parts of the budget um to buy computers, to buy uh even overhead projectors, things that weren't accounted for in that formula simply
because the people who wrote it in 1993 couldn't have anticipated what was going to change in the world and in education. And so those of you may recall uh those of you who went to uh Gardener High in the early to early 2000s uh that one of our computer labs at the high school had
labels on the uh actually was etched in uh to the computer said property of NCCI Gardner. Um because the computer lab was handme-down from the local state prison. NCCI Gardner being the North County Correctional Institute. Um so those are the kind of things that we want to avoid. And even just in the six years
since we debated the last formula changes, a lot has continued to develop uh in education, especially coming out of COVID. Um and undoubtedly there are parts of the formula that are falling short. Um and we'll need uh a more thorough review again. Um and hopefully
um we can uh get the votes to do that and obviously put more funding uh into the formula ultimately being the goal. Um so those are the big formulas. Uh, and a little bit of good news before I get into the budget, which there's not
much good news there. Um, so, um, we were able to through a supplemental budget that the House passed, uh, last year, I mean last month, um, include a second year of funding uh, for the city's new youth center. Um, I was very happy to work with the city last year to
provide funding for the uh, buildout and startup of the new uh, youth center. Um, and at the time, uh, I told, um, I told the mayor that I would work very hard to try and get a second year of funding, uh, on the books to, um, you know, fully
fully be able to test out this this concept as it is something new that the city has embarked upon. Um, but I think we all agree, um, is needed, uh, and very important. So, I will say that the House has passed uh, a second year of funding um, and we expect the Senate to
take up that bill um, sometime shortly. Um so we should know uh with certainty whether or not uh that funding is going to be available to continue that as we did in the last fiscal year. Um so the budget picture I guess I
should start by saying it's not all bad but it is going to be a change in course uh from what uh the last several years have been. Um so this is my 14th budget debate. Um and the last
uh six or seven um were pretty good. Uh revenues were up. Uh you may recall that one year uh the state collected so much excess revenue that uh $3.1 billion uh got returned to Massachusetts taxpayers uh in the form of one-time refund
checks. Um, and we've been able to sock away a huge amount of money into our rainy day fund, the state stabilization account, uh, that stands, uh, close to$9 billion dollars, uh, at the moment. Uh, so much so that in the last couple years, we've been able to do, I think, really creative things with the interest
that's generated off that, um, to leverage um, for, you know, matching funds for for federal grants at the state level, um, and free up cash for other things as well. Um, and I will say this too that revenues have continued to trend in the right direction. Um, so far
this year, uh, revenue has, uh, month-to-month exceeded, uh, expectations, what was agreed to last year to set our budget. Um, and that is all, uh, good news. Um uh the thing though is that you know going back to uh
you know FY17, FY18 uh when uh the economy really expanded in Massachusetts and revenues uh with it uh and then particularly during uh the pandemic, Massachusetts as a state and our economy and with it the revenues uh
did really well which is what led to that $3 billion uh tax rebate. Um, however, uh, you can definitely see that some of the steam is starting to come off of that. And I've been around long enough to know that, um, or I should say
to experience what trying to do a state budget in a recession is like that's clearly not where we are now. Like I said, revenues are still, uh, beating uh, expectations. Um but in the past where we saw those um blowing by optimistic uh expectations, I'll say now
we see them uh edging past what were pretty conservative guesstimates as to what we would take in in revenue. Um so that uh picture is definitely starting to uh change, but I would say I'll say that we're we're far better off than where we were uh when I joined the
legislature uh 14 years ago. Um the other piece with that is is that um there are under sort of things underpinning the budget uh that have changed. Um two years ago and now fully implement fully implemented in the last fiscal year uh the state passed an
almost $2 billion uh tax cut package. Um so now that that is fully implemented obviously uh that is revenue that we uh will not see uh going forward. Um on top of that, starting last um uh fiscal year and continuing to this fiscal year, uh
the state has to absorb uh like all of you will as well um reduce spending uh at the federal level and in turn reduce spending uh at the state level. Uh that number for last fiscal year and this fiscal year. And it's a little bit of a jump because
um the federal fiscal year and the state fiscal year don't line up. Um so some of these cuts hit us midway through last fiscal year. Um but over these two fiscal years uh the number for that is about uh $3 billion uh in reduced uh spending. Um so you take that with the
state tax cuts uh that are uh relatively freshly implemented and then uh we're anticipating um more uh state tax cuts um for next fiscal year. Um and the price tag on that could be uh as much as $4 billion. Um so there are going to
need to be some tough decisions made uh both in this round of budget debates to prepare uh for some of those eventualities uh and also hedge um against uh declining state revenues or hedge against uh declining federal expenditure um and then anticipating um
the passage of additional state tax cuts. Um so that is all to say that um like I said the next couple years I think there's going to be a lot of uh difficult choices and re-evaluation of priorities um as we debate uh state um
um the state funding picture. Um so that is uh what is going on at the state from a budgetary uh from a budgetary standpoint. um not all uh great news um not all bad news um but I think like everything else it is challenges uh that
we need to uh work collaboratively uh to get through um so with that I am happy to take any questions if there if there are some and the president will allow >> Thank you repott does the council have any questions for the representative >> councelor Kazinskus
>> thank you rep for the update and for all the information and all the work that you do at the state level to advocate for our city for 14 years it's been so far. Um the community youth center the earmark for last year was $100,000. What was the earmark for this second round?
>> It's also $100,000. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor. Any further questions? >> Council Jer. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Um you talked about reductions in the budget and in your past experience you've been part of
some of these uh debates in the past. what areas are normally um normally up for perhaps I guess for lack of a better term. >> Yeah. You know, um I will say that one thing that makes the situation now a lot different um uh and I think arguably a lot better uh than the situation we were
in uh uh during the Great Recession is that uh not only were revenues uh sliding considerably um but we did not have nearly as much money in the stabilization account. Um I think there was only uh you know $2 or3 billion at the start of the last recession that had
been saved up. Um the approaching $9 billion is is substantial um and gives us um you know considerable amount of cushion um should there be any significant amount of uh shortfall, changing revenue picture, uh changes at
the federal level, anything like that. Um, you know, back then, uh, it was pretty severe and cuts were, um, just about across the board. Um, there weren't any, uh, you know, there weren't any things that were off limits to reductions or, um, outright cuts. I do
think one of the things that's uh I think you I think you can safely say is that you know again because uh because revenues had been increasing so much um uh it was very easy to say yes to things um it was
very easy to fund projects it was very easy to get more funding uh for projects um you know that's where I think we're going to start to see this blunted the most um you know I I'll give a I'll give a kind of local example. Um um the
uh rear main street development that the city has been uh undergoing for as long as I've been in office, if if not longer, it's a very it's a very big project. Um it's gotten many millions of dollars from the state. Um I'll say like
any development project of that size, um you know, there's always issues that come up, right? uh un unforeseen complications, especially when you know when you put a shovel in the ground around here, you never know what you're going to get, right? And that can lead to complications, delays, expenses, all
that. Um what we were able to do, um you know, we were able to get another round of funding for that project, um to bring it to completion, uh fingers crossed. Um that's the kind of thing that I worry about, uh headed into a different kind of state budget atmosphere. Are we going
to be able to do that? Right? or um you know, we've been working for several years on a large uh veterans housing development in the town of Winunden. Um you know, same same kind of thing with anything of that scope, you always have uh some issues. Um uh one of the issues
that we that we ultimately had um shortly after starting construction uh was that we lost a chunk of federal funding. And at the time we were able to replace it reasonably quickly with state money uh to keep it uh you know to keep it going
uh and make sure that we're going to be able to finish it. Um those are the kind of things again uh that I worry about um because uh we've been I think very fortunate in getting funding for a great many uh improvements, developments, uh
chalking off a lot of deferred maintenance projects throughout my district. Um you know, that's where things kind of get get tight is uh um when there's a lot less money to go around. Um, and there's no, you know, there's no big pots of funding that
aren't things like uh, you know, chapter chapter 70 is one of the biggest um, uh, outlays in the in the state budget. Um, the health care system, another big outlay in the state budget. Uh, higher ed, another big outlay in the state budget. Um, and those three things are
the three biggest employers in the city of Gardner. Uh, the school system, the mount, and the hospital, right? And the state has uh invested a a very sizable amount of money um in in Haywood healthcare as I'm sure you're all aware. Um and those are things that obviously
we want to see defended. Not only are they important to the city of Gardener and its economy um but it's important to healthcare access in this entire region. But once you get beyond um you know we can we can certainly uh you know I'll go to my office and I'll get the budget book. you know, you can find this thing that's that's $10 million that well,
maybe we have a values judgment disagreement on or maybe we agree that it's a nice to have, right? Um, but there's not $4 billion worth of nice to haves uh in the state budget. Um, and I anticipate those debates getting pretty tense. >> Thank you.
>> Any further counseling questions? Like thank you for coming. Thank you very much. Item 11808, second letter from the Teamsters Union Local 170 regarding union negotiations between the Teamsters, the department
heads, and the city. I want to update the council that as authorized in our last meeting, I did send a letter requesting an opinion from the Department of Labor Relations and I'm awaiting a response. So with that, I'd like to chain a motion to place this communication on file.
>> Second. Motion made by councelor Hegund, second by councelor journal to place communication on file. Is there discussion? Councelor Mack. >> Thank you, council president. Um I just want to say I'm very concerned about really the lack of clarity and
communication about the formation of you know the negotiating um team and the status of of this process. We haven't we have yet to hear back from the Department of Labor Relations on this issue this issue. But I want to express some concerns. I'm concerned because last year when we started this
discussion, it went in a very similar way. We weren't given much information about what was going on until it was included in the budget and we were expected to vote for it. I think even those counselors who were inclined to support it uh recognized that what was submitted to us was not ready and a
majority of us felt that it was far more than we could afford. Our budget situation this year reflects the fact that we were right and we weren't able to afford what was presented or we aren't. Last year, the finance committee asked many times for information from the mayor on a salary proposal. It was
emphasized any proposal should be submitted by the mayor. The mayor's salary proposal came only after we rejected a first proposal. After rejecting then the mayor's proposal and then reject the rejection of councelor Hegeland's proposal were we forced to
stop our deliberations and efforts to come up with a compromise due to the formation of the union. I think for for the reason for that was as we found out was that the first proposal was really put together by the department heads themselves deciding what they themselves should be paid. This is a unique
situation and different from other negotiations from other bargaining units. So I am concerned that we the city the taxpayers are are being represented in the negotiations by another department head not the mayor which was my main reason for why I feel
we as a council need to be more involved. Currently in the negotiating team for the city is the human resource director and the assistant city solicitor. The mayor at any time can replace the human resource director with himself. If it isn't legally possible for the council to be included in some
way. I will accept that but I don't have confidence given what happened last year as the council's liaison to the union I have I haven't yet been able to get the needed information but it seems like the union is very concerned about involvement as we received the second
letter from what I have learned there are concerns that peers are negotiating with peers which is especially concerning given last year's working group proposal made by and made for department heads we at the legislative legislative ative branch were actively
involved in looking into a viable salary proposal and until the department heads chose another path. We are no different than the legislative branch of government of the school committee in which in which they do sit at the negotiating table with with their um
unions. I look forward to hearing more about this from the department of labor relations. Thank you. >> Thank you councelor Mack and further discussion. Councelor Kazinskus. >> Thank you Mr. President. I have serious concerns about the position that this letter has laid out
when it comes to the city charter. The position in this letter says that the mayor has day-to-day authority over the city clerk, city auditor, and treasurer collector. However, our city charter clearly states that the city
council holds the authority to hire and remove the city clerk, the city auditor, and treasur collector. With that said, the position in this letter is a major departure from the way we operate and what has been the understanding and practice for a long time. This should
concern all of us, the city council and every single taxpayer that we represent. Granting the mayor, meaning the office of the mayor, not any particular individual, that level of authority over financial operations and financial
oversight is a dangerous practice. And I have two points to raise on that. First, if this letter is an accurate interpretation of our city charter, then we should immediately begin discussions about amending the charter to ensure
proper financial oversight. No one position, person, or branch of our city government should have effective control over both sides of the city's financial functions. Period. Second, the interpretation in this letter could
fundamentally disrupt this checks and balances that are in place to protect the public's money. And without overstating it, this would be a serious assault on our local democracy here in Gardner and the intentional check and balance systems that we have in place. I
would like to make a request and I don't expect it tonight as I think it would be better if it wasn't presented to us off the cuff right now. But I would like to make a request and strongly encourage the mayor to clearly state in writing to the city council his position on this
matter in his words because I think that otherwise this letter could be interpreted as speaking for the mayor and representing his position. I don't think that's fair to the mayor and I don't think it's fair for the city council to have to determine whether or not this letter represents the mayor's
position or not. So with that, Mr. President, I would like to move to amend the motion to keep this item on the agenda until the city council is satisfied that the city charter interpretation has been resolved and the mayor has provided a written statement
of his position. >> Thank you. >> Second. Motion made by councelor Kazinska, second by councelor Dur allowance to amend the motion to keep the this item on the agenda until a letter is received the mayor stating his opinion. Is there discussion on the
proposed amendment? All those in favor I. >> I. All those against no. The amendment passes to the main motion uh which is now to keep this item on our agenda and request a letter from the mayor uh to
his response. Is there further discussion? >> All those in favor I >> I. All those against no. >> Motion passes. Okay. >> Finance uh report of standing committees
finance committee item 11776 an ordinance to amend exhibit F of attachment one of chapter 8 of the code of the city of gardener thereof entitled primary non-union compensation schedule by adding a new section 10 to cover temporary positions.
Council journal outs. >> I make a motion to send this the second final printing. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor journal outs. Second by councelor heglin to send this item to its second and final printing. Is there discussion? This be a roll call vote. The clerk will
now please call the role. >> Council Brooks. >> Yes. >> Council Craig here. >> Yes. >> Council. >> Yes. >> Councelor Harder. >> Yes. Council Heath, >> yes. >> Councelor Hegum, >> yes. >> Councelor Kazinskus, >> yes. >> Council Matt, >> yes. >> Councelor Tbo Munos,
>> yes. >> And President Tyres, >> yes. >> 10 years. >> 10 years. The motion passes. Item 1177, an ordinance to amend exhibit F of attachment one of chapter 8 of the code of the city gardener. There have been entitled primary non-union compensation
schedule. I will be recusing myself due to the appearance of a conflict of interest. This relates to a personal relationship with a member of my family who is affected by this ordinance. In the recusal of council president Tyrus for item number 1777 order of
business the election of a president prom for this item April 6 2026. At this time nomination now open for council promp council generals. >> Thank you. I'd like to nominate councelor Elizabeth Kazinskus.
Motion made by councelor Doward, seconded by councelor Heglin. >> Move to close nominations. Second. Okay. >> Motion made by councelor Dalitz. Seconded by councelor Craig Corman to close the nominations.
All in favor say I. >> I. >> All post say no. Motion carries. Nominations are now closed. When I call your name, please state the name of the council of your choice. Council Brooks, >> Councelor Elizabeth Kazinskus,
>> Council Craig Cromier, >> Councelor Kazinskas, >> Council General Lowitz, >> Councelor Kazinskas, >> Council Harder, >> Council Kazinskas, >> Council Heath, >> Councelor Kazinskus, >> Council Heazinskus, >> Council Mack,
>> Council Kazinskas, >> Council Tunz, >> Councelor Kazinskas, >> have Eight votes for council kasiscus. Council kazus is now elected president for this item. Item 11 1777, an ordinance to amend
exhibit F of attachment one of chapter 8 of the code of the city of gardener thereof entitled primary non-union compensation schedule. >> Is there a motion? Councelor general. >> Thank you councelor Kazinsquez. I'd like to make a motion to send this item to second and final printing. >> Second.
>> Motion made by councelor journal. Seconded by councelor hegland to send the item to second and final printing. Is there discussion on the motion? >> Councelor Brooks. Uh, thank you, Madam President. Um, I guess I in previous meetings I've stated my opinion on this. I I am not in favor.
I don't need to belver the point. I will be voting no. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor. Further discussion. Okay. This is a roll call vote. The clerk will please call the role. >> Council Brooks, >> no. >> Councelor Craig Cormier, >> yes.
>> Council Dawitz, >> yes. Council Hard, >> yes. >> Council Heath, >> yes. >> Council Hegel, >> yes. >> Council Pazinsquez, >> yes. >> Council Math, >> yes. >> And Council Tunes, >> yes.
>> Have eight yays, one nay. >> Eight yays, one no. The motion passes. Item 11 782 donation acceptance order gardener community action team. >> Councelor Heglin >> move to request more time and keep this on our agenda under unfinished business.
>> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Hegeland. Second by council dur allowance to request more time and place this item under unfinished business council agenda. Is there discussion? Councelor Eglund. >> Thank you Mr. President. Three to the council and we've had this in front of us for a bit. Uh and I think we still
have to some degree the same problem. The letter we received from the law department. My reading of it is that it is in a bit of a gray area. Uh I'm a supporter of GCAT. I was on the GCAT advisory committee many years ago when it was still at luck and they do great work. But whenever we're dealing with
anything concerning the city's financials, we should make sure it's beyond reproach. And the reason we have to take this up is a because the law dictates we should and have to and b because we approve the very language establishing the funds and their parameters. As I indicated before, our
city revolving funds are already quite vague when compared to the um accepted generally accepted standard. If you go on um the state website, you'll see some examples that are far more detailed than ours. So to not be diligent about enforcing at least our vague standards
can risk problems. And I see two issues here. First, we have an order concerning gifts to GCAT which is not a send city entity as agreed to by the solicitor in his letter. So the order certainly needs to be changed to properly reflect what city entity is accepting these donations. Formal orders are not a place
for inaccurate nomenclature in my opinion. Second, the fund that this money has gone into was set up to approve and raise to set up and approve to raise money from a specific source and spend money on a specific purpose. As indicated at a previous meeting, the details of that mun report accompanying
this donation provide no real understanding of their nature. Whereas the other donation details we've received from other departments are quite clear. So even if we're comfortable with that gray area, the legal gray area, the lack of formal organization, at the very least, we should have been given, I think, something to show where the money came
from so that we can do our jobs to verify it's conforming to the rules of the particular revolving fund that we have before us. So I think when we, the finance committee, sent this up in the first place, we assumed this would be cleared up pretty quickly. It's been a couple of months again, so I think this
should be a reminder that we need better details about the nature of these donations, where they were for, from, etc. Thank you. >> Thank you, councelor. Further discussion. Motions to play uh to keep this item on our agenda. All those in favor? I >> against no.
>> Motion passes. Item 11799, an order transferring the sum of $3,588 from auditing department salaries to auditing department expense account professional services council journal.
>> Okay, Mr. President, uh this finance committee met on this item. It is to cover the expenses for the outside services um to assist in the auditing department while we were in the process of searching for a new auditor. Um this along with the previous transfer that we made from the auditor's salary line item
will cover the cost um through the uh end of January 2026. Um Auditor Butler has confirmed the services have been um cut off um middle of March at some point. Um so there will be an additional bill from February through uh March at
some point to uh complete the payment for these um outside services. Uh, finance committee was in favor and I move the order. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor journal, second by councelor Mack to move the order. Is there discussion?
This >> be a roll call vote. Cl, please call the vote. >> Councelor Brooks, >> yes. >> Councelor Craig Cormier, >> yes. >> Councelor John Low, >> yes. >> Council Harter, >> yes. >> Council Heath, >> yes. >> Council Hegund, >> yes. >> Council Kazinskus, >> yes. >> Council M, >> yes. >> Council Toss,
>> yes. >> And President Tyrus, >> yes. 10. >> 10 years. The motion passes. Item 11803. Uh and item 11806. Uh a motion. Uh councelor Dall allows to make a motion to suspend rule 22 unless
there is an objection. Is there any objection to suspending rule 22 C? Hearing none, the rules are suspended. We'll now proceed with the items. Item 11803. A resolution supporting the redevelopment of prior authorized funds.
Councelor Hegel. >> Move the resolution be adopted. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Hegel, seconded by councelor journal to adopt the resolution. Is there discussion? Councelor journal. Councelor. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Through to the council. The finance committee met on this at our last meeting. We were
unanimously in favor of this item. Uh essentially this is um and and given its ceremonial nature is why we felt we could do this in one meeting and and wrap this up relatively quickly. Director Stevens and the mayor put this together and proposed this uh coming forward and I really do want to commend
them again. I think it's a great move in transparency and I think it really would be a great operating procedure moving forward. Essentially, the resolution is just notifying the council that given the um the work at Rear Main Street with the geotechnical fabric that needed to
be laid coming in under budget, there is some extra money from the unexpended bond money that we had put towards that from the new elementary school buildout. And so this will hopefully now cover the expected costs of some national grid work being done there to move some
electrical around uh and get things where it needs to be. that came in higher than expected. Uh but luckily this this difference in the money will help fund that progress. So we again reanimously in favor of this um and I support this happening. Thank thank you. >> Thank you Council Hegel for the
discussion. Council General. >> Thank you Mr. President. I just want to thank again Director Stevens. Um there's a lot of different monies coming from different um all while all from the same grants. There's different parts of the projects going on and what came in under budget, what came in over budget. um and I got a very thorough explanation of
that from him and how um the total comes together with this additional portion um from the that geo um fabric that came in under budget. Um so I appreciated that um and just want to commend him for the work um he's done on this project. Thank you. >> Thank you council's further questions or
comments. Councelor Mac >> I just want to uh comment as a member of the Garner Redevelopment Authority um to avoid any conflict of interest I would not be voting on this item. Thank you. >> Thank you councel. Any further comments? The motion is to adopt the resolution. All those in favor I.
>> I. >> All those against? No. Motion passes. Item 11806, a measure ratifying the council president's recommendation for a step designation for the city auditor. >> Council Mack. >> Thank you, council president. leading to
a motion. The finance committee was in favor of the president's recommendation for the uh new step designation for the city auditor. So with that, I make a motion to accept the order. >> Uh motion made by councelor Max, second by councelor Heglin. Is there
discussion? Councelor Brooks. >> Yes. Uh Mr. President, earlier we adopted the uh ordinance that added this as well as several other positions to the salary ordinance. Are are we to expect something from the mayor on the
other positions that were added where he would say what steps they're going to be on? >> That is by ordinance required. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any further questions? >> Councelor Kazinskas. And >> and for just to the council's point to the clarification that this is this
action is by ordinance because this is the council president's action on this particular uh position. Thank you. >> Thank you counselor. Any further questions or comments? This will be a roll call vote. The clerk will now please call the role. >> Councelor Brooks, >> yes. >> Councelor Craig Cormier, >> yes.
>> Councelor Dowitz, >> yes. >> Councelor Hardurn, >> yes. >> Councilor Heath, >> yes. >> Council Heglland, >> yes. >> Council Kaziscus, >> yes. >> Council Math, >> yes. >> Council Tbo Munus, >> yes. >> And Tyros, >> yes. >> 10. The motion passes.
>> Economic and community development committee. Item 11772, an ordinance to amend the code of the city of Gardner, chapter 675, thereof entitled zoning, to remove article 9, thereof entitled signs and advertising devices, and move it to a new non-zoning
chapter to be numbered chapter 665. Council Kazinskus. >> Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, we had a public hearing on this item this evening jointly with the planning board, and the next step would be for the planning board to make a recommendation to the council. So with that, I would like to
ask for more time on this item and keep it on the council calendar as is. >> Requests made for more time. Are there any objections? More time will be granted for this item. Item 11773 FY2026
Community Development Block Grant CDBG steering committee recommendations with resolution. Councelor Kazinskus. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to make a motion to adopt the resolution. Second >> motion made by councelor Kazinskus, second by councelor Heath to adopt the resolution. Is there discussion?
Councelor Kazinskus. >> Thank you, Mr. President. I have made the comment in several the echo dev meetings um with our committee and I just would like to emphasize um and thank uh Amy Uaz, the assistant director um and the economic community
development um department as well as director Stevens for their hard work on the CDBG process. Uh Amy has really reworked and reorganized the entire process and it's really important for the information to be clear about how to apply for those funds for the social
services that desperately need them in the city. Uh and she's just done a fantastic job revamping it. Um and also uh kind of consolidating funds from previous years to get them to be able to be re allocated and used um now. So it's been um a long process and they've done
an outstanding job. Thank you. >> Thank you counselor. Any further questions or comments? All those in favor? I >> I. All those against? No. >> Motion passes. Item 11807, quarterly community development and
planning department update March. Councelor Kazinskus. >> Thank you, President Tyrros. Uh, I'd like to make a motion to place the item on file. >> Second. Motion made by councelor Kazinskus. Second by councelor Cormier to place the item on file. Is there discussion? Councelor Kazinsk. Thank you, Mr. President. The e economic and
community development standing committee met on March 25th where director Stevens provided a quarterly department update. That report was included in the committee's meeting packet and is also available in tonight's uh council packet at pages 91 through 94. I will provide a brief summary of that update, but I do
encourage anyone watching this evening to take a look at the full report in the packet or watch the March 25th committee meeting for more detail. Um, this shift to the quarterly updates is new this year. Director Stevens provided monthly updates to the committee last year when the committee was new, but given the
level of progress the department has made and the scope of the work being handled by him and his team and the department. As chair, I believe that the move to quarter quarterly reporting is well justified. So the report summary is as follows. Uh the rear main street
revitalization project made steady progress um despite some winter and coordination challenges. In the north phase, crews advanced excavation, conduit installation, and utility prep. Cold weather delayed the electrical shed foundation, but concrete work resumed in
late March. A key update is National Grid's revised cost estimate of about $922,000, which was much more above the $260,000 um that was originally expected. But um in response to that, the department
developed a bond reallocation plan, which is now um going to be under the finance committee for review. In the south phase of the project, negotiations continued with the Cumberland Farms property owner to um keep momentum going while they're managing the costs of that part of the project. Uh at Mackie Park,
the project is almost complete with minor welding and landscaping delayed by the weather. Um full completion of that project is expected early this spring. Accessibility items are also being finalized with the architectural access board. For the north central pathway,
the city reached a major milestone by submitting the 25% design, including preliminary engineering, environmental documentation, and layout plans. Mass DOT is reviewing them, and a public design hearing is going to be anticipated later this spring or in the summertime. And the city also applied
for up to $250 in Mass Trails funding. Um, planning efforts have also significantly progressed. Draft sections of the master plan are complete and a full draft is under review. A public open house is scheduled for April 15th from 4 to 6 at Mackie Park with the
library as a rain location. The hazard mitigation plan is nearly is nearing completion alongside ongoing work on a municipal surplus property plan and housing production plan. The redevelopment
authority continues discussions on key Mil Street and Main Street sites um including coordination with the rear main street project. Um for CDBG assistant director Amy Uass has strengthened administration and coordination with service providers and
the state. Um the economic development finance manager Iris Kuifo Mensah has improved financial management. She's closed out older grants and reconciled accounts. Project updates include continued site work at Greenwood Pool and the final improvements planned um
for spring and then the advancement of the Greenwood Pool pavilion into the design and engineering phases. Uh moving forward, the department is preparing for future funding rounds updating the slum and blight inventory and exploring a citywide records scanning initiative.
Uh, CDBG funded program supported 121 students with athletic scholarships, assisted over 1,100 residents with food and emergency aid, provided short-term housing to 24 individuals, and helped 55 people through domestic violence services.
Um, Iris has also made substantial progress reconciling past CDBG funds. Um, she's returned unused funds, uh, corrected accounting issues, and implemented systems to prevent future issues. Uh she's also leading small business support efforts including a
January workshop with the Chamber of Commerce and an upcoming workshop series with the Massachusetts Supplier Diversity Office beginning in late May. So lots of progress with the team there in the community um um planning and development department. And that is it.
>> Impressive. Thank you counselor. Any further questions or comments? >> Motion to place the item on file. Is uh all in favor? I I >> So motion passes. There is no unfinished business. There
is no new business. Councelor comments and remarks. Are there any council comments or remarks this evening? I'll just briefly uh thank Representative John Sonic again for coming to give us a district update. I think it's a a unique and beneficial aspect of what we have going on here in
the city of Gardner that we have a strong relationship between the council, the mayor, the state rep, and even our partners at the federal level with uh Congresswoman Tran. So, um I just want to thank him for taking the time this evening to speak with us. With that, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn after the closing prayer. So,
>> move second. >> Motion made by councelor Heath, second by councelor Cormier to adjurnn. All those in favor? I. >> All those against? No. Motion passes. Almighty Father who ceased over all as we adjourn, we thank thee for the opportunity of joint deliberation and
action witnessed during the course of this meeting. Bless, oh Lord, all who are gathered here and the people whose representatives we are and do thou attend to our commonwealth until our next meeting. Amen. Stand.