--------- for use of the K9 um division and uh with the after the three years we have an option to purchase it for both the purchase and the output he's planning on using um asset forfeite funds which are funds that we receive when we go on various different um search warrants in drug
cases and money uh at the property is seized because it was obtained through the proceeds of sales uh under state laws and regulations we receive up to 50% of the funds that are collected uh in those drug busts uh for lack of a better term. Uh so we have a special
account uh that the police department oversees that's very strictly uh regulated as to what it can and cannot be used for. Uh outfitting police vehicles uh for the purpose of uh assisting in future narcotics searches is a approved use of this or um
outfitting a vehicle or purchasing items that are related to uh preventing narcotics issues in the future is also approved use for this. Uh this is how we uh purchased the pickup truck after they donated it to the uh community policing division a couple years ago. Uh so this
is how we're planning on purchasing the truck after the three years and outfitting the truck now with the donations we have. >> Um that was really my question what the plan was for. Um I assume the plan was to buy the three-year lease and what the funding options were. Um >> so I don't have I think any further
questions. >> Questions. We can leave this one as well. >> We leave this one as well with us. Uh yes, for the next meeting. >> Thank you. >> Uh next we have item 11875, a measure authorizing the city to enter into a tax increment exemption uh tie agreement for
the property located at 94 Pleasant Street. Mayor, >> thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This one is a first in my uh administration coming before uh you here for a uh tie agreement. A uh tie agreement is different than what many may have heard in the past of it called a a tiff
agreement, a tax increments financing agreement. Uh, so what I'd like to explain here with this one is the history with the property, the difference between the two programs and why this was the one that's presented to you and why the plane is presented to you before you now. So the property at 94 Pleasant Street directly across the street from city hall uh was in land
court with the city since 1996. It actually broke the record as the longest standing land court case in Massachusetts. Uh the property owed us over $400,000 in back taxes. We had a very long-standing issue with the previous owner of the property. Uh where uh every time we take them to court, a
different issue or exemption or stay would come up with the court. Uh the uh LLC would change, a bankruptcy would be filed in a different state. I believe there were seven different states in which a bankruptcy was filed by the owner. Um New Hampshire, Florida, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, a bunch of other ones along the way, which then
stayed the proceedings as well. Uh so after uh decades of fighting this property in court, the city was able to take the property by imminent domain. Uh we did so in 2022. Uh and then uh later on in uh 2025, we
did go out for an RFP for the property. Uh sold the property to Matias Development um who uh is the current owner of the property. uh after working with Matias on several different financing options and I've included his original packet a proposal in the in the
uh in the packet here. So you could see the different options that he laid forward before the city. Uh some of them he said you know we may be able to get CDBG we may be able to get state funding. We may be able to do different other options that are there too. Uh I included that packet in here just so you
could see what the full project cost was to renovate the building into the six residential unit uh that he's planning for. uh the gross rent that's uh anticipated to be received um and the different funding options he said were options for there. I will say that we
don't have any CDBG funds allocated for this process. We've allocated all of our CDBG funds moving forward. So there is no housing redevelopment or slum and blight uh funds from CDBG plan for this project. However, I wanted you to see all the costs associated that were here. uh a tiff agreement which we've done in the past uh tax increment finding is
used for commercial properties uh in which taxes are phased in over a certain period of time uh and it's tied to job growth and those have to be approved by the commonwealth uh that if a company doesn't produce x number of jobs by the time that the tiff is done they actually
owe the municipality back the funds that are there in a tie agreement an exemption agreement uh a portion of the property is exempted for a period of time and a portion of the taxes are still collected, but it's not tied to a specific item. Therefore, it doesn't
require Commonwealth approval. Um, so for instance, when uh a business up in Summit Industrial Park had a TIFF agreement that was approved, but then proved that they couldn't meet the uh employment increase that they were expecting, they did owe a portion of the funds back to the city. Uh, that wouldn't be something that happens in a
tie. That's why for housing projects a tie is used where for commercial projects a uh excuse me for uh for commercial projects a tiff is used. So that's the difference between the two programs that are there. Uh the proposal you see in front of you exempts the value of the building uh for a period of
10 years and then phases in the value of the building while still collecting the value of the land uh that the building sits on. Uh it is a 15-year proposal that you see before you. Uh this is in talking to the developer what uh was able to be used to make them uh the line
work uh and to get the financing needed to be able to make the project happen at a 100% market rate. If a different uh proposal is used or put forward or the numbers change, the project can still move forward. It's just not going to be a market rate facility. It would be a
mixed facility with some low-income housing, some affordable housing, some maybe one or two market rates of the six that are there, but it would be a mixed use there. The reason for that is because of a state regulation around gateway cities. So, gateway cities in the Commonwealth are communities uh that
have a bachelor's degree level under the state median average, a uh median home income level under the state average. And both of those categories, Gardner does meet those categories. Um we have a community college that doesn't give out a bachelor's degrees. So, we've always
traditionally had a bachelor's degree level less than what the state average is. and our median home income is significantly less than what the Suffach County area has in median home income. So, we are less than that in the state. Where we don't get included is the statute for gateway city says you need a
minimum 35,000 people in population to qualify. And what that gateway city status does is make it so that certain grant options and funding programming not just for the city but those in the city are available to those types of locations including the housing development incentive program. So the H
dip as it's called does provide credits, tax credits for market rate housing development, which is why places like Fitchburg and Lemonster that are over the 35,000 do see so much market housing development more than what we have here in Gardner is because they qualify for
market rate credits where in Gardner we only qualify for low-inccome credits because we are not a gateway community. Uh there is some talk in the Commonwealth to change that in the long run, but we won't be seeing that anytime at least in the foreseeable future. Um, so I do have a larger copy here of the
full funding plan um that if it's easier to read, uh, it's there. I printed out 11 by 17, but again, so this would make it so that the, uh, value of the building is exempted for the first 10 years and then phased in, uh, over the course of that. I'm just pointing out
the question I have on the change that the amount um for FY 38 >> 40 and then 41 if those lines are reversed on there because it goes down to 560 and then goes back up. >> Yep. >> Yeah, that's what it looks like. It's reversed.
>> Okay. Yeah. All right. Thank you. >> And that's the exempted amount. So that's what if you look at it the >> but it should go down. >> Correct. Yeah, it should go down. >> But the uh the annual assessment is what we'd be getting in taxes. The exempted value is how much is exempted in that year. The total value is the value of
the both land and property together. And the exempted tax is what we would be >> I guess giving up in exchange for the property being renovated. >> Are these numbers all locked in or are they based off what the actual value of the land? >> It would be based off the actual value of the land. >> So basically in theory could go up or
down for the amount that's being paid and then the amount that these are just estimated amounts of what the building may be worth. So it could be more or less of what the actual taxes would be paid. >> Well, yes, especially for the building, too, because that's not >> enough.
>> Yes. >> They don't know exactly what they're going to be able to build. >> And this is so like on the land, >> the 70 71,000. >> Okay. >> Is what the land. So that >> that annual assessment is is an estimate because that that could change. That
could be higher or lower. So their bill could be different. I mean, as you say, we haven't collected taxes on this building in 30 years. Yeah. >> Um maybe longer. We've been paying it for 30 years. So it's you have to stop paying taxes for long. >> And for the last two years, we've collected some in taxes because it's now
owned by Matas companies. >> Um but it's not going to be anything more than what we have right now. And my I am normally hardressed to do an agreement like this where we're willfully giving up certain amount of tax revenue. However, I think
the extenduating circumstances of this property outweigh the the negatives of it. I think getting a property fixed the right way in the heart of our downtown, making it so that we're in increasing our housing units, which is been a high
goal of the city anyway, and working with the developer so that we can get what we need here in Gardener is where I think this is appropriate for the city. church. >> Mhm. >> Uh do you mind if I ask what the the city um assessor to come up and give us
her opinion on this because she's the one that oversees the taxes and everything and and making this um you know is that something? Yes. >> Making this exception or exemption. Thank you. So currently, and I'm just
going from memory here, I think they're currently assessed at a little over 300,000. So we are collecting on that. Um, my concern would be for other investors who've already done work and have
properties right now. Um, this is not something I've seen before. I know it is something new. Um, but honestly, I think that the 0% building over 10 years, I don't really see how that's equitable
for the city. That's just my opinion. >> No, I appreciate that. Yeah. So >> that's I just feel like you could be setting a precedent and one might not break the bank but if
investors now see this know it's available and if it's available it's available if you know but I just don't see for a six unit as compared to I mean you know we have other prop the gardener news building there was nothing for that
it's been totally flipped, sold. Yeah, I just Yeah, >> I I I think that's a a good point. I just want to say because we also have, you know, recently other city properties that have just been purchased. Prospect um sold would be for example, School
Street. Um and uh as school buildings, they haven't been on the tax role at all. >> So, we haven't gotten anything. So, um and nobody's now this person's going to be responsible. Um I'm not afraid of mixeduse, >> right, >> real estate. Um when people say, you
know, low income, I mean, we've already exceeded, you know, our section 8 exemptions. That's not even a consideration. And I think the developer if doesn't know that should know that, but um I I tend to agree. I I hate to make a absolute precedent and um you
know, and just have it be zero. Um because we do have a lot of developers in the city, a lot more coming in >> to look at and build housing. Um and I I'm I'm just afraid of setting that the precedent in my opinion. >> Point is well taken. Um it isn't it's
not even a shorter shortage term. It's a longer 10 years or 15 years overall, but 10 years of um the zero amount. um and the the assessor just the current assessed value is even higher than what we're assessing um for that that initial
period >> and it has been brought down to the condition that it's in. I mean a building of that you know in okay condition rentable could be 7 $800,000. So it has been brought down to the condition that it's in.
>> Sure. Um I know this we're actually short um you know one of the committee members and this does need to be in front of us twice before um most in most cases to go back up um I think we appropriate more time to to think about some more >> yeah I think so uh
>> unless there's further questions >> yeah and and in in in a more time that to see if there's um something else that the mayor or the assessor want to jointly present to us that might be more um appealing to us to consider.
>> Mr. Mayor, one more question. The this tie um and utilizing this, how has it been used in other communities? Do you know? >> It's I mean ties can only be used for housing development. >> Um this is >> I guess how like how often is it being utilized much? Is it is this something that's used in cities or
>> Yeah, more so in recent cities. Um excuse me, more so in recent years and more so in non-gateway cities because in again in the gateway cities, a developer can apply to the state for funding to build a market rate. this is really the only way that we're going to get market rate in non-gateway city. Um so the Greenfields, North Adams have pursued
ties like this for various different projects. Uh some other communities in the area have as well. Um again it's not so much the the developer I just the developer knows our low uh mark our non-market rate percentage and our low income percentage that's there. It's
just what they can apply to the Commonwealth for for tax credits. And the only thing that you qualify for in Garner for a tax credit from the Commonwealth to make the bottom line work in terms of the numbers to get the project across the finish line are low-inccome credits. Uh so that's why the uh that statement was made. So it's one of those things that in order to
kind of make it a little more equitable so we can have either a worker rate or a mixed rate or a more market rate system so that we don't increase the low income rate that we have. Uh which is again is the legal term. Not saying we don't need affordable housing. I think affordable and attainable housing are two different
things and I've gone through that process before. Um but this is very very common for housing development especially since 2020 for getting more market rate housing in the area. But I can see if I can pull a different example too. >> Yeah, I'd like to see how it's worked out in those those cities or towns
wherever it may have been utilized um to if um what kind of precedent set and um how it was as successful was it not? Um what and also I guess my other question too is in these agreements I mean I'm not sure if I saw in there what if they
don't develop or if they don't do anything do we have any recourse? >> Yes. >> How does that work? >> There'd have to be a full agreement says if they don't do that then they owe the money back. >> They owe the money money back some almost similar to idea in that way. Yeah. And some some of them also include
in something that I like to if they sell it within a certain number of years, then they owe the money back to because then they're fixing it up for a profit and taking the savings the city gave them to line their own pockets at that point. We'd have to put something back that say if they sold it within 5 to 10 years, they'd owe the money back to the city >> as well. Okay. >> And in that agreement, would they have a
time frame in which to begin development? >> Yeah, we can have that too and I can add the full agreement to the packet for the next one, too. >> If you have something, >> it was more the funding schedule just to begin the conversation for this one here. >> No, I appreciate the difference. This is I had never heard with Tai before but it was interesting to read about and thank
you for further information from both you and the assessor. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. >> Remain on our calendar. Um on to item 11876 uh measure authorizing Growing Places to make changes to the Waterford Community Center per lease agreement between the city of Gardner and Growing Places LLC.
Mr. Mayor. >> Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Growing Places is looking at installing a backup generator for their refrigeration units and installing two condensers on the roof for the uh interior refrigeration units that they've installed in the kitchen area. And uh their lease requires any permanent building uh renovations or
changes to be approved by the city council. Uh so this is why I'm presenting this to you here as where they both are going to be connected into the wiring of the building and do require some mounting on the building and equipment installed on site. Uh I view those as permanent changes. So I'm requesting council approval for these. I do think these are both in the best
interest of the city. >> I do some mayor. Um what is the timing on this for places their need for these to get installed? >> I mean these to the generator there's a lot more flexibility because we we don't know when the power is going to go out. Um the condensers is a little more time
sensitive so that they can finish installing all their refrigeration units that are internal to the building. Uh so that one's a little more time sensitive that they'd like to get done before the end of the summer. Uh my question is has the the roof been um
looked at and inspected to make sure it can maintain the weight of the generator and >> the generator is going on the ground. >> Actually condenser I'm sorry. Yes. For the condensers. Yes. >> Okay. Um I mean with the even with the generators
you never know wouldn't well they may not be time sensitive per se because they have power right now. They could could be time sensitive because that's why they want them. >> Yeah. >> Um so, but I do see what you're saying that the other ones are um >> even more they'd like to get them done sooner for their um services.
Council Mac, do you have any thoughts on accelerating this one? >> Yeah, I it doesn't matter to me. I we can accelerate it. I don't think it's something that really needs to >> I think it up to full counsel for for discussion. So, um >> I make a motion that we move the measure to the full council for uh discussion
and approval. >> Motion made by councelor second motion made by councelor Max. Second by councelor allowance to uh recommend the measure for discussion for full full council barring a waiver of the committee rule. Um is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say I.
>> I opposed. Motion carries. We have item 11877, a measure transferring $4,16 from city council salary and wages account to Greenwood Memorial Pool minor equipment for signage at the Greenwood Greenwood Memorial Pool. Mr. Mayor and Council, >> I I got to give credit to councelor Mack
for this one. Councelor, this Mr. Chairman, she's the one who kind of spearheaded this one here to make it so that we can get a little more signage at the Greenwood pool. I think it looks great. Excuse me. Um but I if the counselor wants to be the >> uh yeah because uh I met with uh Doug
Monroe from the sign department uh rep director uh Brandon Huey and um Jake Lyman from Lyman Signs and we went through because first and foremost there was no street address on the pool as we require every other building. So that has been addressed. There's also one now on the outside pole um just to improve
the signage of the pool but there's there's nothing on the outside distinguishing it. Um, this was also chosen as a design to commemorate how old the pool building is to, you know, when it was established. Um, as far as I see it, the outside pool is a separate
entity from the new pavilion that's being built. The pavilion, uh, may have the Greenwood bath house sign, but it is an open pavilion. There is, I mean, I know a lot of the historic um, items were removed, but there's really not going to be a place to display them,
unfortunately. And I just can't see. I saw the drawings. I just can't see how they can do that. Um, so that's what made me want to uh, you know, pursue this. Um, you know, I understand it's not a time-sensitive item, nor is it a priority amongst people. Um, you know,
uh, if people want to if other counselors want to hold this on our calendar to so um, I don't believe the counselors have seen the pavilion design. I went in into the uh purchasing office and looked at it myself, but I think other people need to see that
information and know uh but I will respect what other my other counselors do. If it's not done for this summer, I'd like to see it done in the fall. Uh because I do think um this money, you know, is is is being well sent spent because we uh we did a beautiful job.
It's cited. Um I know right now they're looking at bathroom maintenance and doing some fixing. So, I just uh I want it to look nice and I want people to remember the historic significance it has in gardener. Thank you. >> Thank you, Council M. Any further?
>> I'm in full support of this. I think this would be good. The pool is set to open by the end of the week. Um and I think it looks nice. I think it's a just way to we we've refreshed the building on the outside. I think this puts the finishing touches on it. >> I I don't disagree. Um I I think that the signage is is going to be needed. um
with the pool season really upon us and installing this um mid-season um and Council M the point that um of you know the pavilion is a separate um separate spot but it's not done yet and I I think I'd like to see what that looks like as
well before um but that being said um it I think I'd rather I think I'd rather wait I'd be more than happy to entertain this once it's done um and the uh billions up and have it appropriated in the fall and ready to go for next year, the spring and it's up for the season.
Um but I don't know if that um at least especially if we go with the two meeting rule um if we don't rush it, it ends up not getting done till August and the pool's closing. We're putting a sign up on the pool at the end of the season um rather than just waiting. So that's where I am on it. But
>> uh just two things. It once it's passed it will take it will be done within two weeks. Okay. um whether it's June or December, it's it's still the Greenwood Pool. So, as far as I'm concerned, the sign should go up because it doesn't matter whether the pool's open or not.
But I do uh I you know, you know, I do you know understand the hesitation. Um but this is out of FY26 funds. So this does have some is time sensitive for the expenditure. Correct. >> For when the council has to vote to approve it.
>> Yes. And that's by when? So where this is a transfer that's what I so the appropriations can't happen anymore. Transfers can happen till the books closed. >> So that's a different date. So there's some flexibility that I just don't know. >> Is there a flexibility at the end of till July? >> That I don't know that I have to
I can look it up real quick if you'd like. >> Can we take a I'd like to take a brief because there is flexibility to keep it on our calendar and just ask again. If there's not, maybe take a brief recess to find that information. >> And part of that brief recess, uh, can we find out what the timeline is for the
pavilion to to start and be finished? >> Yes, that one already went out to bid. >> Yeah. >> Um, so I know we're looking at an October, uh, ribbon cutting for the pavilion right now as the current plan, >> but I can look that up if you please. Yeah, let's take a brief. Thank you.
>> Thank you, Jay. Uh, back from recess, Mr. May. uh timing for the uh transfers. >> So long as it's voted on at the August meeting, that should be fine for that. >> And then also during our recess, Director Cor the quote is through the 25th.
>> Your expiration date quotes is July 25th. There's no guarantee it's going to change, but just to point it out. >> Okay. Thank Thank you. >> Um I mean that's where where I am. Um you know, I wary of spending $4,000 on short notice
for signage. that's not absolutely necessary to put up um right away. However, I made a motion to get it to the full council as well if council Mac would like to do so. Um, yes, I'd like to bring it back bring it
to the full council for discussion because the worst case scenario is if it doesn't go this the full the council can bring it back send it back to finance but we can consider it again once the finance uh the pavilion's built um but at that point knowing that we'd have to get another vote. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> I'll second that motion. There's a
motion made by councelor Mack to recommend the transfer uh to a full council. Second by um council general outs. Uh is there any further discussion? Motion none. All chair say I posted cares. >> Uh on to subsection three in
subcommittee discussions regarding city's insurance payments and trust fund. Uh Mr. Mayor any updates there? >> No update. This normally takes about a week or two for us to get the finalized uh balance on the fund from Bartholomew Company who does our trust funds. Uh so I don't have those numbers today, but
today is the first day of the increase 12 and a half% rate for the health insurance because this is the first of the fiscal year. >> Council may keep it on our calendar, please. >> Yes. Item 11752, study and report on salt shed repayment.
Mr. Uh I do have the order ready to submit to the finance committee after this meeting for the um depositing about $150,000 from the project backed into the stabilization account. Uh but with the year- end closures and the budget and everything in between, I just wasn't able to get the package ready for submitt. But that is going to be uh
submitted by the end of the week. Okay. >> U questions from committee. >> Okay. >> Late for that and scheduled meeting the end of July will entertain at that point. Uh thank you. We'll leave that item on our our calendar though. Uh item 11814, a measure uh accepting the job
description of a new chief of staff position for the mayor's office. Take this one with I believe it's item 11816A uh in ordinance to amend the attach F attachment F of chapter 8 of the code of garner therefore entitled primary non-un
compensation schedule that is the one tied to those one tied together. Correct. Um >> I'm Oh, go ahead. Go ahead. uh because of the uh budget situation that we were in, the budget that just passed and all the other re-evaluating the needs of this position, I'm happy to request leave for withdrawal to fully remove this item from the calendar uh if that
is the opinion of the committee that way. I I don't believe this is um something that should be moving forward at this time. Um and happy to withdraw it if that's >> amendable to the council. >> Um I'll make a motion that at the mayor's request is withdrawn from our
panel. Second um motion made by council max second by council allowance to withdraw item 1184 and item 11816A from the calendar. Is there any further discussion there? None. All those in favor say I. I. All those opposed. Motion carries. Those two items will be
removed. Uh item 11836 a measure adopting the city's hazard mitigation plan. Uh this item was before us last um last meeting where Dr. Stevens and the mayor had sends a presentation on this and a couple other plans um to us. I don't
know if there's anything the mayor has to further add to the discussion on it. >> I do not, Mr. Chair. >> Council M. >> I have nothing. >> I have nothing as well. >> I will make a motion that we recommend uh adoption of the measure to the full council. >> Second motion made by council Mac. Second by councel to recommend adoption
of the measure to the full council. Is there any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. The motion carries. Uh item 11838 measure authorizing an intermunicipal agreement between the city of Gardner town of Harbertson for animal control services for the period
of July 1, 2026 through June 30th, 2029. Um the mayor has um this is before us last time the mayor has corrected some um date issues in the agreement that's before us and um those are um look fine.
now. I don't if there's any further discussion for the mayor on this. >> Just like the the corrected one that had the new dates on it also had Hbertson's signature on it. Um so that was sent to the coun the finance committee earlier this week. So that's before you now. I still think this is a good service that we provide. Um and I do believe the funding is adequate for the services
that we provide to the town and I think it's a good council. >> Uh just one quick correction on the measure itself. Um the top of the um if there's a comment just needs to get cleaned up. I think one I unless I didn't have the newest one which is
possible but if that's incorrect still is double H1B >> in Harvard. >> Yeah. >> So that just get cleaned up. I have nothing else. >> No. I make a a motion that um the inter municipal agreement measure be um sent to the full council for authorization.
>> Second councelor motion made by councelor Mac. Second by councel to recommend authorization of the measure to the full council. Is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Item 11840, a measure designating the
position of transfer station safety program development and compliance coordinator as a special municipal employee under the provisions of MGL chapter 20 uh 268A section 20D. Um this item was uh before us last uh time as
well for the health department and the mayor. Um mayor, anything further to add on this item? Nothing further other than that. I still believe this is a needed position and I think this would be a benefit to the city. Council >> Mac, >> no further questions. >> I have nothing further. I think the presentation was thorough. It makes sense. So I entertain a motion to
>> I make a motion to uh move the measure to the full council for approval. >> A second motion made by councelor Max second by councel to recommend um uh passage of the measure to the full council. Is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say
I. I. Those opposed? Motion carries. Uh item 11841, an ordinance to amend attachment F of chapter 8, the code of the city of Garner, therefore entitled primary non-union compensation schedule to add positions of golf administrative assistant and transfer station safety program development and compliance
coordinator. Uh this was uh before us um in conjunction with the previous item, but also with the golf um the golf and reserve assistant as part of it uh last time. Um and um merit further to add on on this item.
>> Um just that in reviewing uh information that I've received from you know councilors who have questions and reviewing this here too. I do believe it prudent and I know we talked about this at the previous meeting for this to potentially be a split question where we take the two positions separate. Uh where I've already submitted that that would only be able to be done by vote of
the committee uh to split them at this point. Um personally uh I think the transfer station position should be uh moving forward. Uh but I believe there's some more information that could be collected on the golf position. Uh particularly where the remote aspect of
the job is there too. Um but that's that's the latest update that I they have on that. >> I'm going to make a motion that we split this item 11841 being the transfer station safety program and item 11841B
being the um golf administrative assistant position. >> Second. Just write that down. So second motion made by uh councelor Max second by councelor Dhouse to split item 11841 uh into the two positions with item
11841A being the transfer station position and item 11841B being the golf administrative assistant position. Is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say I. >> I opposed. Uh motion carries. Um I think
we will take up item 1841A um for further discussion. Um >> which is the golf >> no a transportation. >> Um no nothing further than that. I think I still believe this is a saving to the city and I think it be a help for us.
>> I make a motion that uh 11841A be sent to the full council for uh approval of the uh ordinance amendments. Second by max second by council allowance to recommend passage of the ordinance uh to for the
transportation to the full council. Uh is there any further discussion? Hearing none. All those in favor say I. >> I. All those opposed. Motion carries. Uh now we'll go to 11841B the golf um golf service assistant portion. As this is part of the golf mission which I sit on,
I will be abstaining from discussions. >> Thank you. Um this will remain on our calendar for more time but in the meantime I have done extensive research um on this item uh and really uh educating myself about
enterprise accounts. Uh but the basic uh situation with this position is first and foremost that the golf commission needs to take more action items on this to change a uh employee from an hourly to a monthly position. they actually need to take a vote. They did not take a
vote. Um at their May meeting, they made a uh recommendation and approved a vote to send a letter to the mayor dated May 15th to uh to do it, but the committee itself never voted on on the item before they sent it to the mayor for
recommendation. Um the other thing which is uh an enterprise account um is just how funds are separated when they're come from taxes, fees, memberships.
Okay. But other than that, they the they're under the same oversight as any other funds or or or budget within the um the city of Gardener. The city council, Steve, needs to vote and appropriate the person personal budget
of an enterprise account. Um, as we already do with water and sewer, wages cannot be raised independently by the department supervisor. Wages and steps sales increases fall under the same wage instep system as all other city
employees. With that being said, um the city of Gardner has no remote employee policy and under the letter or the description from the mayor's meeting with uh certain
members of the golf commission, um it said under there that they could they have control of the job of the job duties. Job duties and work environment are two different things. So, the commission cannot define the work environment. That would have to be done
by a citywide um policy. We do not have one. And unless there is one, it can't occur. Um and even if we had a policy, I personally think it needs to be looked in because not every department in the
city should have the opportunity to work remotely. We need people in the city clerk's office, the treasurer's office, you know, to meet with the people and whatnot. But there are probably positions that could and we've lost people who have had the opportunity to go to remote positions. But the bottom line is we don't have a policy. And so
regardless of uh the autonomy that the commission thinks they have, they don't. And um they can't make that definition. So I'm going to be asking um I I thought the chair of the golf commission was going to be here this morning. Um he did know
of the meeting. Um, I'm going to say that they need to review the monthly and annual salary in comparison to other non-union um positions within the city. The previous person's position got $19.66
an hour. Um, and this based on even if you go for 40 hours a month goes to $47.14 an hour. Okay? It there's no there's no way that you could substantiate that much of an increase. Um, I did meet with
the human resource director and who said that, you know, 10 hours a week because sometimes they're busier than others. Um, is is is probably uh a good measurement. So, that's 40 hours a month. Um, and at 30 hours, $30 an hour,
which is still substantial, that's $1,200 a month. Uh but I just feel that the golf commission has the u fiscal responsibility to manage the fund well. But the bottom line is that they have to realize is that they can't make an
independent decision like this without going through the mayor and the city council and they cannot make a decision um on a work environment. So I hope that this will get back to the golf commission. they will reconvene and um I'm also going to ask the mayor um
through section 25 of the city charter to I would like to get a legal opinion by the city solicitor or a city assistant city solicitor on this because I don't um as this is not even a procurement I think I think that they need to just to
give an official uh ruling on this because I do believe my extensive research is correct and and and I and I and backs mine uh my stance on this. Thank you, Mr. >> U. I have no issue with the you know all
the questions that were asked and getting answers for that. I my only clarification is just the the avenue that was mentioned. Uh so there is a ordinance that allows for the request of a legal opinion by a committee and then section 25 of the charter requests a written report of the mayor within 14 days of receipt. So I just want to just which process which the one
>> right. So because I can ask for a written request for a legal opinion because I'm a chair of a committee but I'm not a chair of this committee. >> Oh okay. >> Okay. I mean, >> but I can ask but I mean I would I would like to see it see it before us if we could get it for our July 20th meeting
if not but I don't believe the golf commission themselves a meeting but they need to be informed and they even if they have to form a meeting they're going to have to also be able to take some action because I think they're going to have to uh and to make changes because uh you know as I said the
position falls under their oposes for services um you know But but that and just job description but that's that's where it ends. >> Okay. And I and I do think that they need uh to collaborate with human
resource department and with the mayor to relook at this salary scale um that they have created and I found I've watched meetings. I found absolutely no vote from the golf commission to approve the the the salary that is being given. >> Thank you.
uh July it would be the week after if you're talking about meeting for this committee it be the week after July 20th too I'm not sure when the golf commission's meeting meeting next look that up but >> all right so the 27th or so >> 29thish 28th is probably when we'll be meeting again but just for clarification
I just so I'm not sure golf commission I I'm not sure >> and like I said I'm happy to request it's just the process which it was there too >> as long as we have yeah and we we'll keep this on our calendar until we get all the answers >> that that that also works >> anyway so you have the time. Um, but if what you can get us for our next finance
committee meeting would be appreciated. >> Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Um, with say no for discussion just remain on our calendar. >> Thank you. >> Um, that's for item 11841B. And on to item 11842, an order transferring the sum of $25,1278
from mayor's unclassified salary reserve expense account to various salary accounts of the general fund. This was before us last meeting. represent I don't think you have anything further >> nothing further >> question >> other than uh for the donation acceptances we can add a block like this below if that would be
>> that was that would yeah do close yes um any questions on this this item or discussion >> no I don't have any questions on this >> I entertain a motion to recommend the order for the full council >> so moved >> second u motion made by council M second
by council general to recommend passes the order uh to the full council. Is there any further discussion? None. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed. Motion carries. Uh we have subsection four in front of us here as well. Discussions on city's financial outlook. Uh the council president, city
auditor working on some information to be able to present to us at the next finance committee meeting at the end of this month. Um so we look forward to that. Um and those discussions that ends our ends our agenda. Entertain a motion to adjurnn. >> So moved. Second motion by councelor Max
second by councel turn arms to adjurnn. All those in favor say I. I. Those opposed motion carries journ. Thank you everyone. Part: 2
I call the Wednesday, July 1st, 2026 meeting of the finance committee of the Gardener City Council to order. The assistant clerk could please call the role. >> Councelor Dowitz, >> present. >> Councelor Hegley. >> Councelor Mack, >> present. >> Announcement of open meeting recordings.
The open meeting recording notice is posted on the wall over there. Is anyone here recording other than staff? Be noted. There is none. All right. [cough and clears throat] Our agenda is review and approval of prior meeting
minutes. There are none. Um down to subsection two, first time on the agenda. An ordinance to increase oversight of professional development and travel. Uh item 11862. Um I'll take this one actually with item 11870 in
ordinance to increase uh financial transparency, financial governance, and budget uh preparedness. Uh these two items were proposed by councelor Pegland uh who was not here uh today to speak on them, but they're um I don't have anything discussed on them currently,
but I don't know if anyone here uh would like to have any words. I >> I have nothing. I think we should just uh keep these on our calendar to our next meeting. >> With no objection, we're going to keep items 11862 and item 11870 on our calendar until our next meeting
later in July. On to the second item 11867, an order transferring salary appropriations from the city clerk department to auditor department expenses. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, this came from the letters that you see attached from the city auditor
requesting a transfer of funds to cover a deficit in her uh department for FY26. Uh, honestly, the uh the clerk department uh surplus that's in there from the position being vacant uh was really just the first part of money that
I saw and I saw that the auditor was a legislative department and the clerks was a legislative department, so that was there. Um certainly if the committee feels like they should come from a different department for a transfer, I'm more than open to that. There's as we close the books, I'm sure we can find other ways to do it. It was just that was my uh first instinct with it to get
it in by the deadline for us to be able to close everything with this meeting and all the reviews that have to happen with it. Thank you. Uh further session here from the committee from President Harris. >> I uh well I understand that it being a legislative department also would appreciate the conversation uh first
before it's coming forward but because the auditing firm that this account comes out of uh when we had no auditor was used by the entire city. I agree with the mayor that uh the fund should be sought elsewhere. I I tend to agree at least at least in
part some other funding source um how it was utilized um while the auditor was or we didn't have an auditor. Um I would hope we could or find a way to do that. What is the timeliness of doing so to to find the account? >> Um I'd have to check the specific time for it. I know that we have a certain amount of time before the books are
closed is really when it has to be done. Um, and those are all set by the the municipal modernization act was passed a couple uh years ago and changed the timelines with everything there too. But it's it's really once the books are closed. So we have some flexibility with that. New appropriations cannot be made
but [clears throat] transfers between department can still be made up until that point. So we have some time. >> You do have some time. Okay. Council >> I agree with my fellow counselors. I think that yes, I think that the um council could, you know, legislator should be responsible part of it but not all of it. So I'd like to see about the
sources um review to fund this. Thank you. >> Thank you. Sounds like bar no exact objection. We'll just take some more time back and report on possible other sources and we can address it at that point. >> Sounds good to me. >> More time on item 11867. Uh item 11871,
a measure ratifying the council president's recommendation for step designation for the city clerk. Council president here today to speak on this. >> Thank you, Chair Dow. Thank you for having me before the committee [clears throat] today. Uh there's been a lot of misinformation and hallway conversations about this item, so I
prepared some remarks. First, I'd like to correct the record on the hiring process. The selection was a result of a rigorous open and transparent search. To combat any mis misinformation out there, we interviewed top candidates uh almost 50 candidates. Sorry, we had 50
candidates apply. We applied uh a level of review and interviewed three applicants from that pool of 50 and attorney stood out uniquely equipped to handle the legal and statutory election demands of a modern city clerk's office
by far. Second, the step one designation I believe is fully earned under the new non-UN salary ordinance. New hires can receive 50% credit for outside experience up to a 10-year cap. Attorney Blen brings over 20 years experience as a practicing attorney along with a deep
municipal insight from her work on the charter review and school building committees. Her legal background perfectly complements the compliance and analytical skills the city needs to city clerk. Finally, because this is the second time I've had to do this as council president, I just wanted to say
this is exactly how this ordinance was designed. For over 20 years, Gardner's non-UN pay scales stagnated because correcting decades of political salary decisions is incredibly difficult. Uh the best analogy I can think of is we're trying to fix the plane as we were in
the air flying it. We passed this ordinance to give policy makers discretion to handle compensation challenges we face while maintaining a fair compromise for everyone else. For current employees, it rewarded loyalty with up to 75% credit for internal
service with retroactive pay. And for new hires, like in this case, it allows us to have a lever to recruit real world experience for professionals with skills the cities can benefit from. Under our old system, we could have never considered an attorney of this
caliber. Today, we see this ordinance working exactly as intended. Thank you, >> Council President. council. >> Um, I just want to say first, I'm I'm I'm unaware of the hallway conversations in this position um being hired, but as a member of the search committee, I
think we did a extremely thorough and transparent job in the process. Um, and anybody [clears throat] can watch the the interviews um that were were taped to to see this process. I think that we're very fortunate to have somebody of
this caliber to want to take a legis a municipal position. Um, and it it it just disappoints me because I want everyone who works for this city gardener to feel welcome when they they walk into this store. So, there should be um you know, people need
to support each other and um you know, these aren't the halls of of a high school or a middle school. Okay, we have to stop and we have to be professional on all levels here. Um, I when I got this item, I had nothing against it. It's a $1,579.88
difference. It's really not a tremendous difference and it's going to, you know, that's going to break the fiscal, you know, security of the city. Um, so I I I'm not knowing all that, I am in support of this and um and I hope things
really change within these walls moving forward. Thank you. And councelor Mac, um just to reiterate some of those points, I know there's been some the chatter online that there wasn't a process. There is a distinct process that we've used twice. We used it for the auditor. Um used twice recently, use
it for the auditor. Um we've used it for the clerk now that it was a subcommittee that matched multiple times for each of these. Went through their steps, went through all the um resumes that were submitted and then narrowed it down as c as president Tara said to a group.
Council Matt was inspired by group one with councelor Kazinskis. Um and then had interviews that were part of a public process. Um and to insinuate there wasn't any type of public process um for this um is befalling to me. Um
and I want to make clear to the public that that that happened and it's out there and you can go watch it as councilor Mac previously stated. Um but as for the measure itself, I think it's very appropriate for the uh more than appropriate for the type of experience um the new clerk has and I will be in
support of it. >> I make a motion that we uh ratify uh we we move ratification of the measure to the full council. >> Second motion made by councelor Mack, second by councelor Dowitz to propose uh
to recommend ratification to the full council. Is there any further discussion? >> Thank you chair general. Thank you, council man, for your support. I think uh one last note uh if I had an office here in city hall, I would say it's an open door policy. I've already had one good conversation about exactly how this
ordinance works and and the staff designation here. I thought it was a productive conversation and if any employees or residents have questions about this specific ordinance or this uh staff designation, they can always reach out to me by email or phone. I'd be
happy to discuss it. So, thank you. >> Any further? No further discussion. >> Hear no further discussion. All those in favor say I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. President Harris. That's the >> just can I ask for a point of clarity? Are we doing a uh rule 22 recommendation
to the council? >> That is that is correct. Yes. >> I just want to make sure. Thank you. >> Thank you council M for the clarification. Um next we have item 11872. a measure accepting a donation of $5,000 from Lin Bario in memory of Deputy Chief Rock [clears throat] Bario retired for
Gardener Police Department community policing program. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. For several years now, uh Miss Bario has made this donation to the community policing division of the police department uh in memory of her late husband, retired deputy chief Rock Bario
um through her foundation, the Solid of the Rock Foundation. This is actually coming out of her personal funds this time. Uh she's been very supportive of the community policing program. this funds particularly would be going towards the junior police academy um and the work that they're doing over there to help support uh children in the
community through the work of the community policing division. So, I'm happy to put forward this donation acceptance. >> Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Council member, >> I I just want to comment on um the chief's letter that um they will be renaming the junior police academy in
academy in 2026 to honor um officer uh Bario's memory. Um, in my role as a teacher at the high school, um, I actually had the pleasure of, um, co-eing classes with Officer Barrier, >> and I did riding off with him, uh, because I used to teach criminal justice
and, um, just being around the high school. Um, it's very rare that a police officer has the type of rapport relationship with the adolescence that officer Bario had. and um it was very evident um that
the kids respected him and he treated them with respect. So um I'm proud to support this donation. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councilman Mac. Um my main question on this is with the police academy with the community um the junior police academy the timing of this and
the need does it need to be passed >> quickly? No, because those can be retroactive >> sentences. Okay. And then with this one and um the others actually before for the donations. Um I guess more clarity on the actual measure. Um it doesn't
specify what was donated. It's more broad. So is that something we can get more narrowly like as narrowly tailored this donation is for each of these for the next meeting? >> Sure. We absolutely can. That's just the form that we use since I started for the donation. I think that's the I think that's the stock form that DLS gives to
>> the DS. Okay. That's what's I guess the recommendation of DLSS. [clears throat] I'd like to see that is to use those stock forms. I just I didn't know if it was overly broad for these type of >> I mean we can always go more strict and more info than what DLS gives us. DS gives a template. >> And so if DLS gives a template, we can also add to the template too. It just
this is the minimum. >> I don't think there's anything lengthy. I think it's just specifying the donation >> especially with it seems like with all the donations for other things we have a list to go with it and then there we just have to be like donation from Burberry Rock Barrier $5,000 instead.
Um, similar with the truck and the I know we are not discussing yet the truck and the even the flag just >> for so if anyone ever sees the measure alone >> they know what it was for. >> I did notice that when I was writing the letters this time too that the only place that it lists what it is and the approximate value is in the letter
>> is in the letter. Yeah, >> if um >> long for each of those three, I'd like to see that in there as well. But um as you said, the timing is not of an issue. Um we'll wait for we'll have more time on this one.
>> That's great. Great. >> Um item 11873, a measure accepting a donation to the city of Gardner uh from Keller Partners Company of the American flag flown over the US capital building to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States. Mr. Mayor, >> thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And so Keller Partners Company is our on
call grant writing staff that we have for the city. Uh as a gift to the city to commemorate the 250th anniversary of the United States, they have sent us a flag that was flown over the US Capital building um with a commemorative certificate uh working with Senator Ed Marky to obtain that uh for us and it is
shipped on the way here. So I wanted to include that as a donation we received since it does have a monetary value for it. It does require acceptance. >> Thank you M. >> And what will the flag you find at city hall? What's your usage of the flag? the >> putting on a case. >> Yeah, my my plan is a case kind of similar to the one that we got from
Senator Marky for the centennial celebration that hangs downstairs outside the treasur's office. Probably do something similar to that. >> I'm sorry. Um yeah, just as we stated, just similar with the uh the measure itself, but we'll keep this item with us. [clears throat] >> Uh item 11874, a measure accepting a
donation of a two uh 2026 Chevrolet pickup truck for the Gardener Police Department K9 program. Mr. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Uh, similar to the other two, this is a donation request. This is a donation of a three-year lease of a, uh, 2026 Chevy
pickup.