Oh, what the It is 6:33. Uh, so we're going to call this meeting to order and I'm going to read the chair statement. I suppose this meeting being recorded by the economic development committee. If any
other person present or doing the same must notify the chairperson at this time. Uh roll call vote. Councelor Healey is not here. Council Matthew Cataro
is here. Councelor Gordon is remote >> here. Hello. >> Uh, Council Bullock is not here. And Manos is uh [clears throat]
we'll call the members. In accordance with the open meeting law, when a council or counsel has attended remotely, the chair would need to acknowledge the members of the council committee/ committee who are appearing via remote access and inform the full council or committee that all votes will
be taken by roll call. Council is attending remotely encouraged to show their faces. I see a face. Um, so, uh, do we make a motion to approve the minutes?
>> Yes. Motion to approve the minutes. >> Second. >> Okie do. Uh, >> hearing at this time. Uh, >> do we want to take a roll call on that? Right. >> Yes. We got a roll call vote.
>> Yeah, we got a vote on it. >> Yes. Yes. >> Yes. >> Y >> public comment in accordance with Springfield Council rules procedure section 562-121.
any citizen. All petitioners shall be limited to three minutes or another amount of time and this with at the discretion of the officer presiding officer and in accordance with the Greenfield city code article 3 chaplet 49-5D
or all written input submitted by members of the public to a public body provided however that's such public comment occurs at the appropriately designated time if any of a public meeting as determined by the presiding officer.
And it doesn't look like I don't know who Kay is, but nobody has signed up. Um, okay. >> Does anyone want to say anything on public com? Do you have something you'd like to say public com?
>> No, but thank you for asking. >> Then we can close public comment. We'll close public comment at >> 6:363, right? 633 being open. Okay. Motion approved to declare real estate located
at 62 Meridian Street as surplus property. Um, should I just go read all bullet points or are we doing this onesies? I think just one by one we'll just take a vote
for the first motion. Yes, >> Rachel. >> Oh, sorry. We're taking a vote. >> Yes. >> To approve the real estate located at 62 Meridian Street as surplus property. >> Did you actually read the whole motion?
Sorry. >> I can do that. >> I guess that's the whole thing. I'm just not sure if we have to or if it's gonna cause problems if we don't. >> Um, I can read it. >> Nine. I have a paper book. I might be uh
easier to do it this way. >> Do you want me to read it? >> You can if you'd like. Go. I just found it. Go ahead. You got it in front of you? >> Sure. Yeah. Order number FY26-053A1. The city council moved that it be ordered that the Greenfield City Council
declares real estate at 62 Meridian Street being shown on assessor's map 20, lots 15, 16, and 17 to be surplus property and transfers said property to the mayor for sale or lease. Majority vote required. >> And then it needs a second. second.
>> Okay. Um, >> all those in favor? >> I think you have to ask if there's any discussion. >> Is there any discussion? None for me. >> None for me.
So, we have the roll call vote. >> Uh, council Gordon. >> Yes. >> Manos. >> Yes. I'm a Yes. Okay. Bottom of page nine.
>> I can read that as well if you'd like. >> Okay. It's uh authorized mayor to sell or lease city own land located at 62 Meridian. Go for it. Okay. Order number FY26-053A2. The city council moved that it be
ordered that the Greenfield City Council authorizes the mayor to sell or lease 62 Meridian Street assessors map 20 lots 15, 16, and 17 pursuant to the city council policy for the sale or lease of city-owned land and authorize the mayor
to execute all documents necessary to accomplish the same. Majority vote required. >> Second. Councelor Gordon. >> Yes. >> Any discussion? >> Were we discussing? >> Do we need to discuss this?
>> I mean, I think you have to ask if there is any discussion. >> Okay. Would you Is there Does anybody want to discuss this? >> Yeah. >> Yes, you do. >> No, I mean, I think that we've talked about this in previous meetings and the mayor, we've heard from the mayor about why this is
>> useful. So, I'm I'm happy to support it. >> Good. Let's do a vote on it. >> Garden. >> Yes. >> Yes. Menos. >> Yes. >> Okay. Cell.
Okay. Next is to move to declare real estate located at 77 Petty Plane Road as surplus property. >> Second or do you have to read the whole >> I think we actually have to read it guys. Sorry.
>> Order number FY26-054A1. The city council moved that it be ordered that the Greenfield City Council declares real estate at 77 Petty Plane Road being shown on assessor's map 20 lot 20 to be surplus property and transfer said property to the mayor for
sale or lease. Majority vote required. >> Second. Any discussion? >> None from me. I feel the same about this one as the last one that we've we've talked about it plenty previously. Vote.
>> Take a vote. >> Council Garden. >> Yes. >> I'm a yes. Council Minha. >> Yes. >> Moving on. >> I'll read this one as well. >> Go for it.
>> Order number FY26-054A2. The city council moved that it be ordered that the Greenfield City Council authorizes the mayor to sell 77 Petty Plane Road, Assessor's Map 20, lot 20, pursuant to the city council policy for the sale or lease of city-owned land and
authorize the mayor to execute all documents necessary to accomplish the same. Majority vote required. >> Second. Any discussion? here. >> All to a vote.
>> Council Gordon. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. So, moving on. Hi. My best uh posting. There's no topics reasonably anticipated by the
chair. Oh, so I'm skipping one. >> No, we have another >> Yeah, >> ADU one, right? >> This the uh ADU one. And that is page 33, right?
>> Yes. >> Does one of you mind reading that one? >> Sure, I can. >> Do you want to read it? Uh, >> as long as I can see. >> Okay, I'll get that page. Here we go.
>> Order number FY26-061. The city council moved that it be ordered that the city council of Greenfield amend the zoning ordinance chapter 200 section 200-56 accessory dwelling units to add language in bull and move language and strike through as required revisions under the
affordable homes act signed by Governor Mora Healey relative to accessory dwelling units 760 CMR 71.0 O to read as follows and attached exhibit A and further amends the table contents and index of the code and
further that non-substantive changes to the numbering of the ordinance be permitted in [clears throat] order that it be in compliance with the numbering format of the code of the city of Greenfield majority vote required seven. Did anyone do a second? Thank you. Uh do
we want to have a discussion? I would say yes. >> Yes. >> Okay. Councilor Gordon, is there something you'd like to say? >> No. I mean, I think just for members of the public, you know, we have to do this
to be in compliance with state law. So, we're just going to do >> Well, I am going to have a protest vote of no because I don't believe that the governor should be able to determine how we a local municipality should fund our
zoning far as housing goes. So, it's meaningless, but I'm going to vote no. And I'd be curious to know if the entire council voted no, what would happen? Would there be a lawsuit with Would the state sue the
city? I don't >> I believe that is what can happen. >> Yeah. But I'm sure it'll pass. But I'm a no on this. >> Yeah, I got to agree with Michael on this. I think I definitely sense the
urgency that the state and a lot of our local activists are are pushing for for housing. I understand that. I just don't think ADUs are potentially really benefiting and nor do they have a focus of growing workingass
um uh dwelling units uh in which the working class is the one who owns it. I think this uh plays right into the hands of predatory landlords and outside developers and all that sort of thing. I think the benefit work versus cost of
this uh full ADU project and pushed by the state is unnecessary and shortsighted because it just it doesn't take into account the fact that the reason why people don't have housing is because it's unaffordable and u just you
know giving a boon to the developing industry doesn't doesn't really help the issue at hand. I don't know how many ADUs would actually be built. uh it'd be very few. Last time I've checked the approximate cost of building such an ADU. It is totally out of the budget of
any working-class family that would live in Greenfield. So I that's that those people aren't my focus. I'm sorry, but they they are. Um and I just I mean I don't know, but I don't think it's like uh it's going to pass like you said. I I
don't think it's gonna me and you voting against it or a few counselors voting against it. I don't think it's going to uh it's going to do anything. This is more of just a protest vote. But again, you know, I mean, I on principle, like you said, you know, the governor or
whoever it may be shoving down legislative priorities down onto uh localities and taking away our right to legislate and make sure that the living conditions and and uh neighborhoods look like the way that we want them to look
like um is just it's wrong. It's uh but there's not much we can do about it. But I mean this is not a this might be a bit of an exaggeration or but not the law isn't always right. The law isn't always right. At there was
a point in time when slavery was legal and people who voted against it and people who >> struggled against it were seen as criminals and and and and people who need to be hunted down. I'm not saying this is in the same vein, but you know, the law isn't always right. And I believe in uh working with local
activists and and the state could have done a bit of a better job. I think they're just trying to push anything and everything just to be like housing, housing, housing, which I understand, but it's the issue is affordability. The issue isn't a lack of of housing. It's
that there's a certain class of people. there's a there's a there's a small group of people who are in control of our housing stock and uh that's the reason why we need to take properties away from them in in in democratic fashion. But uh that's the reason why
people don't have homes to live. Not because there aren't enough buildings and there's there's not enough uh there's too much regulation. That's that's not the reason. It's because we have a group of greedy people who won't let wealth go. Sorry for the tirade,
>> right? That's what this is all about. But in any event, um >> I mean, as long as we're discussing, I'm just gonna I'm gonna jump in and say that uh I do pretty fundamentally disagree with with some of what you just
said, councelor Vas, and and not enough buildings for people to live in is definitely a significant part of why we don't have enough housing for folks. And I think the idea of ADUs is that, you know, the people who can afford to build them, which is admittedly not very many people in Greenfield, but if if those
people did build them, they might rent them out or, you know, provide them to family members who then wouldn't be taking up other places to live. So it would actually add to the housing stock. Is will it effectively do that? You know, I'm with you. Probably not. We know that not a lot of ADUs get built.
Um, could it do I think it's worth trying because I think most things are worth trying because our housing crisis is so dire. Yes. Does it matter in this case? Not particularly because this is just to bring our 80 like we've already talked about this kind of ad nauseium and and you know we need to tweak the
law the ordinance we already passed to bring it in compliance with state law. So I think that's a thing we should do. But uh that's >> I think I as well think we need more help. However, I don't believe we should uh
we have local ordinances, setback rules, etc. um to um to ignore those or to overrule those uh to uh build things uh by right. Um
without necessarily let letting neighbors weigh in. Um, I I just think she's again dictating what our local uh building
ordinances will be. And there's a reason why we have rules and and the governor's breaking our rules. And I'm all for adus, but uh I uh again I just uh don't shove it down
throats with there's a lot of housing being built in Greenfield in a very rel relatively short period of time and and there's there's many on the docket. You know, the penfields have stuff. They're waiting for the price of lumber to come
down for kind of a before they build. But um so I just again to me it's just a principal thing. I don't believe the go I think the governor's uh out of line quite frankly and um
so she she can go in her hat as far as I'm concerned. So >> I think she's done some great things but I >> anyway agree. So uh what do you how do you want to move forward on this? want to um vote as far as uh recommendations.
>> We do need to take a vote. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Are we done with discussing this? >> Yep. >> Yes. >> Councelor Gordon. >> Yes. >> Wahab. >> Yes.
Master Tataro. No. >> Okay. >> Oh, wait. Sorry. Wait. Did I say yes? >> Yes, you did. >> Oh my god. >> You have time to retract. >> Please. I made a whole thing and then [laughter] I said,
>> I'm sorry. [clears throat] >> Amateur night here, folks. Okay. >> Sorry. >> Okay. Discussion. At the time of posting, no topics were reasonably anticipated by the chair. Um, so
unless somebody else wants to bring something up tonight, Rachel, >> not from me. I think you got all the voice I have today. >> Okay. Can you sing us a song? >> Not one that you want to hear.
>> All right. So, uh, next meetings January 13th at 6:30 p.m. City Hall meeting room second floor Zoom hybrid unless otherwise posted. So, uh, so may make a motion to adjurnn.
>> Motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Yes. >> Yes. Yes. This meeting is officially over at 7 PM.
>> Thanks, guys. >> Perfect. >> Good night, boys and girls. >> Hope you feel better. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Have a good one, everybody. >> Thanks. >> See you. end the meeting. And