some level of shelters. Again, there is a process that the city has that they have to pass or pass in this inspection. There's certain criterias. All of these things have to be met before we decide that organization X, Y, and Z is going
to give us any overnight shelter. So, there is a process. Our first process is finding out who is willing to provide the space for overnight. That's process number one. And number two, if it goes through a review process, that review process then will give us, you know,
things down, makes it think who is able to pass the inspection, who's ready to do that. >> So it got to be an organization who going to be deal with this. So if I have a house and I say well my how it is, I have an apartment that is vacant and I
can provide for one night uh some shelter and also I can open 10 bedrooms. Can I do that? Absolutely not. Unless you are a nonprofit agency with a 501c3 and you have a unique identifier with
the federal government, then yes, you can do it. Other than that, if you're just being sweet, that's not going to happen. >> And the RFP is going out when again? >> On the 22nd of December at 9:00 a.m. It will be posted on the city website.
>> Okay. Thank you so much. >> Absolutely. My questions have already been asked and answered. So I'm good. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh just one one more thing that maybe you can send it over to this committee
is uh how many people as per the federal government counts >> that is on a specific date on a specific night. How many uh own house people we have? If you can send that over by email, that will be great.
>> Sure, we can definitely do that. Uh we coordinated entry. I could basically get um some of that information to you. I could also get to you the information for January 28th, which is the point in time count that gives us a good number when we go out there at 10:00 a.m. uh
10:00 p.m. at night until 3 in the morning uh to count whoever is on encampments here. So that's another good data. >> That's the data the federal houses call for the federal that's the data the federal government >> call for >> request every year. >> Yes. Every year
>> I want to know that day because you just mentioned that we have about almost 200 about 300 according to the police. Mhm. >> So I wanted to compare those. >> Definitely the data will be this is why we're doing all this because we need real number real uh you know numbers that could help us in the future and
help the organizations um acquire the uh funding to deal with the specific issues of the homeless population in the city of Lawrence. >> Okay. No problem. >> Thank you counselors. Any other questions? >> Uh council president >> councel zone.
>> Oh thank you. So uh thank you uh director Gri I in the meeting that we had for budget and finance meeting you mentioned Aidal as one of the uh uh partners
they could be they if they don't apply they're not going to be however these are the people that gave us support letters moving forward. Yes, Amedal is uh able if they get any of their locations um or their partners' location to apply um they're able to participate
in this. Yes, you are correct. That's what I said. And so my question is as proper training being provided let's say that uh a just for the
sake >> do they have the proper training uh or if they don't have it let's say that they get approved because I know some of them they do the job >> uh but some of them are not trained properly so how we going to deal with that is is the
city going to provide proper training um for this you know for maybe one of the churches part of the amidada that decides and gets you approved. So the state actually um requires that
everyone working with this population gets trained as well. So no one is exempt from that whether they're doing the work already or not there are going to be training. One of the things uh you know according to what the um president council president was asking is real
data. They need to be trained also on HMIS system which is the homeless management information system and we have a a program called Vesta. They need to know how to handle that as well. They need to know how to handle crisises. They need to know how to handle um any
type of incident that happens within those centers. So yes, that is forthcoming once we start this process. Um there's a lot that goes on. So it's not just coming and uh having people giving them a contract but there is a process and we want to be able to do
things um accordingly so that that way the state is able to help us further in any other needs that we might have in the future. uh be it the reason why I would ask um the council to um wave the
30 days so that that we're able to move this process because if it's in four months we'll be out of this out of this money. So we need to make sure that we have enough time to do the work and spend the money and do you know and do what we said we were going to do during
this time. uh and through you council president and I mentioned uh I mentioned training and and and also I'm going to mention uh other expenses that local churches even though they are not officially
doing the job uh but they are doing it regardless because of a calling to help others but it's expensive for uh any local church to open their doors
uh and offer a service uh without getting any um help from the local government. Uh I know they some of them have good intentions but on the other hand it's very expensive. So what we have in front of us the amount of money
it's not enough. >> It's not enough. We're thinking about vets but there's also utilities that that have to be paid. bills and I and I had this conversation with some of the uh uh
with a few pastors. Sometimes they're willing to do the job, but it's so expensive to have a church open um and knowing how expensive is uh the electricity now and other uh expenses,
food, etc. So, we have in front of us an amount of money that's not going to be enough. So hopefully um this amount of money can increase because we have the need there's an
issue in the community. Um and regardless of what we how we feel about it uh we have to deal with it but on what we have in front of us is not a lot of money unfortunately. So hopefully
this amount is increased uh and the people that that the organizations that are going to get this award can get more in the following year in the following year. Uh I just wanted
to put that out there. The amount of money that we have in front of us is not a lot. It is not only about beds when it comes to shelter that also uh we have to deal with training with electricity and
etc etc. So I'm I urge my colleagues to vote uh in the affirmative and support this that is is is needed is needed in the community. Thank you. >> Thank you. If there is no more questions I'm looking for motion.
>> Motion to approve. Second motion was >> uh the motion was yes the motion was presented to approve uh she was asking if the consult can wait 30 days >> uh I'll accept it as a friendly amendment >> we need to
>> okay so I'm saying I'll accept it as a friendly amendment to >> not putting the amendment >> oh who's putting oh >> nobody okay I am going to amend the motion to include um waving the 30 days >> all right there is a motion to approve
and wave the 30 days. It's been properly second. Discussion again. There is none. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> I. >> And the eyes have it. Congratulations. >> Thank you so much. You have a good night. Appreciate your time. >> All right. Uh, now we go on top of the
agenda. Uh, no, wait, wait a minute. Not about the agenda. We go with item 47725. uh transfer of for the amount of $127,253 finance 4467 there people from the city 46725
transfer for the amount of 124,253 from free cash to the union uh uniform replacement which are the five Um, he's >> 467. >> He's doing the city employees first. Um, all right. Item 467-25,
transfer in the amount of $124,253 from free cash to uniform replacement was sent up uh to the full council as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion. >> Second. >> There's a motion on the table properly second discussion.
There is no discussions. All those in f please say I. >> I. Any nays? The eyes have it. Item 46825. >> Item 468-25. Transfer in the amount of $72,818 with 90 from free cash to motor motor
vehicles was sent up as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion. >> There's a motion on the table properly. Second discussion. I hear none. All those in f say I. The eyes have it. Item 460
46925. Item 469-25, authorization to expend $144,000 um of the assessment management planning grant CWSFR number 18979 with $66,000
cash max and $30,000 in in services match/ city staff was sent up as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion. Motion on the table >> properly second discussion councel plan >> I like to make I like to recuse myself from this for a potential conflict of
interest because of my employment >> accepted councelor plan have recused himself uh councilors any questions I hear none uh I'll call the questions all those in favor please say I >> any ns the eyes have item
47025 >> item 470-25 program proposal for AI enabled drone and gunshot detection technology for public safety was sent up to the full council as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion
>> motion on the table properly second for councelor by councelor Reyes discussion u there's a lot of interesting information here councel >> councel I I don't we could spend hours and I don't want to spend hours I just
want the 30,000 foot executive summary overview in less than a paragraph or two of what this money is going to be used for. So I I go home and I can tell someone real quick. Yeah, this is money is to do what? >> And and counselors, there is there is no money on this program and this is an
informative program that they putting in front of us. So they need to inform us. >> Good evening, city councilors. >> Good evening. I'm going to try to meet your 30 seconds. >> So, this is an informative this is an informative item.
>> Yes. >> So, provide us information. I already got an email from the from the news. >> So, I need to provide information. >> Sure. >> Yes, I get. >> First of all, my name is Solomon Dar Sergeant with the Lawrence Police Department assigned to the IT unit.
>> So, I believe that the gunshot detection center deployment of public utility poles and street light make a real difference in improving public safety. uh helping our police respond faster to gun violence, which has been a serious issue in our community.
In fact, as of December 2nd, 2025th, the system has already shown strong results in calendar year 46 published activations with 11 resulting in incident reports and seven of those solved, a 64%
clearance rate. It also identifies 19 probable gunfire incidents that prompted response while effectively screening out 2,383 activation deemed not gunfire. These number demonstrate how the
technology is helping our officer focus on real threats and solve cases. We are requesting approval and funding for the flock safety agreement tonight. If approved, the audio detection program would follow its estimate roll out time
which may shift uh due to scheduling holidays and resource availability. It's going to go out in three phases. First phase is going to be mapping uh which Lawrence and Flock personnel finalized the sensor locations. Phase two is the
auto detection installation planning which is in the week of January 6th um and also encompasses permits and ser site surveys. Phase three is scheduled on-site installation with flock text
uh leading to a target go live date in February of 26th. I also fully support a second portion of this which is related to fox safety drone as a first responder which is also known as DFR this project. So this
technology will particularly valuable given our current shortage in manpower and dispatch resources allowing rapid aerial assessment of incidents providing real-time situational awareness of officers in route and enabling faster more informed responses without
immediately con committing additional ground personnel. The separates initiative would the separate initiative would share a similar contact start date upon approval and follow its estimated timeline also subject to uh potential scheduling.
So there'll be five weeks of um hardware lead time. So flock drone docks and FFA approval. Seven week of install dock, radar, antenna, product deployment. two weeks of training u and that's again training pilots launch site operation
on-site flight time tests um leading to a target full of uh launch approximately March 13th of 2026 with the 90-day performance period beginning then
we're targeting flock approval for two 90-day test period upon contract execution after the trial period the cost analysis for both flock audio detector and DFR program offer obviously is flexible so cost- effective options compared to the
current shot spotter agreement that the city holds which is approximately 79,500 a year for one square mile of gunshot detection block audio detection is approximately 35,000 per year for one square mile
audio detection >> can you go back to those numbers again Yes. >> Which numbers exactly con moneywise? So currently with SH flatter our current renewal is set for 79,500
for one square mile of uh detection current system. So Flock is providing it at $35,000 for the same square mileage and the comparison is going to be against obviously Shot Spotter. Uh we'll see how
its performance is before any commitment is obviously made. >> Yes, we done with information council. It was more than two paragraphs, but I appreciate that. So um no worries. Uh, so I I really do think there's an awful lot of information here. Ultimately, my
recommendation that I hope we can bring back to the chief is this. I think that I'm not going to get all my questions answered tonight. And if we have them all answered tonight, we've been here way too long. So, I'm hopeful that the chief maybe with your assistance can do a demonstration, invite the council.
Like to see these devices, like to have more Q&A, like to see how these things work because right now it appears as though there's a trial period. I don't think it needs any requirements for approval by the council because there's no money at this point that's being upfront. It depends on whether or not we decide to go for after whatever
procurement laws are abided by Porsche. Um so that if you could take that message back I'm not going to ask a lot of questions because that's where I want to go with this. That's one. Second one real legitimate like happened this past week in my district. Everybody knows the
Dunkin Donuts is in my in my win. There was a shooting for example that took place there. If this thing was in effect, what would have been different about the police response or what would that this and it was in the geographical area? What would have been different if we had
the system? >> Without going into particulars because it's still an ongoing investigation. Uh, I can I can attest to if we had more of a coverage in the south, it probably would have triggered uh a faster
response both aerial and um officers on scene. Again, that's a speculation. I can attest to that. Uh but what we've seen in the numbers, we've had a pretty significant rate of solving. Um and furthermore, it actually detects those
calls that are not truthful. So, um I also believe that this trial period we want to be completely transparent and I'm speaking on the chief's behalf here where we wanted to make sure that the public and uh city knew that what we
were engaging in as far as a transition from a current system that we have that's possibly meets the match or probably would be even better and we would have double the support for the same value. Councelor Levik. >> Thank you. Council President, uh, how
many equipment do we have installed right now in the city of Lawrence? >> I'm sorry. >> How many equipment of the gun shop? >> So, we the they're all located in various locations of city poles. Um, and it covers one square mile. That's how
it's arranged. >> But how many have we installed it in the city of Lawrence? >> How many have we installed? >> Yes. >> I I couldn't give you a specific number. It it covers one square mile. So whatever one square mile encompasses within the system. >> So council living the the system they
currently have >> is one square mile only. >> Yeah. >> And the whatever the amount of equipment that they need to cover that square mile, the current subscription program we have is for that square mile. So they're responsible to have any
equipment, correct me if I'm wrong, any amount of equipment that they need to cover that area. >> So technically it would be one and then it's amplified within that one square mile. >> It's going to be Yes, I understand that. But how many the city have already
installed? >> They only have one shot spotter. >> Only one >> one shot spotter that covered one mile. >> Okay. Thank So the other six about 5.7 square mile. >> Yeah. So this would this would uh
>> it's not going >> it focuses on one particular area. This would obviously broaden that >> and some of the discussion that they're bringing in is that that uh the membership we paying $79,000 instead this technologies let half of that
half of that amount which is 35,000. And I just like to say this also that flock safety, we currently use flock safety. We have LPRs, which is licensed plate readers. We have 35 of those. Those are also housed on polls. Um it's all
intertwined. So it's it's not a unknown vendor that we're solic we're seeking. Council President, >> but there are houses that has some equipment installing on the roof of the
house. >> No, there's no houses that have those equipments. No, none. >> Those those equipments are specific to city polls. >> So, and what are the equipment that the house already have installed just to detect whatever that's against happen in
the area? So, private residentials don't have those installed on on their dwellings. It's specific to public. So, any public roadway, that's why we use poles. Um, okay. Thank you,
>> counselor. This is anformational item >> which I believe that the police department might be looking for funding at some point. Yes, we're we're we're hoping for funding sometime in June once the trial period is over. And it actually um I
would love for the vendor to come out and for all of you to be present while you can see how it's deployed out. They've they've um offered that many times over, but obvious, you know, due to timing and everybody's schedule, we can still make that happen.
That's not a problem. We were just looking for your approval in order to get this going. As far as a trial period, again, there is no >> Oh, this is a trial period. >> Yes. >> Oh, this is trial. >> It's trial for 90 days for both for both items. And then once that's complete,
we're looking for for funding if it meets the match. >> Okay. Now, it's a different conversation. Gotcha. See, now we get it. Any other counselors? >> Council, >> thank you. Just quickly on the on the scheduling component of of this and the
I guess the the the what's it called the the the showing I've put this counselor have has always told your chief and the both public safety chiefs just put it on my calendar if it says available. If you've sent me
a calendar invite and it says I'm available just go right ahead okay >> at least with me don't even wait for me to confirm it. if it's not blocked off, I'm available. So, at least with me now, other counselors, you may have to um figure their schedules out, but I'm with
counselor LA. I would love to see this in person as well. >> Oh, absolutely. >> That's definitely invite us over. We want to see >> uh I'm already excited to kind of like see what's going on with this. >> Yeah, I just like to put it out there that Methuan has already started their process.
>> So, what are you saying that we should not stay behind? answer. There's any questions? Uh, at this time we need to we are they're looking for a motion to approve. >> It's an approval for the trial.
>> Yeah, the motion is already uh the motion is to approve the trial period 9 days. Do we have to approve that or that just I mean we can do >> uh I don't know but if they looking for approval it was because they probably checked with somebody. >> Well, we're looking for approval because
the anticipation is when it does go again in front of council for for uh uh for funding that it's already on the table. We're expecting the dollar amount will not change once we get to that point if it should meet the expectation.
Just so we're clear, if there if there is a vote, this vote was not for the transfers of monies that would need to go vote, you know, we need to make sure we got you we have the budget for it and you clearly maybe you don't and we need to save the capital if we got money for sleep patch or whatever we have. So this
is a vote for approval. I don't think it's necessary, frankly. I I think the chief would love to get that. So I understand the politics of it. So if we say yes, he's got it. the council likes it, wants to see how it works, and it just provides some momentum. I understand that. I guess I could support
that, but I don't think it's critical. That's my point. >> All right. At this time, uh, if there is no further question, I entertain I got to call for, uh, the roll. Not a roll call. All those in f please say I
any thank you. Thank you. Uh now we going with Yeah. Now we going with item 47225. Madame vice president. Item 472-25,
SEIU Local A8 Carpenters and Trades Union Collective Bargaining Agreement of a transfer of $19,000 from the general fund to DPW building facilities/maintenance was sent up as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion. >> Second.
>> There's a motion on the table properly second. Discussion >> discussion. >> Thank you. Quick question, Kappo, that I didn't um realize during the budget meeting discussion. Why? So, this agreement waso was
supposed to go well is going was supposed to effect officially July 1st of 2025. Why are we getting it five months later? >> We actually I received it because what happens is the council no sorry the union meets with the attorneys and everybody involved then they take it
back to the body, right? the body votes on it and I actually didn't get it back until later. >> So once I get it, I have to make sure I get the signatures from the city attorney, the mayor, and so forth. And we I have to prepare >> the the package for you for you guys. And then it just just takes a little bit
of time. But I did not receive this in July even though it was uh we met in July. So we actually received it sometime >> I want to say >> this is >> in October. >> In October. >> Okay. So when do these discussions I
mean I'll ask these questions offline. Thank you. >> But they will get on a retroactive payment. >> Absolutely. No. >> One of the things I would ask I would kindly ask the council is to wait the 30 days for both unions just because we're
hoping to pay them in the December um payroll um per the contract. That's uh how it's supposed to be for these two unions. >> Any questions? I'm going to amend my motion to include um to wave the 30 days. I guess in in a through you,
council president. Um in an ideal world, I would love to approve a contract >> January I mean sorry June, but I know things don't work out. Just to remind you, we do have 12 unions and
each negotiation takes multiple meetings and trying to schedule the meetings with the union, the reps, this the attorneys. It's it's a very convoluted process. >> I know that's a perfect world. I would love to see that. But >> and we also uh we just approved the
funding portion of it, not the not the contract. >> Not the negotiation, just the money people. >> That's still that's >> counselors. Any questions? Still takes a long time. >> Yeah, that will take three weeks. Four weeks. Uh, I will call the questions.
All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Any nays? >> Yeah. Have it. Let's go with item uh 47325. 473-25 SEIU Local 888 parking attendance union collective bargaining agreement transfer
of $16,000 from ret from retain earnings to salary and wages was sent up with a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion and um in addition to >> uh there is a motion on the table properly second discussion discussion
council plan very good question so you said there was 12 unions in the city we just approved the funding for two contracts. How many are outstanding? >> There's 10. Um yes. Yeah. >> I we actually got rat two of them ratified and I will be sending that to
the to the council. Two more units ratified. >> I mean we we have the police department. >> Uh no, the other two units are ratified. It's not the police department. >> Oh, we have 13 in total. >> 12. >> 12 in total.
>> Yes. Okay. I thought that we have the police department that it we that is not current or expired. >> Yeah, everybody expired at the same time. June 30th, 2025. All the unions. Yeah. So, all the unions that will be
coming to you is starting July 1st, 2025 to June 30th, 2028. >> All okay. >> All the unions. Yes. >> Okay. Good to know. >> All right. Counselors, if there is no further question, all those in favor say I. Hi. Any ns? The eyes have it.
>> Thank you so much. >> Going on top of the agenda item 20225. Madame vice president council president from this vote as well for a conflict of interest. >> The council plan have himself.
Item 202-25, authorization to expend $250,000 um towards the waste reduction project for a permanent household ha hazardous waste facility was sent up to withdraw
was sent up to the full council as a withdrawal and I make that as a formal motion. >> There's a motion on the table properly second discussion. I hear none. All those in favor please say I. >> I any have it. Item 45625. >> Item 456-25.
Approval of tax increment exemption, better known as TAI, agreement between 216 Canel Street LLC and the city of Lawrence was sent up as a favorable recommendation and I make that as a formal motion. >> Uh there is a motion on the table
probably second. Discussion. >> Discussion. >> Councelor Llant. Uh then councelor President >> thank you very much. So had a chance to take a look at this. Who's here to speak on its behalf? >> Yes they are here.
>> Great. >> And uh Mr. McCarthy sent an email earlier today uh regarding this item. >> Can you recap what the email said? >> ML, do you mind um reading it? >> I think he was probably supporting it. >> Yeah, he was in support. He was sick
with a stomach bug and he said that he is straight here this evening to speak on the item. >> It is important it is important to recognize that the Trehor brothers they are the owner of this building right now right next to us. I mean right behind >> that's me. Yeah.
>> Oh yeah. Oh yeah. Yeah. So so thank you. Welcome gentlemen. Good to see you guys again. So um So, I'm not sure where to start, so I'll just I guess start here. Um, in the planning board meetings, and I
don't even know if you have this, and it'd be better if I asked this of of a city official, but I understand they're not here, is that the planning board opinion said that the fire department, they wanted to get the fire department's um reaction or response to that. Let me
just pull that up. Give me a second. >> Yeah, I think um I think what you might be referring to is the the original plans were for which they have been revised, but originally we were going to build u almost like an addition to it to do almost like a parking structure, but
we did work with the with the fire department. We tweaked those plans. Instead of having a essentially a parking garage attached to it, we're going to be doing the parking in the interior. Uh the fire department thought that was a a better option and and safer for that building. So, we were able to
modify that. >> Yeah. So, just so we're all clear, this is on the June 1st, 2022 statement of facts by the um by the board, the planning board. And in their decision or the statement of facts, um
it said that Lieutenant Graham Miller of the Lawrence Fire Department spoke and said he felt that the matter should be continued. As the chief of the Lawrence Fire Department wanted to comment and have the plans reviewed by the state fire marshal, he argued that they had only received the plans the days before and that wasn't enough time to fully
digest. Um and then later in this statement of facts um the board actually had a vote and voted with the conditions and the condition was proposed to the applicants. Um there were two conditions. Number two was the applicants must meet with and abide by
any safety conditions set by the Lawrence Fire Department. And so the stuff that I have in the packet doesn't show that those conditions were met. Do you have anything with you tonight that shows that the conditions that the fire department had were met?
>> Yeah, it's a completely different set of plans that that that set of plans that was um in the 2022 would show a parking almost like a super structure attached to that building where we completely just got rid of that that essentially a parking super structure attached to that
building. We we got rid of that alto together and we're just going to be doing the parking inside the building now. So that completely got revised as far as to to meet what the fire department wanted. >> So I'm not doubting that at all. One of my colleagues in a committee meeting
recently said um and and this had something to do with a with a permit for a junk a license of some sort. Um and the discussion was a fire and he's like you know something I don't want to pass anything until we get the actual documentation from the department say that this has been approved. And I
thought that made a lot of sense to me when that was member from district C made that comment. And so I'd like to see that again. And and and the other thing too on that notice of decision by the planning board there seems the it says it was referring to a petition for a special permit pursuant to the chapters and the sections from the vise
zoning ordinance to construct here's the point. It says construct 16 and then in parenthesis 144 apartments in a former warehouse and industrial district. So it says 16 and 144 and there's a there's
clearly a mistake made in the actual notice of decision that was signed by all the members of the of the of the planning board dated July 8th, 2022. So I think that needs to be clarified. Um and it was decision was signed by the
city clerk on July 8th of 2022. What is it? Is it 16 apartments? Is it 144? Is it a different number? >> It's it's 99. the building permits for 99 because we lost a lot of the units because of having to put the parking in the first and second floor to to meet
the fire department's requests. >> So now so now there seems to be a difference, right? So planning board approved either 60 or 14, which I'm still unclear. The ultimate project now is 99. >> Yep. So we have something that was
okayed by or approved by one of our independent boards that doesn't reflect what the actual outcome is going to be. So that's another concern that I have on that issue. >> Council plan the the approval by the by the committee that you mentioned as as
as of what you read it was as per the condition of the firefire department and then they met revised the plans. They've met with the firefighter, revised the plans, reduce the amount of unit that they got approved for because they're going to accommodate the parking situation that before was a super
structure and now it's an interior uh underground parking lot that they're going to do. >> Don't have the documentation that actually evidences what you're suggesting and provides the basis for what the applicants who by the way are
>> the department also who the permit we applied for. So, they would have never approve approved it if we hadn't their >> and I don't that's the thing. I don't have the fire department's approval here in my packet. If someone has it in the packet, I'm eager to see it. I don't see
it in my packet, but maybe I oversaw it and but that's fine. I'll still look for it. Um the the last point the last point it's >> Do you have the package? Do you have what you submit on papers so you can uh
bring the the the permit or do you have the permit of your electronics? >> Yeah. Yeah, I can. >> What do you want? Email it or >> just the I mean the permit will prove that these are 99 99 units.
>> Exact. Um yeah, I could pull it up. Uh in the meantime, the council, do you have any other any other questions? >> So So we're going to go on the presumption. It's 99 units. >> Yeah, that's what they present on that uh on the budget and finance committ. >> Let's go. Let's go with that. 99 units.
And so and this would be no surprise to my colleagues. We're adding another 99 units. I decided to bring something that's been on my dining room table now for about a year.
documents from the LRA which has been sitting there dormant. When I was going through that, the issue here is that we are starting to build and build and build and build and 99 units here.
These all represent about 1,500 units out of all these across the city. Thank you. And I got it. And so my concern here is not necessarily with this project. It's I'm looking at it
as a whole in aggregate the entire city. And one of the things I've been challenging our ISD and challenging the administration is if you're going to go forward and promote and do these kinds of things, I need to see something on
the back end. Show us where we are. We have the proper personnel. We have we we're taking care of our traffic issues, our parking issues, our snow plowing issues, our trash pickup issues, and everything else that deals with when we increase the number of units throughout
the city because it might be just in the Canal Street area, but if you look at everything in total, it h this is having a major major impact on our city and it's only going up. And
it's been going up. It's been like this kind of trajectory for the last eight years, maybe. It's been like this. The the spike of housing in our city. It's going through the roof. You can see it on Essex Street. You can see it on South Broadway. You can see it on Broadway. You can see it on Marramac Street. You
can go all throughout the city. You can just see um it happening. And and and there's a huge desire to see a lot more of it. And so my point here is that before we start going forward and doing things to increase or try to increase
the housing, we really need to slow down, figure out what we are doing as an agency. Can ISD and the and and the fire department and all the other agencies deal with the tremendous amount of potential new growth that we're doing,
looking for the permits, going and checking for its safety, doing all the things that we're required to do. Are we are we do we have we the city, not the applicants. Do we as a city have the bandwidth, the ability to go ahead and be as aggressive as what it looks like
we're trying to do here? And that's a concern. We've just built two brand new, well, we've increased two new schools. Those aren't going to be enough. They're already talking about overcrowding already and that they need more space, but yet we're continuing to do more and
more. and it's not fair to our our current residents, not fair to our school children, it's not fair across the board. That's where I'm coming from on this. And so I have some real So those are the concerns that I have. Unfortunately, you're at the microphone tonight. This is your project. I have nothing I've heard nothing but fantastic
things about the quality of your projects, the way that you do it, the conscientiousness, all the things, all the attributes uh that we're looking for in developers in our city. I've heard nothing but good things good things about that. But I can't I got to put that aside as I look at our sadine total. Final thing is this. It's not
lost on me as we talked early about fire department stuff. Um there was the Marag Valley gas crisis. It was horrendous. It took a life took that that took three streets from my house is where that life
was taken. The Peton Mill fire, which many of us probably don't even we may have heard of it and it's all we've known about that happened in 1860. It might as well have been a thousand years ago, right? There was between 90 and 145 people that died
through that disaster at that location. And that can't be lost as we go through all these things, which is why I'm kind of really hamping on this fire department thing so much. Can you imagine? And I'm not again I'm not work
workmanship. I'm not debating that at all. But at this location, how important that was in our city's history when we had a massive fire that was the number one most devastating event in our city's history. Yes, we had a we had a twister
come through. Yes, we had a couple other things, but that was horrendous. That took newspapers all over the country, around the world. I don't want I don't we have to be careful about this site as well as all the sites, but I really want to see the stuff from the fire department because of the sensitivity behind this and that fire that took
place that cost all those people's lives. So, that's what I'm looking for as well. I've got concerns about the project. I already made them known. Those are the reservations that I have and I think it's important as much as I respect both of you gentlemen for your fantastic work. Those are the reservations that I have. Thank you, Council. >> Yeah. And I I do want to point out that
there's um there was a pedestrian bridge there that's been out of use for about 50 or 60 years or so. And we had an obligation when we purchased that building to replace it with a likewise structure which would have just been another pedestrian bridge. And we chose
and it's about three or four times the cost, but we worked alongside with the fire department to give something back. and we chose to do a two-lane bridge there that would make it easier for the fire department to access that site as a whole, not just our site. And again,
that wasn't a requirement, but it's something that we chose to do. >> Council President, >> councelor Vice President, >> thank you. I have two things. One, quickly, um, councelor Le to share your sentiment. The first meeting that we had
on this item, um, Jesus heard a lot what you mentioned from me and um as you can see councelor Leanne and I have sh have some shared sentiment and um so this this project for for the council this
wasn't sent up right away like there was a lot of questioning there's a lot of back and forth we asked for additional documentation and offline hu and I worked and I I thanked you before and I thank you again um for being
transparent and for answering all my questions and not, you know, hiding anything. So, I I appreciate that. Um, I do want to, if I may, Council President, we do have the fire chief here and I would like to ask
him if he can either confirm or deny any of these statements that the Trillo brothers are making. If I can, Council President. >> Sure. Good evening. Yes, I I've been following this project for the last five or six years, however long it's been going on.
I do remember that we met at the site. Chief Moriotti, myself and the TJO brothers and they wanted to build a parking structure and we had some access issues. Um, we do what's called a sweep path analysis and we really we we talked
to them about that. they ended up taking that away. Um, and that's what dropped the number down from the 143 to 99 because to get the parking, they they had to go inside. So, the trick with this building, any building that this is
a change of use. So, when it's brand new, a change of use, everything has to come up to code. So, when this building is done, it's going to be a state-of-the-art sprinkler system, a state-of-the-art fire alarm system. Everything is going to be brought up to code. Uh we work very closely with the
Treyjo brothers and and they know the trick is to get them from this point today until that finished product. When that finished product is all done, again, it's going to be a state-of-the-art building, brand new sprinkler system, brand new fire alarm
system, um egresses, everything they have in there is going to be great. So, the trick is to get them up to that point. So, some things that they're going to need is an NFP, which they're aware of, NFPA 241 buildings under construction. They're
also we'll work with them with the sprinkler system, which we might that sprinkler system. Um, they have a tough time every winter. The cold reres a little bit of havoc on that building. It is heated right now. were in there a
couple weeks ago and we may allow them to demo with with us demo part of the sprinkler system, put up some heat detectors in the meantime, get the new system up. They should have stand pipes
and uh we do inspections on them. They work very closely with us and again when when it's all finished it's going to be a it's going to be a very nice project but it's it's a trick is getting them getting them there and we'll we'll guide them along with the building department
and and inspectional services and assist them in getting to the to that end product. >> Thank you chief. Um, one more thing, uh, Council President, if I may, in terms of documentation, um, so, uh, to my colleagues on the
budget and finance committee, the first meeting that we had on this item, we were to we were told by director McCarthy that the documentation was sent to us a week prior to the meeting. Uh, because I stated about us receiving the documentation the same
day. Um, as promised, I did look back uh did look back through my emails. I maybe you guys may have it. I did not have um an email a week prior. So, in terms of documentation and updated docs,
I I'm not going to fault the individuals in front of us. I think that was a city issue and um that should have been included with the same day dockets that we that that the committee received. So,
uh that's a partial answer that I have for that. >> Thank you, Council President. um counselors. Um well, I think that it will be important
to bring something up that it was discussed at the at the budget and finance committee. The reason why you guys are looking for that uh tie is because uh you guys are applying for
another grant at the state level that uh this agreement is required before they consider your application. Correct. Yep. >> And uh this DEI will be in consideration uh if the project goes the project goes through the project goes through if the
state will help you out with that fund. Correct. >> Exactly. Correct. >> So that's the background behind uh the TEI also is an agreement that provide a tax incentive that started at that
60% level I think first. So, so the tie agreement that we ask for, it's it's the minimum that it's it's literally the smallest tie agreement you can get. It's five years. Some of them go up to 20 years. You can kind of negotiate it. We ask for the bare minimum. There isn't
anything lower than what we're asking for. So, essentially what they would do is they would get a estimate for like currently the property's paying taxes as just a commercial warehouse, a suspect. >> And you mentioned those name those numbers. Can you go through those as well?
>> I'm sorry. >> You mentioned those numbers at that uh >> comparison. So essentially what we would get is it's a 5year tax incentive. The first year would be 50% uh the fourth year the second year would be 40% then 30% then 20% then down to 10.
>> So 50% forgiveness then 40% forgiveness. Exactly. >> 30% forgiveness 20% forgiveness and then you ended up paying the 100%. And and can you mention the once the building is done what that means in terms of funds? >> So it's estimated uh at the current tax
rates it's it's a little under $200,000 of property taxes a year where currently as a warehouse is paying about $40,000 of property taxes. >> So currently you pay 40,000 and then once you finish it will be around 200,000 with the agreement you guys
going to be paying about 95 to 100,000 anyway. >> Exactly. >> And then it will increase. Yep. That's according to your to your number. >> Yep. >> So that's that uh that's the intent. The intent is to get the the t the t the t agreement
for so they can apply for other grants at the state level through that uh livable housing level condition. >> Yeah, it's it's a it's an hip grant. Um and the state thinks that this is a competitive project. It's historic. Uh we're doing some in infrastructure work
with replacing that bridge. um and and the amount of units. So, they do think that uh you know, there's no guarantees we're going to get it, but it is definitely a a quality candidate. >> How much you guys are going to spend on the on the bridge?
>> The the bridge is about $2.5 million. >> Are you going to spend out of your money? >> Yep. And we already probably spent 70 I mean, the bridge is almost It doesn't look like it, but most of 80% of the work is actually underground and then that's all done.
There's any questions uh at this time if >> should I Yeah. Councelor man and then we go back to councelor >> you have yeah council man >> I'll be brief and what I was going to say is um I share the same sentiments as
councelor Lel plant. Um I wanted to touch on councelor and v um council chairman of the budget and finance uh infante. Um it's a little frustrating that there's certain documents or certain requests that should be a
standard here and unfortunately we have to take it not take it out on those that come before us but we often are making certain passes or allowing certain people to proceed with mediocre or you know operating from from a mediocre
fashion when it it should be the standard to request certain documents that um it should be part of the decision- making. uh especially something as important and this is something major not only for the city but for you guys. Um so I feel like we
should not you know we should not be apologizing if in fact we should continue to remind people that if there's certain documentations that are that should be part of our binder to make these decisions then if we have to table certain items then we table it and that's unfortunate for you know for you
guys or anyone that comes before us. Um, in regards to this item, I know I had some reservations during our first meeting at budget and finance. Um, and part of my reservations, um, obviously it has a lot to do with gaining an understanding as to what the request is,
uh, on what the project is entails. So, it was 99 units and my my biggest issue from the 99 units was the fact that none of it was affordable. So then the second part that comes to this understanding of what this project entails was what is HD
and what is 40R. So um again I'm here to to continue to learn and for you guys to correct me if I'm understanding something um in a way that is not according to what this project is about. Um but doing my homework I did see I got
your email so I did see the rent roll. I noticed from the rent roll um because the one of the comments that you made at budget and finance is that the 99 units uh are already below the market rate. Correct. >> Yep.
>> Okay. I notice uh the one and two bedrooms are uh fairly below, but then once we get to the uh three to four bedrooms um not as much, maybe $100 to $200 I would say um are are below the
market value. Um I I feel like I'm having a hard time because of one based on what I was told the 40 this this lo the location of this uh project on Canal Street is in a 40R
which completely takes away or exempts you guys from what the H dip um benefits are which is not being required uh to have any affordable units. Um, so correct me if I'm wrong in understanding
that. >> Yeah. So, so the the 40R is the the smart layover over overlay which you can choose to opt in and essentially what this would do is I mean we got these approvals almost three and a half years ago at this point but when we were in the process of going for approvals, this
would essentially just expedite that. Um, we chose not to do the 40R and and the reason we chose not to do it is what that smart growth overlay would would uh mandate us to do is 20% of our units would have had to meet what they call
80% AMI currently today and you know most of those bedroom most of those units are two bedrooms and one bedrooms uh a two-bedroom unit in today's market is under that 80% guideline is $2544 $34.
We're on average almost $500 below that. So, we said, why should we opt into this overlay? And the problem being is that every unit that you have kind of deeded into that into that 40R or that 80% AMI
restriction, you have to have oversight on it. So, I can't I can't oversee it. You literally have to have a third party oversee it and just make sure they're basically just doing financials on the tenants. They're making sure that they're qualifying for it and the cost
for that is about $2,500 a unit. If we would have opted in, I would have had to have 20% of those units. 20 units it would have been rounded up. So that's a $50,000 expense for this building for something that I'm already meeting. So, it just didn't make sense for us to have
that $50,000 expense when my units are already $45 $500 plus below that AMI. So, essentially, I'm out $50,000. So, when a bank seeing that, they're saying what's the cost? What's the benefit? It's it's only it's only a burden.
>> Not that this is you're doing, but the AMI and again um >> it's not >> I'm a willing participant to to be taught. If I am saying anything inaccurate, please correct me. um because this is a public meeting so um I don't want to be uh relaying any
inaccurate information. AMI. Isn't that uh the median of Lawrence, Mthuan, Andover? So, okay. All right. It is. So, we're using the median of other neighboring cities and towns that are well above uh what the city of
Lawrence makes. Like, >> yeah, >> this is um so unfortunately, and again, this has nothing to do with you guys. It's not like you guys created the AMI formula. Um, but Lawrence is is a a city that's struggling and yet we're using the
average of Andover, North Andover that is a more affluent community and unfortunately we're kind of just combining all these neighboring communities in order to um create some sort of structure as to what this AMI um
entails. um that I just wanted to say that for the record. And again, that's I know it's not you're doing, but yet this is the formula that we're using in order for you to say that um you know, it allows you for you to use the numbers
that you're using for um for for for your rental amounts. Correct. >> Yep. >> Um the the second thing I wanted to state was opting in. So, had you guys opt in, city council president, I would like for
you to touch on this. Would the city of Lawrence be benefiting in receiving funding per unit had um and if they if the city doesn't benefit, you know, that's something I would like for you to um clarify if that's
>> the city will benefit if the if the project are opt in into the program. the problem that we have. No, she asked me a question. I can respond. She asked me a question about I'm not staying uh it's not my opinion.
It's a response. The conversation have to be through the city council. And if I ask you a question, I mean, am I going to stay quiet? She asked my question. So the city of Lawrence will benefit if any project
optain into the program. The problem with that is that when we develop the overlays is not a requirement. It is optional and uh the developers
uh have choose to either do 100% affordable and op in through the entire project or opt out completely since there is not requirement. What we should do as a city council is that
what we should do as a city or as a city council just like we did just like we did at the canal street is that have those requirements by ordinance. Uh this is not the case on canal street overlay on the canal on the canal street
area. uh they they opt out they opt out because it's not a requirement otherwise I'm pretty sure that they will be uh they will think about the project before they even purchase the property if
that's a requirement they either need to do 100% affordable which is it worked for me but it is it is a a way of uh people do business >> and we we did originally going back almost four years ago we did look into
optin in uh cuz like you were saying I I don't know if it's changed but every unit you developed uh you used to get there was an award I don't remember how much it might have been $10,000 a unit or $5,000 a unit
or $3,000 a unit >> for the city 3,000 >> but the problem was was again going back to that additional $50,000 expense and I I'd be more than happy to I mean they're probably four years old but I could share term sheets from a bank and they literally I had them do a cost analysis
of opting in and having those 20% at the 80% AMI and just all market rate and and it was the difference of getting $3 million of financing which for us to come in and have an additional $3 million of equity we just can't do the
project at that point. So we did explore and like I said I'd be more than I've been pretty transparent about this whole thing. I'd happily share those term sheets >> and they as a matter of fact back then three three four years ago they did >> uh opt in.
>> I mean they did look into it but they they they financially wasn't >> Yeah. One of the thoughts was with that additional maybe we could have worked with the city at that time with that additional $3,000 a unit. We could have used some of that for those infrastructure aka that bridge
replacement cost. So that was but but we just couldn't get the it was just too light of a spread to make that $3 million up. It is important to recognize that the city of Lance also use that fund for other projects around and sometime for
design uh and help our own developments for future future development uh as a city but is as a as a as a city that's that's what how they've been using it those funds that we get from 40R uh we also get incentive from the
federal government related to the housing uh or to the uh to that type of unit. Council Luzon. >> Um thank you to you cons. So I um you mentioned
you already mentioned that I mean for the people that are watching and for the counselors that are not aware what is the time frame on this application because you there's another application with the state. >> Yeah. So the the deadline for the state is January 13th. That's when they close
the applica. That's when they closed the round. >> Yeah. >> Okay. also uh and just for the record it's and I'm pro um I mean I do understand my my colleagues
concern but I also know that uh in budget and finance we asked lots of questions we requested more documents unfortunately the one that uh some of my colleagues want to see it is it's not part of the package
But we already asked the fire chief for an explanation. So what we have in front of us is a developers that are asking for a
minimum uh they asking for five years instead of 20. There's other developers in the city that have asked for 20 and we gladly gave it to them. So, we have here uh two developers and like I said at the budget and
finance meeting, I love their projects. I may not be 100% in favor of the rent that they're charging, but also they are in business. They are not nonprofits. They are investing and also they giving back. The bridge is already it's almost
done. Yeah. So, I took a pass by and it's almost done. So, it's $2 million $2 million that the city is getting back plus taxes because they're going to be paying taxes. And I think I asked that question in the budget and finance, but would you mind repeating and I think you
mentioned it already. You're going to be paying how many um what's the amount of taxes that you're going to be paying every year? >> Exactly. Almost 200,000. >> So, we're not giving them anything for free. uh they are here so they need this
application. I think five years is is reasonable. It's not 20 years. Uh so I'm asking my colleagues to take this in consideration and both in the affirmative. Uh there are two kids from Lawrence and they're not from Lawrence.
They are >> they're from guys are from Lawrence. But you came from New York originally. When you came the first time >> when you moved >> like eight years to 14 years ago when you started a project over there did you
move from New York here? No. Good. I'm confused. I'm confused. >> What? I'm confused. >> You're confused with the old developer. >> No. No. I mean they are the developers next to the parking lot. But I don't know why uh New York Maybe it's because
they have a new mayor there. Uh and I'm excited about that. But but I what we have in front of us is two developers from Lawrence two Lawrence kid and they are investing in here instead of choosing another city.
So that we have to be we have to appreciate that and help them with what they are requesting. Unfortunately, that document is not here, but we also have in front of us a a time frame. Uh they need this before January.
So, I'm asking my colleagues to consider voting in in an affirmative. >> And uh just to just to point that out, they like the old project because they have this building right behind us, the building, the church at Broadway Street and all that that nobody was looking at
on around Park Street and now the Canal Street project. Council Rosario, >> thank you. I was going to question the properties that you have and then ask your questions about it. I mean, I know this one right next door, the one This one right next door is one of your property. Uh you guys did Havo Street
almost Broadway. >> Yep. >> Right. You guys also I think you uh bought the one on Park Street, right? >> It's almost done, right? Are you getting any tax exemption on on those at all? >> No. No. That that um
>> in any of those properties? Not >> just the one next door. The one next door to the parking lot here. We do have that tie agreement in place there. >> Okay. What else? >> I think there's only like a year left at this point, but uh Common Street does have a tie agreement in place. >> Okay.
>> But that's it. That's the only one. And the one of the reason as of why they have that is because uh the challenging they were facing to get the underground parking was a a heck of a discussion on this council and uh they the city ended
up helping out to develop that 40 years of old property without developing uh proceed and help out with that council. pass that up. >> Um, I'm going to try to do some quick
points. Number one, what this application for is a housing development incentive program. As I just showed you with all the documents that we have, we've got no problem incentivizing trying to get housing in the city. There is no problems. We have
more housing. We got the ADUs that are going out the door. We're going to be adding more units to our single family homes. Plenty. Plenty. We don't need more incentives, but this is under this incentive. They're just using what the law provides, but this is not something the city of Lawrence needs. Number one.
Number two, I want to ask the chief. Thank you guys. I want to ask the chief a question. I just want to make sure the chief is going to be on the record because we don't have any documentation. We're about to take a vote. Chief, can you affirm that that this project
has met the requirements from the fire department and from the fire department's perspective, it's okay for them to go forward? >> Yes, >> that's all I have. Um, number three, inside the um in your in your packet of
information, the units that you have range from one unit one bedroom to four bedrooms. That that was that was just an active rent roll. This building the unit layout is >> it's uh it's something like 54
onebedrooms, 40 42 bedrooms and three or four three bedrooms. >> There's no four bedrooms there. I said
you got you have one. You want I I don't understand why the school department is not part of the discussions when we have units in our city that are going to impact the schools. This is not again on you but
there there should be some fundamental change in the way that we approach this. Those other departments I'm glad they're there. IC needs to be there. Plan department should be there. Clearly a fire department needs to be need to be there. But why when we have these major things the school department is not
being impacted they have as much of this may impact them in aggregate those projects the current projects this project is going to be impacting the schools. why they're not there saying, "Yeah, we can absorb the students here or no, we can't or this is what it's going to take. If we're going to take
them, we're going to need to have this many more classrooms." We need to have that kind of analysis by the school department when we have these kinds of roundt discussion, pre-permanent discussions that's happening out of the mayor's office when when they do the pre-permitting. I think that still goes on. You were here with the River
administration, right? You were doing that then. So, >> not confir. >> You're not gonna confirm that? Oh no no no no but but you are aware that they had the roundts that took place. Um so anyway that's the story and I just want to throw that out there as well. There is many many many ways we can start
improving the process. Many ways and you're here for the vote tonight. It's it's not going to stick here but we need to start looking beyond this. Thank you >> council president. >> Thank you. I have I I have one last
comment. Just just hearing the the back and forth discussion made me think of something that I haven't thought of prior. Uh every time we have a housing project before us, we have a similar discussion pertaining to the future of our city and
the foundational cracks that keep deepening within um the found within our city. Um, in fact, the last major housing project that was before the city council that was not through a private developer, it was something else, but I voted against
it. Um, I think I was one of two or maybe the only one who voted against it. Um, no, you ended up Yeah, it was it was in your district and you ended up voting for it, council. I remember that. Um, yeah, >> it was Yeah. Yeah. But you had you had a
valid reason. Let me He had he had a valid reason. He explained and he explained it. So the little defense uh to defend the council for a second, but my point is is the time to talk about increasing emergency services, fixing
our streets, all of that is during budget season. And year after year, we keep approving budgets that have these unnecessary six-f figureure um positions. We are now
celebrating signs that say we love Lawrence in big chairs that we don't need when that when those monies could be used for actual foundational um situations or um I guess fixtures that we need that we actually need in the city of
Lawrence. So, I mean, you've heard my spiel the first time, and I actually even apologized to you for everything that I said because it's really not against you guys. And you remember that I said that's not against you guys because there's a bigger picture. >> But every time we have a housing
situation, these discussions occur when in an inappropriate time when these discussions should be reflected in the budget that we approve year after year. And I want the counselors to keep this in mind come budget season next year. Thank you. Motion to approve.
>> The motion is already in place. So before we after we finish up with the questioning, I'll I'll call the questions if it is any other questions. Counselors remember this is to approve the tip uh that is going to allow them to >> the tie
>> that is going to allow them to proceed with application. Uh uh at this time I'll call the questions. All those in favor please say I. >> I. >> Any naysay? Madame Clair please call the role. >> Councelor Reyes. >> Yes.
>> Councelor Mar. >> Yes. >> Councelor Miguel. >> Yes. >> Council Dearian. >> Yes. >> Councelor Uzon. >> Yes. >> Council plant. Council Levy, >> yes.
>> Council vice uh council vice president. >> Yes. >> Council president within the affirmative. Congratulations. >> Thank you. Have a good night, guys. Thank you. >> So, counselors, we have one more item for >> even that. Look at that. Giving back to
the community. was wrong. Uh, counselors, uh, chief, do you have anything else? >> Okay. Thank you for saying, >> counselors, we have
we have item 453 >> out of the table matters. >> Oh, the school committee situation. >> Motion to unable item 453-25. Second. >> Uh there is a motion to um table item 45325. This is the school committee
related to a chain or related to law. Uh there is properly second. >> Second. >> Uh all those in favor to unt. >> I any have it. Counselors we have
uh a few things in front of us when it comes to this item. uh we all received the the memorandum from uh the city of Cheney when it comes to the finalist for this position.
Um at this time I believe that we should be reading that for the record please go uh for uh read it for the record. >> It's a memo to the city council from attorney Timothy P. Hootin city attorney regarding Michael Amano and the date is
December 8th 2025. It reads, "Dear counselors, you have asked my opinion regarding whether Michael Amano can be appointed to the school committee while serving as a Lawrence firefighter. Section five of the charter control school committee
in section 5.6 prohibitions holding city office or city employment." quote, "No member of the school committee other than the mayor shall during the term for which she was elected hold any other compensated city office or city employment." The question
raised is that since the position is now appointed rather than elected, does it still apply? The section was amended by the acts of 2016 chapter 45. The provision the prior provision had under the jurisdiction of the school committee at the end of this section. Clearly, a
change was made to prevent anyone working for the city from serving on the school committee, increasing the prohibition to a larger group than those under the jurisdiction of the school committee. Since all school committee members were elected at the time of adoption, this article does not anticipate appointed
members. However, the intent of the amendment is very clear. They did not want any city employees to serve on the school committee. The line focused on the prohibition during the term not on the status of the school committee not on the status of the school committee
member since Mr. Amano would have would be have which I think was a compensated position in the city employment during the terms of this appointment. It is my position that he is prevented from being appointed to this position. I hope this clears up the matter. Please feel free
to reach out to me if you require any additional information and it's signed by the attorney. >> Councilors any questions? Madame vice president. >> Thank you. I just have one comment. um the way I don't I don't know what the
reason was for for what was written in the charter but I can I can at least explain my my position and I have a great relationship with uh Mr. Armano that goes years even before I was a counselor. My position with this is that
the mayor is the chair of the school committee and I can I can foresee and I'm not just talking about this mayor, any mayor, any administration. I can foresee possible conflicts
um in terms of a mayor wanting a vote a certain way and pressuring or not I don't know a city employee to go their way simply because at the end of at the end of the day the bigger picture is an individual is a city employee. Um and I
I could would like to think that's perhaps the reason why such language was put in the charter. I don't know. But I can tell you that that night that was one of the first things that I thought of before I took my vote um that evening last meeting. Thank you,
>> Council President. >> Councelor Luzon and then councel Rosario. >> Uh uh would like to ask Mr. Armano,
did you see can you please approach? Um, so I see two things in front of me. He uh here he's not uh elected. He's an appointed uh if we vote yes
of we well we already voted. Um Mr. Amano is going to be an appointed member. And the second thing that I see in front of me that he's not going to get compensated because I think we had that conversation before. And the third thing I asked the same the question at
the beginning of the second round or the third or the fifth round of interviews. I don't remember how many rounds we had. >> So >> uh well in the full council yes I guess I'm also referring to the suit committee but I asked this the same question. Why
are we interviewing uh uh people that work for the city if we're going to encounter a conflict? But just to put it out there, I I don't need an opinion. But what I have in front of me is this those two things is he's
going to be appointed by this council and the other one is that he's not going to get compensated for this position. Did you ask another attorney for a second opinion uh of interpretation of this of the city chatter? Mr. Armano.
>> Yeah, I I spoke with some uh colleagues just in brainstorming, but I did some significant research myself and uh what I found I dug deeper and I found that this is a little bit more complicated. I think after my research, I stand before you stating the same thing that I said
before. When we made this change, we went from a fully elected system to a hybrid. And when we do that under the Lawrence ordinance, we an appointed position under our city ordinance is is
a special employee in the city of Lawrence. We've designated that as a special employee. That's 2.140 in a Lawrence ordinance. So when we designate something as a special employee, it changes the whole landscape. Um, first
thing I I wrote a couple notes here. Under 268A section 20, that's our conflict of interest law. By designated someone as a special employee, we've agreed that this person should have a lighter load when it comes to or lighter
responsibility when it comes to conflict of interest. The general laws have given municipalities greater flexibility for special employees because these employees are put in place for a purpose. So we as a community, you as a council, we decided that it was time to
change to a hybrid system. When we did that, we knew there was give and take. We knew that it took away a little bit of the democratic process, but the benefits were you had the opportunity to do things like search for qualified candidates that met the city needs. When
you look for qualified candidates, you want the biggest poll you can find. You want people that have a broad knowledge and that have some specific knowledge as well. So, that was a benefit. Also both by going by to an atlarge system we know that uh we've seen cases like in the
city of l it changes things like our selection of demographics by having an appointed position you have the ability to yeah there's a motion to pass them properly second discussion there is none all those f please say
>> I any have it >> so you have the ability to look at the pool of candidates and I'll appoint someone to bring the committee to a level of diversity. You might want bring the committee to a level that represents all the districts or the districts using
the balance that you choose. And I think that's very important to limit that to just take away city employees. And again, this is something that just the city of Lawrence does. There's some cities that allow city employees to run for elected positions and appointed. But to limit that, that takes away that
pool. Either way, I think the proper procedure is this. We changed that section five in the charter. We did not look at 5.6 for whatever reason. Maybe it was an oversight. We, as far as I remember, I I think I watched pretty much all the council meetings in this
public forum. We didn't debate that. We didn't have that conversation. And the beauty of this right now is we're getting a chance to have that conversation and hear some of the feedback from all of you and from me. But it's something that needs to be addressed because it says elected. And if we go into the intent, I respectfully
again I'm going to go deeper on what the city attorney's opinion is. And I I'll remind you I am an attorney. Also, intent is used to define in the courts u when we have that intent argument an ambiguous word. I would argue to you
that the word elected and appointed are far from ambiguous. They're very very specific under the law. They're done for a reason. We all know this because we contemplate it back and forth and there's reasons why you want a certain group appointed and reasons why you want a certain group elected. If you look at
the case law, you you'll find um there was a case Bennett v. Harford where a school teacher uh was this is in Maryland, by the way, a school teacher was trying to get on a city council and that it was an elected position. So that position was initially taken away from
the city council. It was went to appeal and they found something similar. They found that the language was not clear. It banned city, I think, employees. But essentially, it wasn't clear because this person was a county worker for the board of education. And the courts over
and over again in Massachusetts have been clear. They're going to follow the words in the language in the legislative language. Whether it's a general law, whether it's a city ordinance, if there's a word there, they're going to follow what that word means, elected or appointed. They've taken a step further to say they're not going to add words
where words were omitted. So by adding the word elected and appointed to that prohibition, you would if this ever went to a court, the court would likely not do that in my opinion. So the intent to argue ambiguity, I get that. I I
completely agree with the city attorney if this was an ambiguous word. But things completely changed the moment we did what we did because elected and appointed is very specific. And the intent from 2016, there's also case law that shows this 2016. If we look at that
intent, like the city attorney suggests, we're we're freezing that snapshot in time from 2016 when we weren't even contemplating a hybrid system. That was done for different reasons. 2025, there's a whole new body. There was a whole new discussion. You were part of
it. I was watching it. And we didn't contemplate that. So to do it proper um if we change the rule uh just like when it was an elected position a city employee couldn't run. I contemplated running for that position in district B. It broke my heart at the time that no
one was running for it when we had the system and it went left unfilled. And one of my decisions to put in application was I wanted to make sure that I didn't know who was applying and I wanted to make sure that you as a body had the best qualified candidates before you and you could make a decision that
you felt good about and you knew that our children were taken care of, our teachers were taken care of, the profession of teaching was taken care of. So, and I I'm grateful for your vote the first time. I I hope you felt that you did that. And what I would encourage you to do is keep that vote. And if you
intent to change it, change it the right way. If you want to change 5.6 for whatever reason, let's have a healthy debate. Let's see how it goes. Let's see if this candidate would be subject to that pressure that you speak of. Would it happen to some? I would argue it's
not happening to this candidate. Um, we've all been tested different ways. We can say there's political pressures just being elected officials, not just appointed. Um, I I do have some different case law. If you have any questions or specifics, I I have an answer for all that I found here, but
I'd be happy to. >> Council President, I still have the floor. Um, no, in case in case. It's in case. Council President, you're making me laugh. Um,
Mr. Armano, uh, did the attorney send an email or gave you a call in regards to the compensation for the school committee position? Because what I have in front of me is like in a statement
uh, based in an answer. Um, I'm reading I read what I have in front of me. So, um, did he call you or send you an email asking you if you were planning to get compensated? I I can't remember if we discussed it honestly, but with the compensation,
I'll go with that original interpretation. If if our charter says that a city employee employee compensated city employee can't even run for a position, then there would be no question. There would be no compensation. End of discussion. What I
think the um what the special employee rule does under section 40, a conflict of interest. The whole premise of section 40 is talking about contracts, two contracts that one municipal employee will have for the same municipality. And what that section
does, in my opinion, it allows a special employee if they disclose to the city council that they work for the city, which would be done, to have another compensation, being that it might be a part-time position. So, I I think again um it's something that we can explore
more of the compensation. I said it before, I'll say it again. This is certainly not about compensation, but I I think it may be u permissible >> of the chatter. According to your opinion, your legal opinion based on the uh company of
interest law, you can get compensated with a a you know with a contract. >> Yeah. >> Like other employees do. My my position is under section 20 a special employee
who gives disclosure is exempt from that section which is the conflict of um which is the compensation of having two contracts under the same municipality. So there's a specific exemption in that law. Uh again it's 268A section 20.
Are you planning to um the people that are watching? So, are you planning based on what you explained to us um you know to get compensated for if it's allowed under the city charter like you explain it which is not
>> sure sure if it's allowed I I'd graciously take compensation. If it's not I I don't >> if not it >> Yeah. >> All right. Um thank you uh Mr. Mano, thank you councelor President Rosario. >> Thank you. And and even though I didn't
vote for Mano on that night, I went home and read a chatter. We did all the changes with the school committee composition, but we did not change the charter. We did not want to change it completely looking at the appointees.
So we we went with the composition of do a new composition to to do the I mean the the new school committee hybrid but again we didn't we didn't go through the whole city charter and say well this might be a conflict why don't we change it we just went change we did just
change a part of the composition of the way the school committee was going to work so I went home again even though I didn't vote for for for man I went home and said I mean we we should leave it as Yes. I mean, he's not going to get compensated.
He already got elected. We even did the second part of changing it, you know, for the new composition. So, we already elected him. Why don't we go like if he was elected and not a city employee? Um, and that was in my head and I I saw him
today and I said I I went through this in my house. But I mean, I don't I don't know which way we're going to go. Uh, city attorney already offered his opinion. Um but I believe part of this where we are right now is because we didn't change it completely. We just went with the changing of the
composition of how we're going to elect the new uh school committee. But we didn't actually research or dig deeper into the city charter when we were doing all those changes. >> Uh on the city on the city charter it says the section 5.6 six. Uh holding the
city holding city office or city employments. Uh no member of the school committee other than the mayor should during the terms to which
for which he was elected referring to the mayor hold any compensated city uh city office or city employment. uh when it when it says other than the
mayor should in the terms on which he he was elected uh hold any or any compensated city office or city employment. I think that when when uh when we are the intent of
the city cho at that point is that we are electing. We are electing by an appointment. So the city the city the school
committee will be acting as on any aspect of the uh jurisdiction of the school committee will act with all the power and every aspect of the school committee will be act just like an appointee and
just like an elected member and the intent of that paragraph uh 5.6 six is that no school no school committee should be an employee except from the mayor. That's what the
city chat is is is is is clear upon and and I think that the intent of the chat when those changes were made was the the with the only intent that yes we have have issues
with that uh with employees wanted to run for school committee because is it is it is the school committee is is three time more powerful when it comes to funding than the actual council and then the actual city
they control 70% of the budget that's what they what when we have control of the schools that's what it is in reality and uh and as a matter of fact and Lawrence we have have issues in the past
because of the school committee I control follow it directly by the superintendent and their team. Uh and I think that all those changes around those specific language happened around uh happened around the situation that
happened because of the situation that happened in the past. I don't know to be honest with you. We have a motion in front of us. >> Council President, >> um it's not okay.
Okay. Thank you. >> Council President, um I He's no longer here right now. He took But I No, no. I'm I'm gonna say I'm I'm going to say but um I I agree with my colleague Council De Rosario and I believe this body should amend the city charter um
for the future. Um, I do want to say because it's very frustrating um, till this day for me at least that that was part of the job that was supposed to be for the ad hoc committee. Unfortunately, once again, that did not work out. And I
I I was like, no, we we can't we can't do this here. We we can't get this work done because nobody was getting along. Um, so that was an oversight on our part. I want to take some responsibility for that. Um, but I also want to
appreciate your comment in terms uh regarding the political pressures, but I've heard that before. I'm not going to say names, but it is a colleague of yours and it ended up happening. So, I I I just I can't I want to give you you city
any city employee the benefit of the doubt, but more often than not, it does occur. and I I foresee that coming some in the near future. >> Thank you. So, what's most compelling to
me is is the special employee facet interpretation. Uh yes, back in 1983 when this was before the voters and the voters decided to vote on the charter. Um this was probably the language that was provided and the
voters chose this charter and all the provisions in it. Got it. But as everybody said, we have not thought this was going to happen at some point. The other part besides being a special employee, the other part to me that's compelling is that
the law that What we passed was a home rule petition that made it hybrid. It's really the legislaturator's law. It's not our law. It's legislature law. They are the ones that they have to approve it. They did not change it. And you can look at
it two ways. You could look at, oh well, they wanted to go with the other way of the charter or the way that Mr. Romano is suggesting is that is free and open to to try to get the best that we can get to work and allow appointing agency.
>> By the way, it's us. >> Exactly. It's us. We're the appointing agency on this. Um and so so so let's talk about the conflict. It's pretty difficult, as we all know,
nine of us, to put any kind of political pressure to bear a conflict and change a city employee. Yes, the mayor can do it, but I also submit that it really is case by case. If you're an atill employee working for
the city, which means you could be fired for any reason, you could be let go for any reason, your job is dependent on who is elected mayor. Yeah, that's there's a red flag there. But if you're in a position in a well- entrenched union and
a position like Captain Armano is in, I don't know how someone is going to reach down and start putting their thumb on someone that fits the bill of someone like Captain Armano. We ultimately make the
decall. We made the decision. We get to call who we wanted for the for the people, the three people, right? Um, and so if if any mayor, I'm not talking about again, whoever said it was right. It's it's not about this mayor, is about any mayor. I
don't care who the mayor is. It's, you know, it that's going to be the impact. It's going to be whether or not we when we select somebody because we're going to be doing this now for a while until unless we change it. That's one of the questions we should be
asking. We should be looking at can this person that we're about to get there, do we think this person is going to be impacted by any kind of political influence? We should be asking that question anyway from anybody, all the candidates. And by the way, I think that was a question that was asked time and time and time again by my colleague from
District D. We knew what was coming. That was the question. And every what did everybody say? Oh, no. No, no. We're we're good. We're going to do our stuff. And when what are we going to say? No, we don't believe you. Unless someone comes in and we have a track record and we said, "Well, you whatever." But but
we look at that. So anyway, the long and the short of it is this. I think that I think that I think that we could go either way on this and I think that a vote in favor or leaving it as is with Armano there, there's nothing wrong with
it. I also could fully understand if some colleagues of mine who voted whatever way thought, you know, something I just don't feel confident now in that. It really is up to us. It really is. I don't think there's a right or wrong on this to be honest with you. I really don't. So, that's how I feel on it. Um, I'm going to be supporting if
there's another vote on this. Unless I hear something differently in the next little bit, my mind's open. I'm going to be supporting u Mr. Romano and and and having his abs and what he brings to the table sit sitting in that seven person school committee. I think his voice is
going to be very valuable and important. The council president has allowed me to speak, which I'm not going to vote, but since you have a legal opinion in front of you and you don't have your attorney here, I'm just going to weigh in. >> Yeah, I'm going to just weigh in really briefly. First and foremost, let us
acknowledge that you have an excellent candidate in front of you. This gentleman is not only very intelligent but he's a person of character. I don't think you could have a better person standing in. So let us start with that basic fact because I think that's me. I hope it's not. Um
I also think I'm pretty smart and person of good character and I want to tell you um I was on the board of library trustees. I was appointed by the white fund. So completely non part of this structure and I report in my city job to
the council. Both of those are outside the purview of the mayor. And I will tell you this, I am no longer a library trustee. I'm no longer a white fund trustee because I did feel tremendous political pressure to the point that I felt if I am going to do a
good job as a library trustee, I'm going to lose my job as a city employee. So I'm going to step down. So I I think the to say logically that if you're in a protected union and they answer to the council, there's no way you could have political pressure. I
don't think that's real. I having lived it personally, I I don't think that's a real thing. I I think you will face political pressure no matter what. But um the third thing your attorney gave you legal advice and
I think council plant put it best is you as a body are going to make this decision tonight not your attorney who's not here. he gave you his advice, but your decision at the end of the day. Um the the one thing I do want to point out, you talk about clear language, the language, the header of the section is
called prohibitions, holding city offices or city employment. That's the title of the section for a reason because section 5 says prohibitions of holding city office or city employment. And I guess the real question you have to ask yourself, I think this will answer your question for
you, is you as a body adopted a new charter change a few months ago in this last fiscal year. And you at that time when you made this change, if someone said to you, not Mike in particular, but city employees in general, gosh,
wouldn't it be great if city employees were the appointees, would you have sat there that night and been like, yeah, I think we should have city employees as appointees to the school committee. Would you have said, "No, I think that's a really bad idea. I don't think we should have city employees be the appointees to the school committee." And I think how you answer that question is going to be how
you should vote tonight. Like if in general you thought the concept of appointing city employees was a bad idea, then stay consistent with that. And if you think back in when we made this change, I thought appointing city employees was a good idea. If if that's what you genuinely thought, then you
should be supporting this. But I didn't get that sense. I sat through it with all of you. I didn't get the sense of where people were at. Um, but you you do have an excellent candidate in front of you. As council of the plant said, you are making the decision yourselves. Um, but I I do think the pressure is real.
Have someone have lived through it myself. Um, and I do think you're trying to give you advice for a reason, but you as a body are going to make your decision tonight based on what you think is the right thing to do. So that there's no wrong answer. You will make the decision yourselves.
>> The president Thank you. I would like to add um yes, the city council, despite what has been previously said about about the mayor being the appointing authority to the public, um but the city council is the appointing
authority. Now, if in the future, well, not if, we know, the city council changes every two years and some counselors may be more in favor of a mayoral figure or not. And what I mean in favor is perhaps they have the
same vision or or the same bigger picture or their values align more whereas others may be more independent or or may be, you know, the the complete opposite side. Those are the type those are the type of leaderships and individuals that we that we see coming
in and out these this chamber. If one day say a city employee does not align. So when we get the school committee back from the state, if one day
a city a city employee who is appointed does not see eye to eye with essentially their boss at the end of the day and if that council majority of that council aligns with
that current admin administration at the time we will see different votes. It won't be an independent city council vote whether or not to keep or to appoint someone. You will see an influence in that vote and it has
happened before um and for other things. So that's what I'm trying to avoid for the future. It's not about I know how tremendous you are. Uh Mr. Armano, I've worked with you um in an official and nonofficial capacity.
I know you're more than capable of doing this, but at least for me, there's a bigger picture aspect to this that I as a not per but personally as a counselor cannot ignore whether I'm a counselor in the future or not.
>> Thank you. counselors. If it is no further questions, we madame cler do we have a motion in front of us or do we need a motion >> because we have we need to take a determination on this? >> We have a motion. You could make someone can make a motion to um reaffirm the
nominee as previously or somebody can make a motion to reconsider a new nominee. Um but >> basin a motion at this point >> make a motion to reaffirm >> there is a motion to reaffirm
reaffirmation vote n five vote on the affirmative just to be clear and this is to affirm uh uh chmano to be the next city council to to be the next school committee member >> your your granddad
your grand uh the motion is to reaffirm uh counselors dis uh entertain any discussion on this matter. Council president Levy at the beginning you know last at the
last meeting I just b for you but in here that is one of my thing that is coming to my mind. So we have or we ask for an opinion to the the city
attorney. when we ask for an opinion to the serat only when okay whatever that happened that he if he doesn't give it the opinion so we are getting uh not comfortable because he didn't give it the opinion or he doesn't want
it or or he want to give it like this is my personal comment no anatony opinion or the city attorney so but we had a document in front of in front of us that was changed you know as point what
change and what I see here that the section five is that like a shadow control of the school committee is the section five the charter control the school committee but the sections 5C that's is what I'm
getting in my mind doesn't talk about remuneration or you want to get something else just only say prohibition according in city office or city employment is a prohibition. It doesn't mention
anything else. So I think if we want in the future to change, we can start like doing things right now, you know, uh and reading and
looking again and all of this for future generation or for future people that wants to apply. If we wanted people from the city, I will not like it if I work for the city to be rejected to be part of any commission or to be hoarding any
any employment or to be hoarding anything. But at this point for me, you know, I been working with you and been doing things. So the city sh okay said
very clear provision holding city office or city employment then below no member of the school committee. Don't mention directly member of the school committee doesn't mention that this has to be appointed or has to be elected mention
that no member of the school committee other than the mayor shall during the term we was elected or any other compensator so he mentioned the compensation okay but at the beginning at the beginning on section
5.6 say provision hoarding city office or city employment. That is my right now um my question for me you know what is say on the city sh and this is like a I
feel right now in this moment you know where should I go and the thing that I been raised like I don't want to say oh because um iso jub
Bed that is not clear, it's not transparent, it's not this and so many other many many things you know that we sometime have a lot of fun for and say you know that is what's the shadow or
it's uh it's been mentioned at this moment. So if we want to work on this, if we want to change it, we should start doing this like today or not today, let's say tomorrow and work on this for future generation or for whatever that
is going to happen in the next two year when election is coming again. That is my concern. Thank you >> council president. I ju just hearing the tone of the comments. I just want to say and I hope you know this. There is and
will be on my part. I'm a city employee. I think I've worked with you all of you at some point. You will never ever have to worry no matter what decision you make tonight that you can't call me tomorrow for anything. Just >> called you anyway. >> I know you will. And when you do, you
will get 100% service, maybe more if that's physically possible. I nothing is changing. I just want to reassure all of you of that. I just hearing a little bit of the tone. I appreciate so much your your valuable feedback. I'm honored to be part of this community and have a
discussion over this 5.6. I gave you my honest opinion. I I love hearing what you said. I kind of lean towards one of the councils who mentioned it gives you more discretion whether whatever whoever's in here, whether we're elected officials or appointed, there's always
going to be pressures. We all know that the makeup is always going to be different. >> But what we do know is there's great there's great discretion. You you are the appoint this council is the appointing authority and if there's something that you don't like a decision or a value or tone I was going in, you
take that away whenever you want and I don't get in again. And that's the beauty of having that flexibility. But if you limit it, I can tell you there's a lot of city employees and yes, you should use your discretion. Some you may want, some you may not want. But there's a lot of people who care about the city. There's a lot of people who have
children in the school system. There's a lot of people that wish they could do more in the city of Lawrence. And for those reasons, not just Mike Amano, it's not about Mike Amano. Again, I hope you contemplate this. I hope it lasts long after. I hope the council for the rest of time has the discretion to decide if
they want that city employee or that city employee, whoever it may be. I think you're missing out, not just me, you're missing out on this world of incredibly talented city employees, which we have many of if you limit that. And that's that's the point. But I just want to reassure
hopefully I don't need to, but I appreciate everybody and you you know this your vote doesn't weigh anything on what um you know, my my efforts towards this city and towards anything you need in the future. >> No, no, I mean, he already spoke. you have a speak.
>> Uh go back >> to you, Mr. President. Uh I want to say thank you to Mr. Armano because I not only see you work from the city. I know how you do for our family
and our community and also for our children and youth. I'm really glad to have you in this position to represent our pattern, our families through the school committees. If we had the opinion for tonight and at the same time we had
the right to change the law. I love to see we starting this process to change the law and give you the opportunity to the people have the qualification to serve into our community. I'm so glad to bring in favor tonight for you
>> and and Mr. Roman you pretty much said what I'm about to say. I'll recap it from my words because I think it's important that I say this. I take no great pride in this, but I'm the one that offered the amendment to separate into three buckets, the buckets that we see tonight. And one of the intentions from that amendment, and this
is the author's intention, was because I wanted to see someone with certain expertise in these various phases of government, if you will, or life that can provide value to a school committee. And one of the things that I mentioned I think during the debate was that it's important that we your words we have a
broad we get as many people as possible as as many qualified people and we make the choice. We make the choice on who we believe is the most qualified and the person that we trust to take that position. It doesn't cast into the clerk
said it's either one or the other. Ask yourself that question. I ask I I I differ. I say this. Ask yourself this question. Find out who it is that that you think is the best and qualified person and factor that point. Is that
person a person that you know that you believe is going to be able to withstand or be able to be straight and true and true to their word and when they stick when they take that oath of office as a school committee member that they're their allegiance is to the charter. Are they going to be true to that? And some
people are going to be true to that and some people aren't. And that's a call for each one of us when we have someone. We may disqualify Mr. Romano if he was a different position and whatever. We know him. We know something. I don't think he's going to be the right guy. I think
he's going to he's going to sway. He's going to I've seen him. I worked with him. But this is a guy that we see him. I I have a different opinion. I think this guy's going to hold fast. That's my professional opinion, my personal opinion. I've seen him work. I've seen his qualification. That's why I'm going
to be voting for him again. That's why I'm doing that. But I can't. Each one of you have to make that call on your own. I can't do it. But now you know where I stand and why I put that in there back last year, I guess. Thank you. >> Thank you. At this point, counselors,
I'm going to call the questions to affirmation. A vote yes means you affirming that uh the candidate. A vote no means that you are denying. Madame Clair, please call the role. Councelor Levy. >> Yes. >> Council plan.
>> Yes. >> Council Luzon. >> Yes. >> Council del Rosario. >> Yes. >> Council Miguel. >> Yes. >> Council Marl. >> Abstain. >> Council Reyes. >> Yes.
>> Council Vice President Infante. >> No. >> Council President Rodriguez. >> No. What's the count? >> Um, one, two, three, four, five, six in favor, one abstension, two nos. >> Congratulations. Thank you, safer. >> Thank you.
>> You got to change the hands. >> Can we take the vote again? Just kidding. So, uh, school committee members First, be ready for the fifth. So, you're going to be sworn in. Now, we're going to ordinance committee. The housing
committee. There is no reports. Ordinance committee. Chair of the ordinance committee. Council La Plan. Council La Plan. Do you mind uh taking taking all the withdrawals as a block? Yeah. At the end, we're going to take
any business. >> Okay. All the way to 3:36. >> Council President, if I may, >> council Luzon. So I'm seeing a lot of W's uh here withdraw. Uh would you mind uh counc
as per the rule 25 >> correct? >> That's why >> no this is are on the committee. So this is our committee thing. So I will tell you uh this was not like throwing a a a dart at a dart board with a blindfold on. There was a reason why we we took
these. What the committee did and the committee will correct me if I'm wrong. with the committee. We we we looked at our agenda which has gone to like seven or eight pages. It is long. And and what we looked at is if something hasn't
moved any action at all in 2025, all you're looking at here is 20 item from 2024 or earlier, maybe some 23s, I don't know. >> 24s. Um, if there's been no action on these 2024, by the way, I'm not
convinced there was no action. Some of these there was probably actions on it, but we don't have the bandwidth to go in and say that the stop sign was there or there. We may have actually approved it, but we just know that this for starters are things that have been around for a while. No one has pushed on it. There's been no action. It's been dormant and so
we're withdrawing it. We will also, we also talked amongst oursel if there was something that the council wants to put back on. they find that let's say they find out that that stop sign wasn't there or that handicap parking wasn't there or whatever it is that's there wasn't there go ahead and reinsert that.
So I think it's important that we have a new council that we start doing things fresh rather than have things that are stagnant from previous councils. So I hope that's a little bit of a background as to how we got to this point. Um not saying these are bad ideas. That's not what this is saying. Not saying these are bad ideas at all, but just that
nothing's happened on or if they did happen, we just >> we don't we we haven't documented it on the ordinance committee agenda. That's all. >> Go ahead. >> First document, uh, 2024. Bang. Hang with me. A removal of handicap parking space, 23 Dartmouth Street. 2524,
request re update of information from the parking meter contract between the city of Lawrence and PCI Municipal Services LLC. 3624. Amen. Time frame for approval of candidates sent to the city council by mayor. Uh document 14924 removal handicap park and at 67 Farm Street apartment F1. 21324 application
of hawkers and peddler's license power home remodeling. 21724 family day June 25th 2024 Gian Park 2023 24 Junth Arts and Awareness Festival Camping Common June 22nd 2024 342 24 request for hawkers and peddlers
license for the sale of flowers Ezekiel Uortiz 23724 request for a loading zone at Hall and Berkeley Streets 3 24724 resident parking at 73 Irving a 24824 one side parking Fton Street uh down uh coming down from
Prospect Street 25524 Trains and vendor license Delhi Moore 30624 remove handicap parking space 32 Lawrence Street 30924 Creation of four waste offs all the street and Dale Street 30724 proposed new ordinance for licensing
board administrator 3242 24 proposed new ordinance for sanitation and hazardous material program manager 32624 stop sign four-way stop east pleasant street intersection of KBY street 33024 15minute parking 241 South Union 33324 review real property task force
33524 15-minute parking 152 Broadway 33624 removal of two stop signs Canal Street intersection of Apple Street and Mil Street 3 I can't read that 34624 resident parking
Brad Radford Street 3842 24 one side parking beacon aav 34224 H street frost review and update ordinance times oneway street 4082 24. Remove handicap parking 117 Sterns A. 41824. Remove handicap parking space. Delete ordinance. 45
Bigalow Street. 42324 resident parking street near Hamster Street. 42524 resident parking Alabian Street from Avon Street. 432 24 Resident Lincoln Court. 44924. No parking Bradford Street at Amesbury Street, Southside 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. 49324. Creation of a city council
policy regarding namings and dedications. 55024. Approve amendments to the city zoning ordinance to follow accessory dwelling units as a permitted use. 53024. No parking war street from Hal Street to do street. The odd side. 53424. No resident parking Trinity
Street. 53624. No overnight parking southside 396 Water Street. 55824. Proposed ordinance to regulate commercial parking in residential areas. 55924. This is a school zone Hamlet Street entire street during the school year and school hours. 56124. No parking. Sunday
is only 290 Water Street. 57624 adopt citywide hump speed hump program. 520 32325 resident parking water street southside from 34 to 82. Uh that's it. Make all those in as a block and and the motion
to withdraw. >> Second >> discussion. Council Luzon. Um, so, um, I noticed there's a few items there from district B. Uh, do they, uh, are you guys, um,
ah, I'm sorry, is the committee adding this for withdrawal because of the police department didn't respond? >> So, we've received, just so we're clear, there one or maybe two or three things have happened. One, the best news scenario, it's on our agenda and we
already sent it through, but it never got taken out of the agenda. So, some of these may have passed and have been adopted. Not sure. That's one possibility. Second, there's something on this agenda and we've either DPW or the police department. Um, and we've um
and there's been no action since 2024 on anything that's on there. If there's a 20 again, it's a 2025 action. We left all 2025 actions on the committee. So if you look at our agenda going forward, you will see stuff from 2024 because
they have items that have had some movement within the last year >> but we're not 100% sure consular plan >> and for that you are correct. So can it would be fair to ask to um consider
to amend your motion and leave uh 42524 I added I marked the ones that are that belong to district B
and will that be fair enough or do I need to resubmit that for next year? My my recommendation would be this. Once you start opening this up, everybody's gonna say that's in my district, right? Propose this. What I would recommend is this is that um if somebody wants to
reintroduce any of these matters that that would be in order so someone else can carry the mantle or someone can carry the mantle and move on it. I don't know if these things have passed or not passed. I can't tell you that. But that that would be my recommendation because we need those. I know that your this is
your last meeting. I understand that. Um, if the the next person that's going to try to fill your shoes comes in and says they're going to maybe they're going to find some utility and they're going to say, "You know something? We're going to we're going to put I'm going to push on that." I I have no idea what they're going to do. That's my recommendation.
>> Uh, councelor Laena, my items there are a constituent request. Um, and my question was if the police department deny the request and we're not 100% sure. So, and I know there's
other counselors here with other uh items, but um I think um that getting them out of the withdraw package will be um reasonable for the
constituents that requested those changes. And I know when when the next counselor um when the elected counselor in January, we can have this conversation again as a constituent. Uh and I will refer
the uh the items that that's still in the ordinance committee to her to follow up. But I mean, we don't know. We don't have any answer from the police department. That's why I'm requesting if we can take those items out.
and leave it in the agenda for that lesson alert. >> I'm not going to be want to to go against my colleague. I would just I would just caution my colleague on this. If the if my colleague out of respect to her to your position, I would I would move those things out. Just understand
that once we start doing this, there'd be other counselors say, you know, something I really want that as we open that up. Number one. Number two, there if this hasn't been done, there really is going to be very little delay. if somebody reintroduces it because if
if it gets reintroduced, it's going to be sent to the committee. And by the way, I will tell you this as well. I had a conversation with the police chief today. There there's going to be some fundamental changes with respect to uh things going to the police department.
Um I just want you to be aware of that. So there's going to be some changes as well. I didn't want to speak on it in too much detail tonight because a new council has to convene first. So that doesn't answer your question. So the question is this. Do you I mean I'm I'm not going to stop this from happening counselor. If you really want
me to not to withdraw that as a courtesy to you, I will take that list. >> What other items are you referring to? So we can add it right away. >> That way we just add it right away to the next uh 247-24.
Not >> 425 24. We need it one more time. >> Next cycle. >> Yes, let's do that. >> If if the council approved >> Yeah, let's let's work it out and we we draw release it and then deal with it
next time. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, council. Yeah, through because that's what I was going to say. We also approve an ordinance that anything sitting over two years is going to be automatically withdrawn. >> So not from the committee council, >> but those are 224. Yeah, we set a full agenda. That's why we the whole from the
agenda. Anything on the agenda that's sitting on the agenda, >> the city council agenda, not on the committee's agenda as per the rule of 25, just table matters from the agenda, which is the city council agenda, not the not the committees. So that rule
doesn't apply to the committees. that I understand that's okay. But I mean it it >> if it is any other items that we want to add we can just >> we've been and that's okay but we've been getting also the plan doesn't follow those but we follow we've been pounded people been
pounding us on how big the ordinance agenda is and I can mention name that it's on every week she sits and watch and watch the meeting and says the agenda extremely big one of the constituents and we try to clean up I mean it's been sitting there we went back and checked
what had movement and we put it back. We did an option to withdraw it. Uh last week we went back also some of the my items before we got to withdraw. I myself checked my agenda and email the police department. They did not reply anything to me. So I'm waiting the next year put them on as a new item and then
follow up through the year just so we can clear up. They've been and we almost done basically but they was stopped sitting there since 2022. >> Oh >> sitting there without no movement. But that's okay. I mean I have no issues with with moving those and leave it there. So president I can council
president I can resummit it uh next week. >> Yeah. >> Yes we already you she you already take a note she will res. >> Thank you so much. Thank you. >> Thank you. Okay. It's under the withdrawal.
Okay. What is the item? No, just just tell us the item if it's part of the list that we want to take a vote. 444. We're not there yet. 4425. >> Yeah, >> it's a 15-minute apartment.
They don't have enough space for that uh for the handicap. They they probably have a type. All right. Uh counselors, any other questions when it comes to all these items? >> Councelor Le. >> Okay. just only for clarification but I
I was reading on the city cho that mentioned that this cleaning for for the agenda is just only for the um for the king the city council in general is said very clear that's no for any the committee agenda
>> I just clarified with that with council >> I'm sorry >> I just clarified that with councel Rosario it's not for the committee >> it's not for the committee so so that committee can keep it whatever that they have on the agenda and they just only for the city council. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. Any other questions on
the on the withdrawals? Madame Clair, do you have all the numbers? >> Okay. So, uh we don't have to repeat uh repeat those u at this time. I'll call the questions. All those in favor, please say I. I. >> Any names for the withdrawals?
>> The eyes have it. Um councelor Blank, chair of the of that committee, please proceed. >> Let me let me do um let me do this block. Uh, I'm gonna do a block for 40725. Install a J pole on Berkeley Street near Montgomery Street. 4010 41025 install a
J pole on Brooksville Street near Bowden Street. 41125 install a J pole on Sheper Street near Glen Street. And 4125 saw a J pole on Andover Street near the intersection of Tukbury Street and Kulie Street. I make a motion that we have that in block and and um and order a
public hearing. There's a there's a motion to order a public hearing on those items just mentioned. Properly second discussion. I hear none. All those in favor, please say I. The eyes have it. Any have it. >> I'm going to now do the handicap
parking. Um 42425 handicap parking at 124 Trenton Street. 43725 handicap parking at 197 Crawford Street. 43825 handicap parking at 47 Abage Street. 43925 handicap parking 151
Willow Street. 44025 handicap parking at 87 Trenton Street. 4 uh 46025 handicap parking at 41 Juniper Street. 46125 handicap parking at 15 Brook Street. 40 6225 handicap parking 8789 Springfield
Street and 46325 handicap parking at 2 May Street. Make a motion that we have that in block and to order a public hearing. There's a motion to order a public hearing for all those just mentioned. Discussion properly second discussion I hear none. All those in favor please say I
>> I have it. Uh councel plan. >> Uh I'm going to go back to document number 4. >> 430. Thank you. 43025. Ordinance committee met on 43025 which is no parking on Pearl Street. Oh, that's a withdrawal. I'll make a motion to withdraw.
>> There's a motion to withdraw item 25 properly. Second discussion. I hear none. Uh, all those in favor, please say I. I. >> I have it. >> 44325 is childc care parking at 111, I'm sorry, 11 plaque street. This was sent
out to the full council in the favor recommendation order of public hearing. Motion >> motion is to order a public hearing properly second discussion. I hear none. All those in please say I. The eyes I have it of >> 444. 4442550minute parking 64 Berkeley Street. This was
sent up to the full council with a motion to withdraw. That's the motion. >> Motion to withdraw properly second discussion. I hear none. All those in favor say have it. Item 446. >> I like to take the next two as a block. 47625 remove handicap parking at 76 Em
Street and 47725 remove handicap parking at 25 Durham Street. This was sent up to the full council to to order to order a public hearing. That's the motion. >> Motion is to order a public hearing on those two item properly. Second discussion none other
uh all business 436. I don't think we taking any action >> because it's already >> the mayor vetoed the item so we have to put it on the agenda for your consideration. the >> well last week they said not the most >> right so the >> and then they have
>> proponent of the thing they said do not override the veto because they didn't feel like they were in compliance with Mass General law chapter 30B um they're going to go through the process with procurement but I'm still required to put it on your agenda like you know what I mean I
>> the 10 days possible >> the 10 days for the mayor was December one and he on December one on the 10th day he vetoed So I have >> 10 days to >> right. He had 10 days. >> No, you have till your next agenda to
override the veto which is today. This is your next agenda. >> Well, because you did on December 1, your agenda is already closed for December 2nd. So your next agenda would be >> all right. Any actions on the on that item?
>> Let's make sure we're clear on that. Council president said there was a >> there was a >> veto from the mayor. >> Veto that the veto from the mayor and then now they want to resend that veto. >> No, they just don't want to take any actions on the veto. The applicant is already aware that they need to be in
compliance with the mas law when it comes to procurement law and they are okay with the veto. >> Everybody >> everybody wants the veto. everybody fine because they uh we received this item from the mayor's uh from the uh from
McCarthy's uh office asking for the four years uh extension. We took that recommendation and proceed and approve it. Uh all of a sudden we got a letter from that uh procurement uh
department saying that they didn't they didn't go through the process. The process is specified from the mas law. The mayor based on the recommendation of the other department which is a procurement department veto the item and
decide to go with the proper process. Uh and then now I guess that they find out that there was some issues. Uh so next time that we will get an uh when we get an item similar to that what we should be requesting is a recommendation
from the procurement uh department instead because it's like we approved it based on the fact that we thought that they check on that but they didn't. So we good with the veto. Everybody should be. I mean unless the council
want to take some action. >> It will be moved automatically. Business. >> As the council president just said, it will be withdrawn automatically to take no action. I just I'm obligated as your clerk to put it on the agenda for your review, but where the applicant is saying please don't override the veto.
And the mayor obviously doesn't want to override the veto. It doesn't seem like action is needed. >> Motion pass 11. There's a motion pass 11 second >> properly second discussion I hear not all those properly say >> I have it um we have two two items you
have any question we have two items counelors one is in the new business one is on the table matters we have somebody out here for the new business uh and the item is item uh 48725
all of old gold and secondhand dealer license Argentina jewelry. Uh it was put together uh by the applicants. All the process went through and they asking to see if we can consider this as an
emergency and not send it to committee and discuss it at this level. Uh all the documentation has been submitted and it's in your package. Counselors, madame clerk. Um, councilman, the applicant came in to um update his business
license and related documents. He's physically moving an existing business. So, it's not it's an existing business that's already been approved by you for old gold in the past. Um, but the old gold license, I want to say, expired in like late 24. So, it's about a year out
of compliance with the old gold deal license. in moving physically. When he went to get his new permits at his new location, they realized the old gold license that you folks issue had actually expired more than 12 months ago. So, the problem is it's Christmas
and he's selling jewelry and that's the time to sell it is now. Um, nobody's going to >> So, in January, nobody you probably won't vote on this item till January 20th at the earliest if you don't take it as an emergency tonight. So, he asked if it could be considered as an emergency because it's not a new
business. It's not something you've never seen before. He does have all of his other permits in place. And it's the difference between being able to sell jewelry starting on December 17th tomorrow, or being able to sell J jewelry on January 20th, months from now when the Christmas um sales are over.
So, it's your decision, but just where the background comes from. >> Yeah. Essentially they asking to see if we can consider due to the fact that this is the higher pick of uh of of the of the store. Uh they were in
compliance with the police department. They were in compliance with every department uh uh through through the system in the city of Lance that we have and they have the special this for this license. They need a special permit from the police department which they need to run the fingerprint. They need to run
all the background. They did that and come out clear. So counselors at this time if it is no objection I'll entertain a motion to suspend the rules and declare this as an emergency not to send it to committee. There is a motion on the table uh and that uh and this is for the convening of
the convening of the community. Uh the councelor Rees has been making the motion. It's been properly second by councelor Levy discussion. I hear none at this time. Uh I call the questions. All those in favor, please say I. >> I. >> Any nays? >> No.
>> As um uh ML, please call the role. >> Uh councelor Levy, >> yes. >> Council La Plant, >> no. >> Councelor Luzon, not her is absent. Councelor Del Rosario, >> yes. >> Councelor Miguel, >> yes.
>> Councelor Marl, >> abstain. >> Councelor Reyes, >> yes. >> Council vice president, >> yes. Council President. >> Yes. What's the count? >> So, you have seven in favor. You have one abstension and one no. So, it will pass.
>> Yeah. Motion pass. Um uh at this time, uh we're going to entertain this this item at this level. Uh I need a motion, counselors, before we proceed. >> Motion to approve. >> There's a motion to approve. Properly second uh uh discussion
487, the old gold and secondhand Dless license. Uh discussion >> address. >> The new address. >> Address. >> The address for your business.
>> The new address. Lovium. >> The 27th New Street. Yeah. >> 27 New Street. >> Yes. streetsbury >> 27sbury. >> See
27sbury. All right. Any other questions counselors drive? >> Okay. Uh counelors, any other questions? I hear none at this time. I call the questions uh to approve.
Um all those f please say I any ner please call the role. Council Reyes. >> Council Mamo. >> Councelor Miguel. >> Yes. >> Council Del Rosario.
>> Yes. >> Council Luzon. Council plant. >> No. >> Councelor Levy. >> Yes. >> Council vice president. Council president. >> Yes. What's the count? >> Again. It's seven yeses, one no and one abstension. >> Okay. Congratulations.
>> Um councilors. I have I have an item. All right, counselors. I have a table matters that I would like to bring up is item 12517 which is the establishment of the maximum uh the maximum motor vehicle speed uh citywise to 25 miles an hours
to request to amend chapter 10.26. Um, councelos, we have received information from the police department, the latest report that was about four, three, four months ago.
Uh, any questions on that or we're still going to need more uh reporting on that LA plan? We send it to you specific. >> Pardon me? >> We send it to you specific. >> You sent it to me? >> Yeah. And you respond? >> I responded. Yes,
>> I did. Wow. I'm impressed. Um I don't remember doing that. >> I do remember the item 202517. Uh this is the establishment of a maximum motor vehicle spit spit city
wise uh spit limit uh city wise to 25 miles an hour to amend the chapter the chapter 20.6. Uh we have been uh asking for report. We have been getting reports from that uh from that u city engineer and as well as
the police department. >> Do we have that? It's been a while. I talked to the police oddly by pure coincidence about with the police chief about this matter today and I just said to him because I wasn't sure I'm sorry for taking it up right now. I said, you know, we've got a table matters, but
this is something I think many of us want to see happen. I'm not sure the details, what streets, all that stuff. But I go, I want to get your feedback on. and he expressed his feedback to me that he should be telling everybody here, but he's going to wants to look
into it and and do that. >> So, councilors, at this time, I would like to make a I would like I'm looking for a motion to suspend rule 12F not to withdraw document 12517 on the as per the rule 12 rule 25 of the city council.
So I'm looking for that motion to maintain uh maintain and keep this this item here. >> There is a motion uh to suspend rule 12 F uh been properly second discussion.
At this time I'll call the questions. All those in favor please say I. >> Any names? I have it. Counselors at this time um I going to get in touch with the police department again. uh to send correspondence blue I mean to ask for
correspondence from them again so we can take this matter uh probably next meeting or a meeting after um next year any other items counselors from the
table matters uh it is important to recognize that these items are going to be withdraw automatically as per the rule 25 on January 5th, correct? On the new on the new council takeover.
Um, so if you have a questions on any of these matters, which is the day of matters about a page and a half, uh, please get in touch with the city clerk so we can find we can find the
solution. >> Any other questions, council? More questions? >> Huh? So um some of the item that are the home petition are we going to keep it or are we going to remove or what is >> if it is an item that is a home petition
that was approved by the city council >> and signed by the mayor and it haven't moved at the city at the the state level they already withdraw it because they only keep the item for one year. I don't know what you're referring to, but that's the process. That's the normal process. >> But I can make a motion just to keep it
that like they >> so it had been approved by the city council or still there without approving. >> Uh it's been discussed and just looking for uh more information like the requesting of the voting ID. >> Okay. >> Item
44423. >> 44423. Okay. Do you want to keep this item? >> Yes. >> Okay. And then you should make a motion just like I did. >> Okay? >> Otherwise, you need to submit just like I request. Sorry. Otherwise, you should resubmit.
>> So, it's either one of the two. >> So, the motion is just to keep it the >> Okay. So, the motion will be the motion that you should make is the motion to suspend rule 12F not to withdraw the item 44423. >> Okay. >> That's that's the motion.
>> That's the motion. Can I hear a second? properly second discussion. Um I hear none. Uh all those in fail please say I. >> I. >> Any the eyes have it? take a look at those items. So item I'm
sorry President item that is going to be removed is going to be the the one that got more than two years or all the item also the 24 and 25 is going to be removed to >> everything. >> Yep. Anything that's on the tabled matter section of your agenda is going
to be withdrawn effective with your next council when people get sworn in unless someone either resubmits it in January or you um do what you just did make a motion to suspend that rule and re you know retain
it otherwise those documents will all disappear on your next agenda. >> So we can resubmit it we can resubmit it in the the first meeting of January. >> Okay. Okay, >> counselors. I think that for the sake of
uh history how this item was debated throughout the years and the importance of maintaining the the the discussions alive referring to the item and not necessarily starting a new item. I think
that u as a body we should maintain item 7216 which read as follows. residency requirement city employees for petition reviews. It was put together by councelor Zasquez and it was uh taken
off table matters uh back in 2022 and retable as well on February uh 2022. uh this item for the sake of the history portion of it. I think it will be uh very important if we move on and
suspending rule 12F uh not to withdraw 7216 counselors. If if I make I need a motion. I motion to suspend 12F not to withdraw I
uh document uh 7216 a second. Properly second discussion. I hear none. All those in please say I. Any nays? >> No. >> ML please call the role. >> Council Levy.
>> Yes. Council plant. >> No. >> Council um >> yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Council. >> Yes. >> Vice President. >> Yes.
>> How about on the fire? >> Council President, I have a question. >> Council vice president. >> Um just refresh my memory. Is item 389-18 within that list of >> 389
>> is department heads quarterly report? >> Yeah, that's a that's already been passed. >> Okay. I'm sorry. Thank you. >> We adopt that. Probably it's a second item that is related to what we already have because people kind of like, you know, piggyback
or want to take credit or perhaps just uh put another item. >> Yeah. Item uh 39625 counselor. This is an active discussion that we have here. Uh we should be looking at those as
well. But that's item uh 39625. 39625 uh counselors. I got a very nice pictures uh that I can show for that item. I'm going to submit it for the uh and videos as well. Uh so you can send it to the applicants. Item 39625,
Auto Recycling Group LLC, John Deer permit at 4850 Medford Street. They're still operating. Uh I don't know the license. Uh I I I believe this is an active discussion. So resubmitting it. We'll be
sending them again. >> I like to uh take 12F. Is it >> 12F? >> And keep that on the table matters. >> All right. Uh there is an there's a motion on the table properly second discussion. I hear none. All those in favor, please say I. The eyes have it. All right. Council, there's any other
items. >> President. >> Yes. >> So, we already finished with item 45325. >> Yes. >> 45325. >> Yeah. That will be >> new applicants and select >> that will be withdraw unless you want to
take a motion now. You let me know it will be automatically or you make a motion >> report after the what about item 37825? Do we finish with that item?
>> You brought that in because I think that we have current discussion with the with U. Yeah, that was exactly what I'm pointing. I think that we have current discussions with the with De McCarthy about item 24575 uh which is uh adopt a new floor new
farm flop floor plot plans map citywise approve and amend uh I think that we should maintain this item to just uh to to know the history of it. Item 24525 >> make a motion to suspend 12F for
document 24525. There is a motion to uh there is a motion to suspend 12F to maintain item 24525 properly second discussion. I hear none. All of us say I any names there have it.
>> Uh we already talk about iron 396. What about uh iron 37825? It will be withdraw automatically. What's the next? Okay. If it is any refiling, you can just refile. Uh or you can get in touch with the clerk to see
what is the options even though the options will be amended once we finish today. Okay. All right. At this time, counselors, let's go to new business. Uh item 47925 appropriation of fund of $2
million from the schematic design frames phrase Massachusetts school building authority uh accelerated repairs program that's going to the bon finance committee item 28025 authorization to spend at 232,000 from the office of dis
uh disability ADA uh improvement grant that's going to the ordinance uh to the ban finance committee item 48125 authorization to spend 48,7474 from as DOT grant that's going to the weight and finance committee item uh
48225 appropriation transfer of 280,400 400.65 65 from the free cash to the rail trail project account that's going to the uh budget and finance committee. Item 48325 surplus declaration of the
4,97 square foot parcel of land located rear the 47 Hless Street that's going to housing housing committee item 48425 creation of an ordinance for new
positions any energy advocator uh in the office of planning and developments that's going to that uh to that ordinance committee item 48525 disclosure of conflict of municipal uh conflict by municipal employee ordinance
committee. Item 48625 disclosure of of a conflict uh by municipal employee ordinance committee. Item 48825 no parking here to corner does not does not need it. That's already an ordinance for that.
So please send that over to the DPW uh so they can act upon. Item 489, child care or parking 9 uh 29 Boxer Street. That's going to the ordinance committee. Item four uh 49025, childcare parking at
8 uh uh Hanlock Street. That's going to ordinance committee for item 49125, installation of conduit at Lower Street, uh Neil Paul uh 3043. That's going to ordinance committee. Item 49225 request
grant of request grant of utility easement from the city of Lawrence to Verizon that's going to the U housing committee uh 49325 install and on the ground uh
cond on exit street near Asbury Street that's going to the uh ordinance committee item 494 uh 25 resident parking only section of tux Uh that's going to um ordinance committee councilors committees
committee meetings. The recommendation will be the following. We're going to have our first meeting on the 5th. the new council will take over and after that it's going to be a week
uh that uh these committee meetings can take place because the next the second meeting of January will be on the 12th uh so uh on the week of uh between the
uh between the 5th and the uh which is Monday the 5th on and That's eight, I believe. Yes. Between the fifth and the eth the sixth and the eth that's a week that we can actually >> have the committees. No, the 12th is the
next uh the 13th is the next meeting. >> Well, the 20th is your next meeting. >> Oh, sorry. The 20 is the next meeting. Yes. Yes. >> 12th to the 16th. >> The 12th of the 16th. That's the occupant week that you guys can put uh the committees.
The 12th to the 15th of January. that way. Uh there's no meeting next week. No, unless that you guys want it. That's fine. >> But you got an extra week and uh in
January January 12th, 13 >> from the January January 12th to the to the 15th. So bud finance ordinance Tuesday. >> Yeah, I think it's premature. We don't
even know who's going to be on the ordinance committee. So we're I'm not going to schedule. I'm not sure. We're not sure what those committee assignments are going to be. >> It's just an assignment of the committee. It could be anybody because at the end of the day, the committee have to pick the new chair.
>> You have to we have to meet and pick the new chair. If it is a new chair, we still need to have those meetings >> on that week >> in the prerogative of the council president to schedule a meeting after the election of the council president.
So that should happen >> on the on that >> on the 5th >> on the 5th, >> right? >> There is not going to be any meetings uh or any meetings scheduled. Oh, I mean any items schedule other than the
president and the vice president. >> We can say have whatever it is. You can say it's on Wednesday. You can say it on Thursday. We can say whenever you want to say it for that meeting. So, but that's the prog of the council president to make that choice as to the first meeting to
have this council next when we're meeting. It's a little >> and then we should meet next week. >> No, I mean not. Just want to point out you don't have a reporting secretary. Um Maria Howerin is
the only city employee right now who has the um >> that's why disclosure. That's why we have two more trying to get the conflict disclosure. Um but in the meantime I don't really have anyone to take minutes for you folks between now and January 1. So, I would encourage you to go with
that same week, whether you set the meetings up now, or you set them up later, that January um 12th to 16th week are the best week to have your committee meetings. >> 12 to the 15th. >> 12 to 15, right? Yeah. >> All right. No meetings. Uh at this
point, I entered a motion to adjurnn. Uh there's a motion to adjurnn. Properly second discussion. There is none. All those fail. I have it.