Tonight's newspaper every day over your brain. The council will come to order. All rise and salute the flag >> outside of whatever. >> I pledge allegiance
of the United States of America. >> It's a it's a referral. Yeah. So you have like like a family practice. So she's not even the there is a doctor the woman those standing moment of silence in honor of our veterans service members and those who have given the ultimate
sacrifice. >> We honor and acknowledge the Massachusett Penuk and Pucket peoples whose ancestral lands we now call home and on which we gather today. We express gratitude to the indigenous peoples who have cared for this land for generations, predating European
colonization and continuing to the present. Moving forward, we are committed to ensuring that the histories, voices, and contributions of indigenous peoples are recognized and respected in the life of our city. Clerk, will you please call the role? >> Council Cologne Hayes,
>> here. >> Council Condan here. >> Council Crow. >> Council Lewong. >> Council McDonald here. Council Omali, >> Council Sega >> here, >> Council Simmonelli, Council Taylor >> here, >> Council Winslow >> here, >> Council President Lahan
>> here. >> Thank you very much. Now, under the provisions of the open meeting law, for those of you in attendance, please be informed that UMA Urban Media Arts will be recording this evening's meeting. So, just be aware there will be audio and video recordings of tonight's meeting.
We also have Brian Deacy of Malden News Network recording. Is there anyone else present tonight who is recording in addition to Uma and Mr. Deacy? Could you please identify yourself at this time if so? Okay, thank you. Seeing none, we will
move on to our next order of business. First order of business tonight is public comment. Public comment is allowed under council rules. Each speaker is limited to the subject matter relevant to this evening's agenda and everyone must keep their comments to 2 minutes or less. Clerk, do we have anybody signed up for public comment in
person or via email? >> We do not. >> Okay. Thank you. Next order of business. >> Council will hold a public hearing on the petition to amend special permit granted to DMS Trinity LLC on behalf of Charles Street Realy Trust 2020. Roseanne J. Spinny TRS. Paper 334-26
petition DMS Trinity LLC DBA Trinity Natural seeking amendment to special permit application CMID04598-2021 as granted by council paper 202-22 time extended by council paper 233-23 amended floor plan by council paper
75-25 now seeks to reissue the special permit and/or transfer the rights authorized by the special permit to a different entity at the property known as and numbered 36 6 Charles Street, Malden, Mass, also known by city assessor's parcel ID number 062239-910.
Public hearing required. >> Okay. Thank you. Um, attorney Demarco, if it's all right with you, I'd actually like to invite our building commissioner to join us at the podium if Nelson Miller is present with us this evening. Is he >> still at a um review meeting so he can
buy a few minutes? >> Okay, that's that's no problem. Then Mr. Mr. DeMarco, you have the floor. Please feel free to get us started. Thank you so much. >> Council President, members of the city council, thank you very much for um coming tonight to this hearing. I am
here on behalf of my client, DMS Trinity LLC. We have met a few times on this client over the years and uh I am here again for some changes that need to um happen for my client to move forward.
Um, my client has uh done frankly a beautiful job on their property. We're going to go through a um uh a little presentation, give you a look at what's happened. They have invested quite a bit of their hard-earned monies. They have
begun discussions and uh entered into an agreement with a partner, strategic partner. It would be a joint venture with this partner. They wish to have their special permit and their license. Not something the license that you need to deal with tonight. It's not your
purview, but the special permit is. And they'd like to amend it in order to be able to have this partner join with them in the project going forward. A special permit addresses issues having to do with property. You when you
granted the special permit uh originally you made a determination that the benefits and the detriments the balancing test that occurs with a special permit weighed in favor of granting it. None of that has changed.
Who gets the special permit is part of the licensing. Your job is to determine whether or not that property should have this business in it. And you did that. Tonight, we're
asking a change to your special permit because you have a provision in there that says non-transferable. Now, here's the issue that occurred over these years. In summary, my clients have two locations.
They have a location in Chelsea that we all talked about at the beginning to bring you back in history. And that location in Chelsea is open and operational and doing a wonderful business. The attorney in Chelsea unfortunately used the same LLC as you
approved in Malden because they were moving forward with both at the same time. The permits were issued to the same LLC, the same corporate entity originally. Okay. And when they did that, the licenses sat together with all
the shareholders and all the permits etc. If not for that, if they had opened up a separate LLC, and it was a it was an interesting time. We were all at the very beginning of this this statute. We were all trying to learn what it meant to have cannabis shops opening in our
cities. But if not for that, if there had been two different LLC's, we would not be here tonight. we would have simply gone to the click and said, "We're bringing in some ch um some different um ownership structures."
We would have gone to CCC, different ownership structures, but we can't do that without your permission because the uh LLC is tied up with Chelsea. And so, first we want to separate them out, two
different LLC's. And then we're going to be changing the ownership structure a little bit to bring in these strategic partners. They are great people. They have gotten excellent reviews in Fitsburg. They built our site for us. They're
contractors. So, they built it for us and we got to know them during that process and we want to keep doing business with them. So, we're here tonight to ask you to first um change your ordinance so that we can move the special permit into this other LLC
and then we'll be working with the click to change the ownership structure. Okay. So, let me take you through what's happened so far at the property so you get an idea of the investment thus far. There's a nice sign out front. There
will be a change in name at some point, but we've got our sign and we're ready uh change of name should the licensing etc go through. And this is the interior. It's stands ready for uh to get our final
walkthroughs. We have a provisional license. This is the security systems. Um there is the security age verification check-in counter. We are requesting that the name be changed to Beach House Cannabis. There
is no request for any of the changes that protect the neighborhood. None of the 20 conditions except the the transfer are being asked to change. Beach House Cannabis is an investor and a general contractor. Like I said, they helped build the location. We will
continue, DMS will continue to have financial interest. Beach House has done an amazing job in running their location. As a small business owner, we want to have partners that can help us to ma maximize this location.
Uh you all know about benevolent botanicals and the lawsuit. So there's currently no zoning ordinance specific to the cannabis that we used to have. So this actually falls back to your old um and standard uh special permit provisions. So, we're asking for that
change. The planning board voted unanimously to recommend as per the the planning department's recommendations that it to stay all 20 conditions stay and that you put back on that preventing transfer so that you can have these discussions with
us. Um, Beach House is owned by the Farazzi family, Paul Farazzi and Casey Baker. Casey is here with us today as are my clients who you've met several times who have been running their location in Chelsea and have been working to get
this one open. Farzi family are owners of the Healing Center cannabis dispensary in Fitchburg for 5 years. They are licensed owners marijuana establishment agents um in good standing with CCC. in Fitsburg. They have contributed $5,000 annually to um
nonprofits and they are in full compliance with their community host agreement in Fitsburg. They have won the best dispensary in the Sentinel Enterprise for three years in a row and in the Worcester Telegram and all of their
employees except for one are residents of the city. These are all things that attracted us to them. Mr. Farazzi owns a uh a union electric company and is a licensed electrician and construction supervisor. And Mr. Baker is familiar with Malden. He's going to be the one
who's around here the most as part of the joint venture. He's worked with Dom's Hoffs and Lamar and Bricks. So he knows the businesses. He knows the community in Malden. These are great partners for us.
the next steps. We would ask that after you approve us and we hope you will that we will then go on to meet with the click and we will talk to them and after that we will also be meeting with the city because the mayor's office because
they have to do a new um community host agreement. So this is one of three steps that need to occur. We are also they are also very familiar with the other parts of our community involvement like the spot pond greenway project. They want to
get that done. They think it's a great project. They want to be part of a community with us. That is uh our short presentation on that. Um I would ask to reserve time. I understand there has been a legal
argument made against this transfer. So, I'm asking that um Mr. Madame President that I reserve time to respond to that legal argument uh after you're done with me. Um I understand that you guys got a pretty lengthy memo. I've supplied one
to you myself and we can go through that. If they if the objector decides to uh present as well as discuss his um he's sent the memo and if he's going to present on it as well, I would ask the same courtesy. But for now, I'll take
questions. >> Okay. I do have one light from councelor Simonelli. So, let's start with councelor Simelli. >> Thank you, Madam President. I I I don't have any questions, but I just want to say this that
I appreciate uh attorney DeMarco coming before us today uh who is well respected here in the city of Malden. Great attorney, great litigator. I have a lot of respect for him. that in itself by saying that representing the people that
are before us today I you know I hand them over all my trust as far as like getting this thing done and you know I think we're looking at I've met with the folks that are sitting before us today too on several occasions and um
they're very good business owners they've been before us on several occasions look uh you know I'm a 12 stepper so I you know really don't have much to do with the uh substance stuff as far as marijuana and alcohol and all that stuff is concerned. But this is something
that's bringing in tax revenue into the city. So, you know, as a city council, I have to do my due diligence and to be able to ask questions and u either be in favor or not in favor of this situation. And I am in favor of this situation
because look, you know, we need the tax revenue coming into the city. We've all talked about it dealing with uh Council DeMarco and you know the uh applicants here. You know, it's very expensive to open up a business like this. It's a
multi-million dollar uh type of business and it brings a lot of tax revenue into the city. And I think that, you know, all they're what they're asking for us tonight is to bring on another partner if I'm if I'm not mistaken.
uh a financial partner which we should be applauding because again you know not to be redundant it's very expensive to open up these type of shops. So, we would want to make sure uh that the folks that are coming before us have the
financial capacity to be able to have a long-term effect here in the city of Malden and be able to bring in the tax revenues uh that we're looking to get uh under the financial situation that we find ourselves in over the last couple of
years and moving forward. So, you know, again, Madame President, I don't have any questions, but you know, and maybe this is premature, so be it. But I would just say that, you know, I think that we should honor this and appreciate the fact that they're coming before us and
being very transparent on the fact that they want to bring in new uh partners, financial partners, so that they're able to fulfill their objective that they've told us uh for
the last couple of years that they want to do. and and you know and I'll uh heed to uh my colleague uh councelor Peg Crow because it's her ward. So whatever she says I have to go along with. But that being said, I just want to say that as a
city council here, it's not an easy task. And uh I haven't heard anything from uh the building inspector or the clack click clack toll board or any of those folks as far as like they have any objections to this. So, I know there's probably a lot of questions here
tonight. I don't want to hog the microphone like I usually do, but I just want to say that, you know, I I I think this is honorable for them to come before us. I don't think they're asking this is not a big ask here tonight, and I think that it would be uh it would
behoove us to uh to grant this uh moving forward. Thank you, M. >> Thank you, Councelor Simmonelli. So, in terms of process, our building commissioner has just joined us. So, I do want to give him an opportunity to come to the podium um and address the council. Thank you so much for the presentation. I'm sure we'll have a
chance to invite you back up. Um in terms of next steps, we are going to have the hearing after Nelson addresses the council. So, we'll open the public hearing um and then we will have a chance to deliberate. So, that would be an opportunity for us to ask questions and I'm sure that would be when we would
be asking you to come back up. >> Thank you. So, thank you so much for your time. >> Nelson, please, if you could join us. >> Thank you. I know you're coming right from another meeting, so thank you so much. >> Yes. Sorry, we were upstairs approving ADUs. >> It took took a little longer than
expected. >> Not approved. >> We we approved three of them. >> Uh so I'm not sure where the discussion's already gone. Uh my intention as you know uh council president was to sort of just give an
overview of the process where we're at to sort of put you guys on the right track for what the discussion was about tonight. Uh and to do that kind of want to go backwards a little bit just to kind of review what the process is for
uh marijuana retail marijuana um approvals through the city. back when it was created, there were three distinct um processes that were put together. Uh one was obviously a licensing process that was done through the cannabis licensing and enforcement commission or
we call the click. Uh there was a special permitting process, our zoning process which was put with the uh the city council and obviously there was a u host community agreement process which sat in the mayor's office and that
hasn't changed. those three processes still exist and it was the way that the city decided to sort of make sure that no particular group or body or person had the entire say when it came to the issuing of of any any of our um
commercial marijuana uses. So where we stand now is that we still have those those three distinct processes that have to take place. There is still a licensing process that that this applicant will go through through the click which to a certain degree
still needs to be decided on exactly how that's going to go, but it still needs to take place. There's still a host community agreement process that will this applicant or this petitioner will need to go through uh with the mayor's office to revise their
host community agreement. and there's a zoning process that sits with all of you that needs to be addressed. And that's really the first, you know, domino to fall. It wouldn't make a lot of sense for the clerk or for the mayor's office
to push forward with their processes with the nap petitioner who doesn't have the zoning approval through their special permit to get into that into those other processes. So, the issue with the the zoning at the moment is the fact that they have a
special permit which has a condition in it which states that it's it's non- transferable or assignable. Just so you're aware, those other two processes, the click and the mayor's office, the products of those two
processes have those same restrictions. So, those restrictions also need to be addressed and changed. But the only one that you're really concerned with tonight is the fact that there's a special permit that has a a a condition written within it that says it
can't be transferred and it can't be assigned. So the end result will really be if you decide to allow this, it would be that that special permit would get uh there'd be a new special permit that condition would be removed.
the the special permit would be assigned to the property like all of our other special permits are and the new owner would be listed on it. All of our other special permits work that way. So if I've I've been having
discussions with a lot of you the and I've used 200 exchange as an example because it's a big building. It has a bunch of special permits that Berkeley Investments have have got over the years. If Berkeley Investments decide to sell that building tomorrow, uh, they
can do that. We would have no say in that. And whoever bought it would get those special permits along with it. That's essentially what you would be doing here. You'd be modifying this special permit so that it is then assigned to the property and not necessarily to the to the current owner
of it. I know there's been a lot of discussion about a lot of other things and maybe there'll be some discussion about that tonight about the legality of the special permit and if it's expired and um if the licensing process supposed to take place first or all we can certainly discuss that if you'd like or I can
answer questions about that if you'd like. It's u it's pretty involved. Uh I can say confidently that the special permit that you are addressing tonight is valid. It is legally valid. So that question could be put aside
and that's it. >> Thank you so much. Um do folks have questions for Nelson before we open the hearing? Okay, I see councelor Cologne Hayes first. Thank you. I just want to um clarify what you just said. This the special permit is valid, meaning the
special permit is placed on our docket valid. Could you explain a little bit more what you mean by that? There's there's been some question about the validity of their special permit be because of the lack of it being recorded. Uh this the special permit
has been acted upon. So the work it has not been recorded to my knowledge unless it's been done within the last few days. The work under the special permit has been started and completed. So when it comes to our state zoning law, that
constitutes exercising your rights under the special permit. So it is valid. It still should be recorded and hopefully it will be or it has been. Uh there's also uh the permit extension act over the
last several years which has been extended a few times by the governor's office which this special permit fell under and got the uh the benefit of that extension also. So as far as we're concerned the special permit right now
is valid. >> Okay. Thank you. I did read um that from our um city solicitor, but the special permit um as far as as is written, the special permit is nontransferable and
non assignable as of today. >> There is a condition written within the special permit that says that. Yes. >> Okay. So, yeah. Okay. Actually, that's pretty clear. If I if I could if I could back up a little bit, not and I'm I'm here to
not muddy the water, so I'll try not to. Um, previously our cannabis zoning ordinance stated the same thing. >> That's the special permits would be non-ransferable, non-assignable. That section of our ordinance got thrown out. >> So that that hurdle doesn't exist
anymore. That's gone. However, the special permit, which is a lifelong document, >> uh, still says it. So, you all have to decide whether or not you wanted to not say that. >> Okay. And under normal circumstances, this would go to um I don't have any
problem changing that, but I I do on the floor. If um it would go to rules and ordinance where we would discuss this. >> No. >> No. >> Okay. Thank you. >> No, you you were the special you were the special permit granting authority. >> Okay. >> So, they're back before you.
>> Okay. >> To revise a special permit. The planning board does this all the time, by the way. This is not extraordinary circumstances. People revise these special permits frequently. >> It's just not this big of a deal. >> And then just to go back to what the
click um I understand we had long conversations um about this to repeat that originally the click is there to make sure that what we're doing in our city is safe and that they're vetting people and they're vetting finances. Um, I'm
hearing that they had already gone through that, but the new own, this is something that I I'll wait to hear everything at the end because I want to hear about have the new owners been through the same vetting process. Um, just to be sure we're making sure
who we know who's coming into our city. And just to state for clarity, everybody knows I am a big I am for having cannabis shops in our city. Um, I am not trying to hold things up. I just want to make sure they're fair and going through the same process and that they're vetted. >> And if I can speak to that because I
think it's important to your conversation tonight. >> The the click is going to go through that process. We have to because at the moment the rules which govern the click >> um chapter six of our ordinances also state that a license which you you're
not here to speak about tonight, the license is not transferable. So that's something that CLE has to deal with. Now, I'm a member of the CLE and we're going to have a meeting tonight and we're going to discuss that. So, I don't really feel comfortable about telling you what's going to >> what how that discussion is going to go.
But what I can tell you is is that we are keenly aware of the fact that our process needs to be reviewed and at some point changed by all of you through our ordinances to make sure that we have a process in place and it's something that's repeatable down the road. Because
let's face it, >> the odds of this happening again are probably pretty good. >> Okay. And so no matter what happens tonight, you're still going to review it >> tomorrow in the click. >> We're not going to review them tomorrow night at the click. We're going we're
going to discuss the necessity to do so. >> And as I previously mentioned, the mayor's office will also need to >> revisit their host community agreement. and I'm not I'll let him speak to that. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yep. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Colon Hayes.
Um Councelor Omali, >> um so I was watching remotely. Um do you have a hard copy of the of the slides that you presented? >> We can actually send it to >> for I mean ideally for now. Thank you. And then if you could send a digital
copy to the clerk for the public record that would be helpful. Um I I did have a question about um why >> here when we call the role >> why we're here tonight. Um because I know the process is usually click special permit and then the community
host agreement. So why not go to the click first and I guess it's in in I who advised this process versus going to the click first. I that would be both to to both the applicant and I guess the staff.
>> Sure. So, as far as the process went, when you're speaking to when we first opened up applications for retail marijuana locations, uh it certainly was different. It was first an application through the click and that was an open competitive process amongst a bunch of,
you know, people that applied for those for those licenses and then through the vetting of the click they were sent forward. We we we called it moving them forward where they got into their zoning process. That really wasn't the end of the click's involvement. When they went
through their zoning process and their special permitting process, the click was still the body. We were sort of the point man when it came to the state licensing process, the state cannabis commission, which ultimately is the licensing authority over these places. Uh we were the people that were in
communication with them saying yes, they've received their zoning approval. uh yes they've received their building permit, yes they've received their certificate of occupancy. So the click oversight was really ongoing whereas the special permitting process was a a moment in time and then the licensing
when you get towards the end was to a certain degree of formality because the state had already gone through their entire process. We really can't compare the initial licensing process to new candidates to an existing location that is done
sitting there has a certain occupancy and a provisional license from the state. So when uh attorney DeMarco came to me to say we want to you know move the ownership around or I forget how he
exactly described it. Uh the first impediment that I saw was well your special permit doesn't allow that. So like most things let's get the zoning taken care of first and get the licensing take care taken care of after you have the authority through zoning to
move forward. If someone wants to come build a restaurant in the city and they want a liquor license, we don't send them to the liquor board until they have their zoning in place, special permit, variance, whatever is they need. and we communicate with the liquor licensing board and they say are they good to go
and I say yeah they're good to go and then they go through their licensing process. >> Yeah. I the only reason being is the this particular industry I think that we were we were hoping to have the expertise in the vetting of the click.
Um, and I think that that would be helpful for the city council as a special per permit granting authority to have had that information tonight because I feel like tonight there's a lot more questions than answers and um I don't
think that the petitioner benefits from that ambiguity. I think that I personally would have preferred this go to the click first to vet the potential new owner and then we would be showing that we did our due diligence and I
would be more comfortable making that designation of removing this this condition whereas it feels like we're kind of doing that a little bit blind um without the without the availability of the cl expertise to kind of look at the financials and do the background check
that we depend on. Um the the other question is more procedural and in scheduling. Why is this on this agenda tonight? Because we're this is the last agenda before we go on recess and it just doesn't seem like it's a great time to have this conversation. Why was this scheduled tonight? Like and I guess that
would also be to the petitioner like why hasn't this why wasn't this scheduled earlier when we maybe could have tabled it uh and had like follow-up conversations over over a couple weeks if need if needed? Like whose call decision was that? I guess
>> if anyone >> I don't make the schedule for the city council. I don't know. >> Do you want to address that? >> I Yeah, I I think it's just the way that the schedule came about when by the time we got the petition from the petitioner. I spoke with Michelle Romero, attorney
DeMarco, and just we have to post it for two weeks in the paper. And so just the way the timetable worked itself out, this was this was the meeting. >> You know, I I just I I feel if I and I I appreciate it, counselor s I'm I promise
you I'm almost done. I just I I kind of feel like when these when situations like this come about, it kind of feels like we're being a lot of pressure is being put on us to not do adequate due diligence. And I just personally don't
appreciate that. I don't know how we got here. It sounds like it maybe was a collective situation that got us here tonight. Um, but I would have appreciated a little bit more time to consider this and information before us. Um, and I mean I
I don't think this is this is in a in a vacuum. I mean, you know, we have been talking about beneath the Lent. You know, that whole thing has been crazy and this exact topic has been brought up a lot in an attempt to try to prevent
benevolent to move forward. And so I'm I just I know we're setting precedent tonight and I I think that we need to make sure that we're doing our due diligence across the board. And I don't want it to appear as though the city is treating different applicants
differently. And this is not a this is not a this is not a criticism of of the petitioners by any mean. Um but as a city, you know, we are subject to a lot of litigation when it comes to this. And I really think that the way this has
come before us tonight does not put us on the strongest footing to show that we're really doing our due diligence and treating people fairly. Um so I'm that's just my feeling tonight. I'm just trying to be honest. Um, I don't know where I'm going to end up on this. Um, but yeah, I
would have appreciated a little bit time to consider this. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Ali. Councelor Simelli, I'm going to go to someone who hasn't had a chance to speak yet. I know you've already had a chance to speak to this. Um, councelor Sika. >> Thank you, Council President. Council
Orali, really quickly. So, you think that we shouldn't be here tonight to vote for a re to revise a special permit because we haven't heard from the click yet on a
vetting process. So, why would we why would the clerk waste their time on a vetting process, which I'm sure is not just one meeting. It's probably a course of several. How how long does it take to vet an applicant? Would you say, Nelson?
>> Uh they they were all somewhat different. Um some were quicker than others, but yeah, it's usually more than one meeting. >> So, we're going to make the click meet to vet this applicant before we revise the special permit that we put in place
with a condition that says it's non-ransferable. They they currently still have this special permit. It's not that's not going to change. The only thing that is going to change tonight is we're going to allow the click to vet the new applicant to join
the team that's already been established. I I think this is 1,000% the way it should be done because if not, we're wasting the clicks time and we're wasting the mayor and whoever
else does the community host agreement's time. Why would they move forward with any of that if we don't revise the special permit? The point would be mute. >> Oh, yes. Sorry about that. >> I'm just trying to think. I'm not trying to attack you or anything. And and I
would ask from a decorum perspective if you could speak to the chair just so it's not it's not so adversarial. You're being great. I'm not saying it but just in case. >> Clearly I'm not. If you want me to speak to the chair. >> No. Well, I just I would say that um the
same thing could be said about us. Why waste our time if the clerk is not going to approve them? and and the the whole structure was to go through the click first to vet the applicants. And I'm not
saying that they need to go through the same rigorous process that the first time applicants went through, but a basic due diligence of a background check and financials I I think would be behoove us before we before we agree to
transfer the permit to anyone. So, what if I'm just throwing this out there, Nelson, if we revised the special permit this evening to allow the click
to vet the applicant, you do that, then it goes to the mayor for the community host, then it goes to the cannabis. Tell me the process. >> Yeah. So then >> could we make it a could we make it a condition or whatever that it comes back
before us when that's all done and then we revote on an updated SP I mean I I don't understand what I don't understand what benefits we would get from the
click vetting this person today tomorrow before we do this vote. I I think I >> I'd like to hear Nelson actually answer that. Do you mind thinking this? >> Can Can I actually would like to hear >> that process if you don't mind just laying that out? I think it would be helpful for us to hear that.
>> Yes. So, as I said, uh and in a memo that you all received today, hopefully you all received it. uh the processes that need to change when it comes to the click and when it comes to the host community agreement, some of those still need to be figured out and there's some ordinances that may
have to change with that. So, as far as what exactly does the collect uh process look like, I I'm I really don't feel comfortable answering that because I'm I don't I can't 100% 100% say what that process will be. But I can tell you that they will have to go back through the
click for that vetting that we did with everybody else. And they will have to go back to the mayor for the host community agreement. And maybe that agreement looks exactly like it does now. I don't know. That's that's up to them to figure out. But both of those processes will
still need to take place. And to speak a little bit about the process for the new applicants back when we started retail marijuana as opposed to now, this isn't really all that much different. When when new applicants came back when we first opened up the application process,
their first step was zoning compliance. Their first step was to come to me with their proposed location. And when they got their compliance for zoning that their location fit or they found out what their uh speed bumps were, well
then they moved on to the click. That's not that much different than what we're doing now. We're getting zoning compliance taken care of, which is the city council. It's the special permit. And then once their zoning compliance is in order, they can move on to the rest of the process. click approval, HCA
state, and we can't forget the states involved in this, and the cannabis commission uh looks to us as a city to provide them the information that they need to ultimately issue a license. This location already has a provisional license, so they're right at the finish
line of um being able to open up. >> Can I still have the floor? >> Yes, of course. Thank you. So, so Nelson, so the process that we're trying to do this evening is not allowing this applicant
to bypass the vetting process in this process. Th this is just we're we're here tonight to say yes, we're going to revise the special permit that we granted with the condition that the
license non be transferable. >> Correct. Okay. The state allows licenses to be transferable. So, we should allow the licenses >> to to try to draw a comparison if it makes it easier. Uh, FACES has special
permits which allows them to operate, allows them to brew beer, allows them to sell alcohol. They're not restricted to the Martini family. They are assigned to the property. So, if
uh Bron Hogan went and bought faces next week, he would get along with that building all those special permits to go with it. However, >> he would still have to go through his licensing process to get his liquor licenses to sell alcohol and to brew
beer, which could be denied if, you know, we found out Ron was part of the mafia. So by us removing >> which is >> so by us which is possible >> so by us removing this one condition of this special permit it doesn't eliminate
the special permit of the building. It only eliminates the condition that it cannot be transferred. >> It it changes special permit to be assigned to the property as opposed to a particular owner just like every other special permit. And the new applicant that is going on with the others that
have already been on this application since day one is going to be fully vetted through the click. It's not being bypassed in any way, shape, or form. I I I know that I keep saying this, but this is I think what
the confusion is in in this whole the emails that I've received, the stuff that I've seen online. It it all made it seem like we were totally removing the process, bypassing the vetting process, and just
allowing them to change an applicant on their application. That is not what is happening here. Those other processes will still take place. >> Will still take place as soon as we vote to remove the condition from the special permit
>> and we figure some of those processes out. >> And you have a meeting tomorrow at 5:00 p.m. because at one point you said tonight. >> We do. >> Okay. I just want to make sure. >> I just don't want to I don't want to commit to what's going to come out of that meeting. That's all. >> I I don't want to see anywhere that we
had a special meeting tonight that was not posted because at one point you did say this evening. So, I just want to make sure we're all on the same page. Yeah. And with that, council president, when ready, I make a motion that we revise the special permit to eliminate
the condition of not to transfer. >> We have not even opened the hearing yet, but I have made a note of your motion. Thank you, councelor >> Zika. We've been listening to this so long I didn't realize. >> Yeah, we have a lot of lights still on. I'm going to go to councelor Winslow next. So Nelson, so just in terms of
building permits, doesn't have to be a special permit. So some when someone comes in to the building department and applies for a building permit and you issue it, they have two years to start work. If they
don't stop that work, >> keep keep going. >> Oh, it's one year. So is is it So how much time do they have to start? They have six months to start work, >> right? So if they don't start work in six months that permit evaporates right basically without unless they get an
>> it can it can >> right. So in this instance did when the council approved a special permit did they initiate work within 6 months? >> It's not the same rule for a special permit. >> Oh okay within the rule for a special permit. >> So they it's within a year
>> within a year. >> And to further >> to further confuse that have one. Thank you. their special permits got issued at a time when state uh permit extension act was in place which extended them beyond those expiration things. So they never landed in a period where they were expiring.
>> So I mean I did look at the you know the permits you know the building permit um database and there's a heck of a lot of work that's been done out there. Lots of lots and lots of permits. So I mean I there's this is literally I mean when you see the pictures up there they are literally you know really and with the
certificate occupancy they're basically ready to open the door. It's just figuring out how to make the business model work at this point. So so but basically they they did all their diligence in working to get the building ready to be opened as a marijuana
establishment. So it's just that other things have not you know happened to actually them open up their doors or whatever. So they're figing that out. >> Correct. So all right. So yeah, that was only my only question. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Wow. Councelor McDonald.
>> Yeah. Thank you, Chair. Um, I just had a few questions to the to the building commissioner Nelson. Is there any reason that we couldn't make a change to this permit contingent on the Klex approval of the new operator?
You can you can add anything you want as a condition to a special permit. >> Um I just think that's something for us to consider so it would make it clear that that >> I'd be more sorry I'd be more comfortable with Ally answering that question. >> I'm just looking to see if there's a way
to make it clear that we are in fact going to be relying on the cl judgment >> regardless. >> What's your question again? Alicia McNeil, city solicitor. >> Thanks Ally. Uh my question was, is there any reason we can't say that we can't consider a change to this permit
to the new operator and have that change be contingent upon that operator's approval for a license by the CLA? >> I believe you can make whatever condition you want to on the special permit. >> Okay. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. >> Um I had a question for attorney Demarco. Is that okay? >> Yes, of course. Um, I just wanted to
understand more about the restructuring of the finance and you had made a comment that if there had been a separate LLC for this location, we wouldn't be here. Is this a separate LLC for this location or is this an existing LLC? >> Separate.
>> It's a separate LLC for this location. >> This will be a separate company. >> Uhhuh. >> That is licensed for this. And the reason I say that is back to what was said. your job is really about the
property, the vetting. To to Counciloman Malie's point, I I understand the concern about wanting to vet people, but you can make a condition to a special permit. You go we go into licensing and licensing says, "Well, you get a condition on your special permit, but the special permit has already told us
not to be able to go forward." My client is not abandoning their special permit. They're not abandoning their license. they are asking you for permission to change them so that they can bring in financial partners. So that's that's
very vastly different and the clerk will deal with that. The city and the mayor's office will deal with that. Your job is to deal with whether or not this change fundamentally changes the use of the property in such a way that we shouldn't be allowed to do it. And the answer to
that is absolutely not. There is nothing that's changing. You still have your 20 conditions. You still have your ability to control what how the property is used. None of that is changing. Who operates just as Mr. Miller said is
about the click. That's the license, the use, the zoning. We need approval from you so that we can then walk into the click. And this was logical in our view. Talk to you first. Get the transfer able
to be done. We'll go to the clerk. We'll go to the mayor's office. We'll get those things done. Now, if the clerk turns around and says we hate them, I don't think they will. Obviously, I wouldn't be here. But if they say we hate them, guess what? We still have a special permit, right? I mean, we're still moving
forward. These are great partners. We're going to have we're going to build one of the best businesses in Malden, but you need to allow us to do that. And we have a vested right in this property. We have a lease. We have rights in the
property. If you say no, my client will go forward, but you will have interfered with his business. >> Well, mostly I just wanted to make sure that we're not if we approve this, we're not going to be back here again in a year amending future special permits. >> And and Mr. Counselor, you could
>> counselor is fine, >> but you could be right. As Mr. Miller said, special permits get amended all the time. Businesses change. You got through the initial startup of a new type of business. You did a great job in my view. You've had hiccups. The court
had its opinion on the botanical case. But at the end of the day, Malden's been benefiting from cannabis coming to the city. Now those businesses evolve to the next step when they want to make business deals. So we need to come to you because you have restrictions there.
This is very simple. Is this going to change the property's use? The answer to that is no. Who does the work there? The licensed person, that's up to the next board. Each piece has been separated. The relationship with the city between that
operator and the city is the mayor's office. Right? Everybody has their piece of the puzzle. I want to urge you not to overstep your piece. I want to work together, but this is really about the use of the property, and it's got to be
fixed to the use of the property. Thank you. >> I just had one other I just wanted to make sure I understood a clarification of this. So, as the as the original owners are still maintaining an equity stake in this >> Yes. >> in in the new company. >> Yes. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. And we'll go over that structure. We'll be talking to CCC and all of that. >> Okay. Well, thank you for that. I mean, I I look forward to hearing the public hearing. My general opinion is that we have been we have made it far too hard to open cannabis businesses in Malden. So I look forward to further
conversation. Thank you for those clarifications. >> Thank you, Councelor McDonald. So I have councelor Crowe and councelor Condan. Everybody else whose light is on has already spoken at least one time. I just want to say we have not started the public hearing yet. So I'm going to ask folks who haven't who have already
spoken once, please think about whether you need to speak again before we let the public have a say. Councelor Crow, you have the floor. >> Thank you. And um since I heard a couple weeks ago this was going to be on there. I've spoken to multiple people on all ends of this um and um and so I think
you know what Mr. Miller and you know Ally have we've had these discussions is really that the special permit does go with the property. So this is a unique thing I think again because we were brand new to this. So, I do think if we're going to keep things in line with
special permits, we really need to look at it that this is substantially separate than any other special permit that's um allowed by the the planning board or or or this body. So, I think that needs to be taken into account that it is but I do agree with Council
McDonald. I think Council Lang just said the same thing to me. it is making some contingent on the the successful vetting of the um of the click you know with with some of the new and in structure that has I would think that would be the
same way for as you said you know faces someone's getting their um license they're going through a different different processes but I think I do think it it is the right step because they're not going to be going through this process as if there's nothing to be going through so I do think this is the
the proper way to to begin. And I think um again, I've talked to lots of people on this on this subject, and I think keeping in line with the way other special permits get amended is probably the right way to go. >> Thank you, Councelor Crow. Councelor
Condan. >> Thank you, Council President. Um I think this is a way to get people in here for business. we uh haven't been very good at it at times. So, it's I feel comfortable they're going to be vetted,
you know, I feel comfortable the the click click will be involved and uh I think they'll be successful. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Condan. Councelor Simmonelli.
>> Thank you, Madam President. I know it's the second time and I I apologize. Listen, I'm not too sure what's even going on here tonight. I I I think that what's being asked of us is for us to move forward on
our part of the process so that these folks may move forward into going before the collect board and the host agreement with the mayor. But they can't do that. Uh correct me if I'm wrong. We can't do that until we've done our due
diligence on our end to make that process available. And I just want to go a little further by saying like, you know, as far as vetting goes and everything else, I don't know if everybody's been asleep here for the last 3 years or 5 years that I've been up here, but we've already have dealt
with attorney Demarco and his clients, and we know what type of people they are. And I don't think that's asking for a lot that they want to like bring somebody on board. financially to help them be more successful. I think
if nothing has taught us here and you know maybe our city solicitor's office can talk more about this but you know I think we've already been spanked already if I'm not mistaken on the u restrictions that we've put on prior to
this. So I I really don't know what we're doing here tonight and I don't know if it's grandstanding on some folks. I hope not. But I think they're making this bigger than what it is. And it really bothers me to see this
tonight. It's the last meeting uh before we break for summer recess. A lot of us have a lot of Fourth of July stuff to do. Thank you, Council Seeker, for helping me with mine. Uh and those are the things that we should be working on right now. I I I got to be honest, man. I'm appalled of the fact that we're
sitting up here with this type of delay. You know, I'm looking out in the audience and I see so many confident people out here that are going to be hearing these issues uh with these folks that are seeking licenses. same group of people will sit up here
and say for the last five years, correct me if I'm wrong, how we need all this revenue and we're hurting for revenue. But we're going to sit up here and we're going to delay this process because they want to take on they're not changing anything as
far as the special permit conditions are concerned. Just asking to take on another responsible financial partner to help make this work. So again, I mean, if I'm wrong, I'm
wrong. And I apologize, Madam President, for taking up this time, but I do have to speak my peace here tonight. And I I and I am appalled of the fact that, you know, we're sitting up here and next week we'll be saying how we need these places to open up so we can
bring in more revenue. Get it together, folks. Choose a side and stick to it. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councelor Simmonelli. Councelor Omali. >> Um, is there any representative of
Charles Street realy trust 2020 here? >> Uh, we've he is not here. He had uh I've spoken with um with Mr. Spinny. He is well aware. He had actually met with council for these uh partners previously. Um and he was going to send
in a letter, but uh Ed gets a little busy at times. So, um, you know, we'll we'll have them at the vetting, but there is absolutely we we've complied with the lease, been good tenants, vast improvement on the property. So, um, I
think that, uh, as far as the use of the property, it would benefit his property to have a special permit that attaches to the property versus the the, uh, particular tenant. Well, that's one of the reasons why I was asking if they were here because this is not just
vetting the the operators. It's also vetting whether or not the property owners are are are qualified to have this type of special permit. Um, >> you've done that already, counselor. >> It's it currently the special permit is for the operator. But but it but that
was together that this as a special permit you vetted the property and you've made a decision that that property fits the parameters the city wants and I understand the
attachment but it was still going to be this person operating this place. >> Understood. And then and then you called it a joint venture. Is is DMS Trinity LLC cuz I feel like I have to do the Klex job right now, which is what is
annoying me. Um, is DMS Trinity LLC a member of Beach House Cannabis LLC? I I the ownership structure of Beach House will involve the owners of DMS. I'm not
going to go further than that because I find that it's improper to get into click issues in front of the city council. Those are two different pieces and I'd really like to stick to the issues that are are with us and I'm prepared to present at the when we
finally get the hearing open. >> Yeah. And two last questions. Is there an operating agreement that that's already been >> There is an agreement in place that we have that has been signed between the parties. The operating agreement of Beach House has um Yes, there is an
operating agreement for Beach House. I mean, that's every LLC needs a operating agreement. >> And who's the managing member? >> Uh I'm the the public knowledge on the website is the way it works. Casey is going to be running the uh that LLC and
Dennis Pony will be also operating the managing the company. So, these two individuals are here. They are going to be a partner with us, but we're going to discuss that with the collect. >> Understood. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Ali. Mr. Hogan, did you have something to add? >> Yeah. Can I can I just clarify? I know
Nelson mentioned early on, but I think it got lost a little bit in the discussion that uh currently the ordinance that dictates the responsibilities and the powers of the Cannabis Licensing Enforcement Commission doesn't allow us to transfer this license. So, I know there's a lot of discussion about and council, you
just mentioned you were annoyed that it hadn't come before the, you know, the collect first. Well, they they can't. We don't have the power without you amending the ordinance to allow a license to be transferred in addition to removing this piece of the special permit there. There is no process for this because it's not allowed by
ordinance. So, two things need to happen in addition to the host community agreement. ordinance needs to be amended and then a process needs to be defined under which a transfer happens and what the vetting process is and what have you. So the the challenge with this processes there was three different
places that you could start host community agreement special permit or cannabis commission and all of them had their flaws to it because each one of them was going to be dependent upon something else. So, but but I want to be clear. It would not be appropriate for the cannabis commission to have this
transfer before it when by ordinance licenses aren't allowed to be transferred. So, in addition to doing what you're doing with the special permit, you would have to amend that ordinance to to allow for the transfer to license and whatever else you might dictate in that ordinance in terms of
the process to be followed forward. So I I just feel like that got lost a little bit because there was a lot of talk about, you know, if we were to have somebody before us and send them back to this body when the ordinance says we shouldn't be doing that. That's also a problem. So the ordinance has to be amended also. I I'm sorry to add one
more step to it, but it's really very clear. It doesn't allow us to transfer it. So thank you. >> Thank you. Is everybody clear on that? Any further questions before we open the hearing? Okay, great. At this time, I will
declare the public hearing open. Anyone wishing to speak in favor of this petition, please come forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Good evening. My name is Roberto DeMarco. I reside at 17 Division Street
in Malden. I operate a law firm at 350 Main Street, Malden, Third Floor. I speak in favor. Um, I depend upon this testimony I've previously given to you. I will add to that that there is nothing
within this request to your board, your committee that will uh create any further burden on the city and will not change the rights that the city has to
enforce the obligations of whoever is operating that um cannabis license. So when that location becomes operable, the same 20 conditions plus any that you might add tonight will be um will carry
through. I would ask that you vote accordingly. Once again, I reserve my right as to the legal issues raised by the memo brought in by um one of the people in opposition. I request that I be allowed to answer those when they are raised if they are presented to you in
full instead of just depending on the written record. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Anyone else wishing to speak in favor? Do we have anything we need to read? to read those in full.
>> I'd rather just say they're attached to the history of the paper then. Okay. Okay. Hearing none and seeing none, I will declare that portion of the hearing closed. Anyone wishing to speak in opposition to the petition, please come forward and state your name and address for the record.
>> Good evening, Madam Chair. My name is attorney Blake Mening. I'm with Cable Fleer and Sussy, which is a cannabis law firm based out of Northampton, 90 Con Street. Uh, so there's been a bunch of statements here that are completely unsupported by the public record.
uh building commissioner Miller stated that the special permit is valid by operation of the construction that happened after its issuance. The letter from the city council that says you've been awarded a special permit contains very clear instructions on what the applicant is supposed to do after they
get it. And unless the applicant here can show us the book and page where any of those special permits were recorded, there's nothing to assign. I also just want to say I couldn't be more pro cannabis. I've been a cannabis attorney for years. I've owned multiple cannabis dispensaries. I think it's a delightful
plant. So, I'm not anti- anyone, but I am process. And MGL chapter 4A section 11 says on its face, a special permit takes no legal force in effect unless it's recorded. So, you cannot just declare that a special permit took legal
effect without following the statute that governs it. No one's addressed that. So, in the absence of a book and page of any of those special permits of the extension being recorded, you don't have the legal power to extend or amend anything it never took legal force. Um, in addition, there's a timeline
under chapter 48 section 9 that says you have to have, you know, substantial use commenced predicated on a validly recorded special permit. So, the fact they built it out is a mistake by the building commissioner, not the applicant, not the city, just the building commissioner. So, what he should have done before issuing that
first building permit was check that it was recorded. That's not new. Um, there's been talk there's a term of art here calling uh a special permit typically runs with the land. It runs with the land precisely because you can go to the registry of deeds and see where it was recorded. That's when you
can buy that right. Until it's recorded, there is no right. So, we can't ignore chapter 4A because other things have happened in the city. Uh, Beach House has never gone through click as we know. I think there would be a permissible avenue to condition the amendment of a
invalid not you know legally enforced permit if you wanted to go that route to say KLE had to go first um you know the entity and the folks that made up DMS Trinity that went before KLEC is not the same entity that sits there today uh there's an independent obligation uh
that starts when the provisional license is issued by the cannabis control commission that you have to go through changes of ownership and control to change your cap table. The slides from the collect presentation by DMS Trinity shows a bunch of people who aren't involved in the entity anymore. I think
the CCC is going to have an issue with that because they already changed control. That seems to have happened after the provisional license was issued. We have the third amended uh operating agreement that came in that differs
substantially from the humans that were vetted by click. Um, I think also the fact that the the click vetted an original group and said you met the financial standards and then clearly they didn't by seeking financial and operational partners, I think is an indictment of the KLEX's original
process. So, there's been a couple statements that this is not a big ask and that they're being very transparent. Yeah, they are being very transparent. They're being very transparent that they want their own set of rules to apply to them. there's this prescribed set of processes in order that has to happen by an ordinance that the land court case
and benevolent botanicals didn't touch. So the reliance on that case to say let's circumvent the zoning law, it didn't touch the general's ordinance on cannabis or the clerk's approval of power or its role in this process because explicitly the land court judge said we can only touch zoning
ordinances. So the citation of that case is a red herring. That's not that's not a real argument. Uh, in addition, the HCA specifically says you have to let the city know if you're going to have a change of ownership. They've already consummated a change of ownership. They violated their their host community agreement. Uh, Mr.
Hogan from the collect said that they couldn't have gone to the state. He doesn't know what he's talking about. That's simply incorrect. The CCC should have been involved in this process already. I have an outstanding public records request pending with the commission's record access officer to provide me with a copy of any change of
control application. My suspicion is it hasn't been filed yet. This is ultimately what happens when you use attorneys who might be locally known but don't do cannabis all day every day. I've lived and breathed these regulations since 2017 when they were first put on paper. They're not being followed here. Nor are the city's
ordinances that are in place being followed here. Um I also think the addendum very grossly misrepresents the public record. Uh there's a factual claim that the click has approved this new applicant and that the HCA is already in place. The HCA is in place
with an entity that had different human beings on the cap table than sit there today. So this applicant doesn't seem to think that the city rules apply to them and they very clearly don't seem to think that the state CCC regulations apply to them. So what you'd be doing by granting this quote unquote simple
amendment is to ignore that 40A section 11 wasn't followed. That's a that's that's a very simple statute. It just says it has to be recorded to take effect. How are we glossing over that? Where's the argument? Where's the book and page? Show me at the registry where it's recorded and I'll sit down and go
home. Uh I also think there's an incredibly uh uh big issue with the notification provisions in the host community agreement saying you come to the city to amend that host community agreement before you make a change of control. Every single thing they've done in this record that I've reviewed has
been out of order. And what they're trying to do, I think, is get to you before you go on vacation and relying on some other, you know, city issues that happened with benevolent botanicals, which really isn't relevant. The general ordinance stands. You can't ignore the click's role. Why would they think that
the click should come after the special permit? And again, I don't know how you answer the question of what what special permit when it wasn't recorded. Um, right. I I mean, again, just if you look at the the the public records of who's on Beach House, I think you noticed uh
Attorney DeMarco's evasive answer about who's on the cap table. He actually misrepresented something to you tonight. He said that Dennis uh uh was on the the Secretary of State's records that he'd be one of the business owners. Well, here's the record here from the Secretary of State. It only lists Paul
Ferazzi and Casey Baker. This is a public record. I can verify everything that I put in my letter with a citation to a direct publicly available source. Every other representation and every bit of frustration is misplaced.
You have to follow the law whether you like to or not. And if if you do go ahead and amend a special permit that's not currently in force, uh I think there's a very strong likelihood that people will appeal it. Uh again, back to that notice when you when the first special permit was issued, you have to get a certificate from the city clerk
saying no one no one appealed it. so you can have it recorded at the registry. The applicant didn't do that. We can't jump out of order now just because they got, I think, very bad and incorrect advice from building commissioner Miller as well as their attorney. Uh, if you
have any questions, I'm happy to answer them. >> I think we should proceed. Well, I was going to say I'd rather proceed with the hearing and then we can take questions at the end, but thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. >> Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? >> Good evening, council. My name is Eric
Gath. I own and operate Misty Mountain Shop located at 323 Commercial Street, uh, one of Malden's licensed cannabis dispensaries. Um, attorney Blake Mening has submitted a detailed, uh, legal me memo and he
also just spoke for you. I won't repeat his arguments. I'm just here to speak what I saw firsthand. I went through this exact process and I want you to understand what this petition is really asking you to undo. When I applied this, the click didn't
just approve a location. It vetted me. My application ran over 600 pages, a business plan, standard operating procedures, the resumes of my operations team, and financials proving I could actually build and run Misti. The click
vets people, their experience, their finances, their character, and their commitment to Malden. That competitive vetting is the entire foundation of how a cannabis license happens in the city. DMS Trinity went through that same
vetting and they won it on the strength of who they were. The city was told about The city was told this was a woman-owned business led by Mary Susan Blout with minority and LGBTQ members in a survivor of the Boston Marathon bombing.
They committed $800,000 of their own money and made promises about hiring, scholarships, and supporting addiction services. This is the application the city approved. But that is not what stands before you tonight. The state provisional license issued in December
lists Dennis Panon Dos Santos as 90.5% owner with no one else named. And now they want to hand everything over to Beach House Cannabis. A new entity run by people the CLE has never vetted.
The equity, the local ownership, and the people who earn this, they don't transfer with the assets, and they're not even listed as owners on the Secretary of State website. The city has already said no to this.
When DMS Trinity applied to transfer the permit to Beach House, your own building commissioner, Nelson Miller, denied it because the special permit is non-transferable. So, they've come back with a new request. Delete the condition that stopped them so the transfer can go
through. They're asking you to remove the one rule that blocks us in order to allow the very thing that rule exists to prevent. And that condition isn't yours to wave because the ordinance makes it mandatory on every cannabis permit.
I suspect the real reason this is being rushed is the benev benevolent botanical's decision, a belief that it opened a loophole. It did not. The judge struck the zoning section 1212190 in its entirety.
But the reason for that was the buffer zones are too restrictive. Not that it's non-transferable. Nothing to do with who may hold the license. She didn't touch 6870, the licensing ordinance that creates the click and governs who qualifies.
That framework is fully intact. The right response to a struck zoning section is for this council to revise it properly as the rules and ordinance committee committee is already doing not to rush an unvetted transfer through
a side door while everyone waits to see what the new rules say. The cluck itself doesn't even take this matter up until tomorrow. If Beach House Cannabis wants to operate in Malden, they should do exactly what DMS Trinity and the rest of us did.
Apply to this. apply to the clerk, sit for an interview, then earn their own new special permit, sign their own new host community agreement. That process applied to all of us, and it should apply to them.
For these reasons, and for the reasons in Attorney Mening's memo, I respectfully ask the council to deny this pet uh petition. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition to
the petition tonight? Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition? Clerk, can you summarize what we received by Oh, so sorry. >> Yeah. Hi, I'm Christopher Dreer um uh from Molden at Mountain A. Um I'll be
brief. I know that the state has permitted um cannabis dispensaries um and Malden has uh a supportive business model for cannabis dispensaries.
Um I draw a distinction with the dispensary model and its benefit to the community. Um, I I personally don't agree with the use of
um marijuana as a beneficial product for the community. Um, and I think that the distinction with marijuana and hemp, it well, it's both cannabis sativa, I think, um, under the
2018 Farm Bill, hemp is a legal product to be considered cultivated um under federal legislation and recreational use of hemp is very minimal. Um although there is CBD oil
that can be cultivated. Um I just I I just don't see it as a benefit to the community. Um that's just basically what I'm trying to say. Even though there's tax revenue that can be generated, it's >> Are you opposing this specific petition that we're hearing tonight? >> Yes. and others that would be related.
Yes. >> Okay. I just want to make sure you're clear that the pet the hearing tonight is specifically about this petition, this location, not cannabis in general. >> Both. Yes. I think it shouldn't be in this community. >> Thanks.
>> Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition to this petition? Come on up to the podium. >> Name name and address for the record. I'd like to apologize for my parents. I understand this isn't um the best look to come in and speak in front of people
like y'all. >> That's no problem. >> Uh I apologize for that. I'm very sorry. I'm uh new to this community and I just want to say that this guy right here, Paul, you ain't looked up or listened to not nor one person who was sitting here. You've been looking down and I don't
know why you don't take people in this community seriously. I've heard about you and I know what you do. I'll see you. >> I'll see you. >> Okay.
>> You okay? >> Okay, folks. Sorry about that. >> Yeah. I I just want to make sure we have a summary of what was sent in by email. Um because there are some things that we're going to attach to the agenda as well. Everything that we everything that was sent in through email has been expressed verbally by the members of the
community that are here tonight. >> Okay. >> How many? >> Three. >> We had two that were in opposition and that one was um in favor and they were from attorney Demco, attorney Mening and Mr. Gath of Misty Mountain. The same
people that we heard from speak directly tonight. Almost exactly what they said in their letters. >> Okay. Thank you. And the letters are attached to the history of those papers for public viewing. >> Okay, great. So for anyone watching that's click through the agenda, you can see all those attached to this item. Thank you.
Okay, so seeing no one else wishing to speak in favor or in opposition, I will declare that final portion of the hearing closed. We can now move into council deliberation, including hearing from our city staff if folks have questions. So let me shut off the podium
microphone so the audio comes back a little better. I would listen to them first. >> Do folks want to respond to any of the comments that came in before we move into counsel or questions. >> Could you Oh, I'm so sorry. I did just turn that off. Could you actually just I
need to >> I just want to clarify. So, um, I got up an address to council earlier and I think council me, you know, one of your points about why we hadn't come before the, um, cannabis the local cannabis licensing commission and and I explained that because the ordinance doesn't allow
us to do that, you know, which is that that's specifically the reason why, you know, we we weren't in a position to have them start with us. So, I know it was represented by the attorney that I quote unquote didn't know what I was talking about and mentioned that I was referring to the state. It was clear that I was referring to the multiple
references here to this entity starting with the local cannabis licensing and enforcement commission and the fact that the ordinance doesn't allow that. So I know it was clear to you all but to anybody listening from home. Again, they could not have come before us because the local ordinance doesn't allow them
to. I don't speak for the state. I do speak for the Cannabis Licing Enforcement Commission locally and that's what I was speaking to. So thank you. >> Thank you, Ron. Commissioner Miller, did you also want to respond? Yes, in regards to the uh special permit being valid, I think I said this earlier, I didn't give much detail to
it, I don't think, but uh it was not recorded. However, there is state uh case law and there's a lot of it and there's recent CA case law that people who are familiar with zoning are very familiar with McDermott versus City of Melrose that
states that if the special permit was lawfully granted, if it wasn't appealed and if construction or use has has commenced, then all the rights are vested. That does not mean it shouldn't be recorded. Attorney Demarco should certainly re make sure it's uh recorded, but all those things took place and
there's no issue with the special permit. >> Thank you, Michelle. Ally, did you have any other pieces to respond? >> I'll just echo what what um building commissioner Miller said is that the uh special permit is a valid permit. Uh
there is case law which I believe I provided to the city council just for your information that states that it is valid and again it should be recorded but the fact that it is not recorded does not mean that it is fatal fatal
rather because they have started construction and again as I believe um somebody said I also provided you in my memo uh the I believe it was commissioner Miller that there was a um
an amendment made where the permit was extended permits were extended for an additional two years. Um so based on that the permit that the special permit that was issued in 2022 actually did not
expire until 2025. >> And I'm sorry I just want to make sure did everybody get a copy of that memo from the city solicitor this afternoon? It was emailed to the full council. Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you so much.
>> One more. >> Okay. >> Hi, Michelle Romero, city planner. Thank you. I just wanted to um note you should have also received a copy of the planning board report and recommendation just to make sure you're considering
that as part of the public record as well. I didn't speak in favor even though I'm here for the planning board and the planning board recommendation is in favor of >> Yes, of course. Is there anything else that you want to add to that? >> I was just going to say the planning
board recommendation is in favor of reissuing the special permit to the new entity. There already is a condition that requires prior to certificate of occupancy issuance. All approvals are are obtained from the state. cannabis control commission from our local click
as well as any that might be required of the board of health. So that's already in as a condition, but the board did not is not in favor of removing the condition regarding non-transferability and non-assignability. So just wanted
that to be clear for the record. They're in favor of reissuing the special permit and transferring the rights to the new entity. They are not in favor of removing that condition. Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Um, you have a question for
Michelle. Okay. Council Romi, >> the the condition of the non-transferability, is that unique to marijuana um, cannabis permits or is that something that's common for other special permits? >> I wouldn't say it's common. It has been in other special permits, most recently
in the Malden Hospital redevelopment special permit. >> Thank there is a condition that's specific to TUS in Aadia healthcare or its affiliates >> exercising those rights. So that's the most recent example. There are a few others further further back. It's not
typical but it is occasionally done. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you councelor Ali. Um councelor Cologne Hayes. >> Thank you. Could you just stay I'm sorry. Um Mr. Romero. Um just I want to repeat back what I just heard to make sure I understood it corre
correctly. So the planning board approved the conditions but keeping in the non-transferable um license. Could you just repeat that back to me? Sorry. >> Yes. So so the petition was to amend the
special permit. So the planning in specifically it was to transfer the special permit or reissue the special permit to this new entity that was listed. Okay. So that's the advisory recommendation that the
planning board is making based on that petition >> to keep in the second. >> So so they recommend that that be granted. So a new special permit be issued to that entity. >> However, that it be subject to the same 20 conditions that the last special
permit was subject to and I believe the prior as well. >> And in those special conditions is condition 8 that says the special permit is non-transferable. Excuse me. this special permit is non-transferable and non-assignable. >> Okay, thank you very much. Um, and thank
you. So, uh, what I hit my button for originally is just to say >> after hearing all this, personally, I am not ready to make a decision right now on this. Um, especially if um, it is the last meeting. I wish this came before us
um, so we could talk this through a little bit more. We have had so much litigation that I am concerned about opening up anything else. I feel very comfortable about opening up cannabis shops. I am very much in support. I
spoke actually on on your case when they happened. I'm just super concerned right now and um again wish I had more time and I did call so many people. Um I made I have a different opinion about what we should be doing now. Um, so what
I I would also say, we care about our community. There's been some reference to grandstanding, but it's it's people here are asking questions because we love Walden and we care about Walden. We want to make sure that we're doing the right thing and that we have the right people here. Full stop. Uh, with that though being
said, I would, if Council McDonald wanted to make that motion, I'd certainly think about seconding a um motion to grant it with a condition that it's approved by the clerk. that makes me feel a little bit better. Um, but for me, this is uh, yeah, I'm not
comfortable with voting on this tonight, but um, thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. And just so just to review, an hour ago, we had did have a motion on the floor to grant, so we'd probably be looking to add to that, amend that just um, to go way back in time. Um, okay. Next up, I have
councelor Simmonelli. >> Thank you, Madam President. You know, I I just want to caution this council tonight with everything that's been going on with the cannabis thing over the last year and a half. You got to be careful here tonight
because it's almost like if we had like a bunch of pizza shops up here tonight that are in competition with one another. Of course, they don't want competition with one another. That's what I'm hearing here tonight. So, I caution everybody tonight that,
you know, there are five licenses. We've already had conditions. They've already been vetted. Again, they're just changing uh and adding uh a financial partner. And I think we need to be careful. And I I'll let legal come in and talk more about it than I than me.
But for me, I think that we just got to be cautious of the fact under the things that have happened in the last year, year and a half, uh, with the cannabis license and what's transpired in the courts with botanicals and other
folks. Yes, you know what? We could take in consideration how other people feel, but again, you know, they're all in competition with one another. So, I think that needs to be taken in consideration. So, you have to do what's right tonight,
not about influence on other people that already own cannabis shops that might have competition coming in their direction. So, I would advise this council be very careful tonight on its vote. Thank you, Madam President. >> Thank you, Councelor Simonelli. Councelor Winslow.
>> Yeah. No, I am supportive of uh issuing a a revised, you know, the new special permit as uh the planning board recommends. Um you know, just looking back, I mean, I was definitely highly involved along with councelor Crow and and councelor Sika um in helping to
develop the whole idea of having a collect having the special permit process. And I think when you look back when we started, I mean, this was going to be a competitive process. And one reason why we, you know, we would put in a provision about not not allowing a
transfer, a special permit was we didn't want to get have someone come in, give us a show, get a piece of paper, and then hand that off to someone right away. Um, or hold on to it. I mean, you know, I I remember when I worked on the the River's Edge Pro project down here, we were very concerned when we were
doing a an RFP process for that about having someone come in and, you know, often big investors buy up, you know, land to sit on them for speculation. We didn't want people coming in, you know, buying the piece of paper and not
investing. And what I see here is that um now that it's been a few years, we see a entity that has invested. I mean, they're basically done everything they need to do to get ready. And um yeah, I mean, years have gone by. They need to
have the investment to get them over the line and and adjust the operation and the and the and the structure. I mean I I think you know one of the things you know seeing generally you know you go to the registry of deeds or or our permit
database often there you know investors set up individual LLC's to a particular property I'm sure Misty's done that I know you know you know biotonicles is you you do that so it's it's unusual that this was not done that way so um so
however that was done so I I I think that now that it's it it is you know having you know in my ward I've had some restaurants change over and when that's happened they've had to get you know they the they get the business you the
business use transfers easily it's that liquor license that the new person has to come in it's very standard the whole purpose of the select the the click was to really be the liquor license equivalent to the the liquor board you
know to to for the cannabis so the whole purpose was that they are the vetting of the the operator and you know the special permitting is to really take into account the impact on the neighborhood. So the special permit you we got 20 conditions here but this has
been a couple times to the council already. I don't really think we have much justification to say we're you know you know to say there's any uh we haven't vetted this as as a council and the the neighborhood supportive. I I favor um issuing the permit and I would
uh vote in support of it. Thank you. Great. >> Thank you, Councelor Winsow. Councelor Omali. >> Uh yeah, just my last question would be for legal. Um I just was wondering what like legal's involvement was in this order of things um in not going to cluck
first but coming to the city council first. Um and then second um I know h we I'm assuming we have not appealed the clarified judgment in benevolent uh and if we have not appealed the the clarified judgment when does the appeal
period um end? >> So to your first question legal is would have no involvement whatsoever in how this process went forward. um legal's involvement was to advise the city
council after I received the memo and that was it. Um secondly, as it relates to can we talk should I be talking about benevolent? Is that relative? >> I don't think we can to be honest with you. >> It's referenced in this application and
it's been mentioned many times tonight. I would like to know if we've appealed the benevolent clarified judgment and when the appeal period lapses. We can't we can't we cannot have a legal update on that case in the I understand what you're saying. >> That's public record. >> I I we're not the question isn't whether
it's public record. It's whether it's topical to what we're being discussed on the agenda. >> It's mentioned in the presentation. >> It's it's a fact of public record. I I just would like >> if we want to get an update on that then we're going to have to do that not in
this session. Not not on this agenda item and not on the floor. >> Okay. >> Thank you, Al. >> Any other questions for me? >> Do any do any other attorneys in the room know when the appeal period >> elapses? Councelor Ali, do you have any
other questions on this paper? >> I move to table the application. >> Thank you. >> Do we have a second to that? Okay, seeing no seconds to that, that motion fails. The tableabling the motion has failed
for lack of a second. Do you still have the floor? Do you have any other questions? Okay, councel or seca. >> Thank you, council president. >> Thank you, Alie. >> So, my head is spinning. Um, okay. So, we're
worried about being sued for revising a special permit that we placed a condition on that has nothing to do with the vetting process of the click, the community host agreement, and the cannabis control commission. I'm just
trying to say this out loud because it's going in my head 10 million different directions. So we we pro if we're worried about being sued for that, then we should probably be worried about being sued for not allowing DMS Trinity to potentially sell
their business like any other business in this city can do, legally do. Um, for the past several weeks of the most critical budget process I've ever been a part of in the 14 years I've been sitting up here, we've been talking
about leaving millions of dollars of tax revenue on the table from not opening up pot shops in this city. Okay? I've heard it loud and clear from just about everybody. We're talking about economic development and how we can make this
city better. and we're going to sit up here and we're going to argue with a potential business that's had a special permit with us for years when all they're looking to do is add one person. I think everybody up here is
forgetting what our job is. Our job is to do we want to revise the special permit and remove a condition that we put in the special permit and and to sit here and say we may maybe
we should put something I I understand Council McDonald where you were going with that but the more I sit here and think about it that makes it seem like we don't trust our click we don't trust the community host agreement and we don't trust the CCC. DC and I'm
comfortable voting tonight to approve the revised special permit to allow those things to to continue and take place because the ultimate decision maker is the CCC. They are the ones that are going to say
DMS Trinity or Beach House Cannabis, whatever its entity ends up being. They're going to they're the final decision maker that says that this company can move forward. We're only here right now and I think everybody's
forgetting it to to discuss the special permit that we put in place that we decided we wanted to be the special permit granting authority of. I did not want to be this person, but here we are all these years later. I think we need
to move this vote. I make a motion that we revise the special permit by eliminating the the non-transferable piece and any other cannabis business in this city. I I think they would they
would have to come back before us if they do hold a special permit that we have granted. But I don't know why they wouldn't want us to allow this because in the future it could only hurt their business from being sold if they ever if something ever happened to come up in
their life where they would need to sell their business. I I I'm just I make a motion that we we >> So so we we already have the motion on the floor >> and the motion that we need is to
grant the petition to amend the special apartment. Did who did that one? You did that. Oh, all right. I wasn't I'm like listen, my head is spinning because >> I just >> You both already did the same thing you just tried to do. >> Can I just really quickly to to reiterate this and I know that it's Can
I just have Nelson come back up and and restate this process? If you can do it, if this if tonight, Nelson, we approve to revise the special permit to remove the non-transferable
piece, where does it go next? >> So, as I said, it still needs to go to the click and it still needs to go to the mayor. Now, maybe further to the question should be and it's been asked a few times now and I thought Ron and I both touched on it, but I don't think
necessarily we're getting across right now. Now, it cannot go to the click. >> So, we need to change that. >> The ordinance does not provide the ability for the click to transfer a license. So, if they petitioned us to come in, we'd have to say no. There is
absolutely no reason the mayor would entertain changing an HCA with someone who hasn't gone to the click, who can't go to the click, and has a special permit and says that they can't do those things. Anybody who has a special permit has the right to come to me and ask me
to amend it. Anybody. They don't need a process laid out to do that. >> Okay. >> This bis this this business has a special permit. If they'd like to amend it and they come to me and say we'd like to amend our special permit, I deny their request and send it to you all. So
that's why we're at where we're at. The collect cannot address this. There's no reason for the mayor to do it. You all can. >> But now you can tomorrow. >> I'm sorry. >> You No, we have to redo the ordinance. So, this isn't even going to get done
till September. >> I don't know when it's going to get done, but tomorrow night at the click, we are not vetting this candidate. No. >> Okay. And the planning board has previously already reviewed this in in addition, just for clarity. For any
special permit, whether you issue it well, any special permit that you issue, the planning board first reviews it and provides you a non-binding recommendation which Michelle previously provided to you. >> Correct. >> If we're talking about like how much bureaucracy is around this and we have
an open ordinance now, I just feel like we've been talking about this for two hours now. If we're talking about the bigger picture, that's just yet another layer here. I I just really wanted to underline why this is the first step >> because it's the only step that can be taken right now. Yeah, this is the first step.
>> Okay. Thank you. We appreciate your time tonight. Um Council McDonald, you are next in the queue. >> Well, thank you. Um yeah, councelor Sika, I think I could I really couldn't agree with you more at this point. Like I don't even know why we grant these special permits.
>> I never wanted to. um because it is such a messy process with the city council and I will say to the to the folks at Trinity when you first came to us to get a special permit I said I feel like we're being too hard on you um but I just wanted to get your permit approved so my question about
conditionality was to see could we get to like a consensus you know so that you get a unanimous vote about this because I think it's important for businesses to hear the city support but that does not seem forthcoming so I'm not going to make that motion and it's been helpful
to understand the problem with the click uh and their ability to or lack of ability constrained by our ordinance to actually vet this new operating candidate at all currently and we will have to address that. So I do think while this is separate from what my
understand so the planning board has recommended that we issue a different permit that has the that has the non-transferable clause. Council see your your proposal is to amend the existing permit to simply remove the
non-ransferable clause such that it would have to be approved at a future before us. Can I just say something? >> Just for just for clarity. What we have before us on our agenda is our this hearing is on a petition to amend the special. >> I just want to make sure that that's the
motion council. >> That's what I just restated. Back to council. >> Can you just put my Yeah, your lights on. I apologize. So, Council McDonald, to your point of wanting to double check, I think if we only revise that,
>> if if we change it, then I I think the revision is probably best at this moment to remove it because if we change it, >> then the vetting proc I feel like the vetting process may be bypassed because
they'll have a special permit with their new name that Beach House LLC. I think we have a little bit more >> I think just revising it to remove that allows us to still follow the process
because technically if we just change a special permit to the new name, they've already been vetted and we're giving them basically it it they're just going to be able to if I'm thinking of this correctly, that's how my thought process is going with this. If we change the
name to the new entity, they've already been vetted. We're just changing a name. If we revise the special permit to >> remove the provision, >> remove the remove the transferable thing, then it's the new applicant still has to be vetted through all the other
channels. >> Yeah. So, I support Yeah. So, I'm happy to support that. Um, I just wholeheartedly agree that we are leaving dollars on the table because we made it hard for these businesses to open and operate. And I've said that
consistently. So, I I don't fully understand um what the level of opposition to this permit is. I've listened to this. I' I've tried to, you know, wrap my mind around what would be uh so offensive to another operator. And
and I can't get beyond the argument that you made, Councelor Simmonelli. So I think respectfully I am happy to support the removal of debt prohibition so that our own licensing commission can do its job and the state licensing commission can do its job and we can get that badly
needed tax revenue uh which we I just don't I've spent so much breath in the last year talking about this and the budget crisis that our city faces. So let's just get them operating. Thank you. >> Thank you. Councelor McDonald councelor Cologne Hayes we're close counselor.
>> Yeah. No. Yep. where thank you. Um, so I think what council see you just um I think you just changed my mind something that you had just said there. So thank you for that clarity. What what we were looking for tonight and let's be very
clear about this is that everyone well I shouldn't say everyone myself I have been extremely vocal about needing cannabis revenue in our city opening them up being open to it that that's what we need. so vocal. Um so I caution
anyone to think any different. Um and the thing that we that you had just brought to mind is that okay let's say we grant it today and I have lots of questions obviously everybody does or we wouldn't be here. So if we grant this
today it's still going to the click. It will still be vetted. Um, it will also go, I think is what you heard. It will also go to the ordinance, which I've been asking councelor Winsow here all night. Is this still coming to ordinance
so we can talk it through and make that change? So, I want to be clear about that, too. Um, there's there's a couple of levels that we're still going to get through. And then I have no problem um supporting this. It's I think we needed to have this to answer
lots of questions. I'm glad we had it. Um, but now I'm, you know, I might have come full circle on this, but so could someone here make sure that that is correct. It will go to ordinance. >> Hopefully, >> chair. No, it's come from Thank you.
Okay. It's come from planning. It's to us. It goes to collect, then the mayor. >> Okay. >> Then the state. Okay. So, we're bypassing ordinance because it's here. Come up and clarify if I got that wrong. I'm trying to >> and I I don't want to sound like a broken record, but the only way it can
come come to the clerk is if the ordinance gets changed that allows that to happen. And I >> understood. >> Yeah. So, so yes, it's that's got to get changed to allow it to properly be for us for a transfer, which isn't allowed right now. And that's what I stated earlier. And >> thank you very much. >> That's okay. >> Okay.
>> Um, so yes, I get that now. Um, thank you. >> Okay. Um, I have councelor Ali next. >> I'm just concerned how unprofessional
this is and I'm not clear what we're even taking action on. Are we are we adopting the planning board's recommendation? Are we changing the applicant to the beach house applicant?
It's not clear what is going on. I it's I don't see it in in the papers here. Um so from the scheduling to the lack of legal's involvement in this process in in how in which this happened here while
we're still in an appeal period for a case that might invalidate the zoning ordinance related to cannabis. this whole thing is just is is crazy that we're here right now at this exact moment when so much is in flux and um
you know I can't in good conscience do my due diligence and and be a good veter of what needs to go on on behalf of the city of Malden. Um I'm going to recuse myself from this guy guys. This just does not seem appropriate. It doesn't smell appropriate. Um so I'm
just going to recuse myself. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Ali. Councelor Winslow. >> Yeah, I mean I I think just related to the or rules and ordinance committee, I I I'd have to go and look and we did have a paper. I think it was really relating to changing the zoning, not the
licensing. So, we we would have to have a paper come up on that. So, um not you know, if that's what we need to do, that's what we need to do. But, um yeah, I don't think uh I mean, that's something that can be done. So, yeah. Great. I mean, I think what it might come down to is having a setting up a
process, particularly how to transfer licenses. I don't know if that licensing committee has that, but that's really, you know, it's not clear how that process works, but um you obviously um you know, that's really what it's about, how how a license might be transferred,
you know, at a for a property. Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Winsow. Councelor Simonelli. >> Thank you, Madam President. Look, I'm just going to say this. You know, I think we've beat this dead horse to death. And uh I, you know, I'd like to move the
previous question. Let's take a vote on this thing. Now, we've been on this thing for two and a half hours. I think everybody's made valid points. I think that down the road councils can take this up in ordinance if they want to, you know, make some changes to it. But for tonight's agenda, can we move this forward, please? >> Let's call the question. Councelor
Simmonelli. We have a motion on the floor by councelor Seika, seconded by yourself. Um, we do need eight votes. Am I correct? >> Yes. >> Okay. We need eight votes to grant this petition >> to adopt
>> to amend the special permit >> to amend and adopt >> just for clarity. >> So the petition is to amend the special permit. We need eight votes >> to >> to amend the special permit. to amend the special permit >> transferable condition.
>> Okay. Is everybody clear? And we have lost counselor Ali. So, >> right. >> Oh, sorry. >> Yeah. So, we he is subtracted from the total that we need. Clerk, are you ready to call the role? >> We still need eight. >> Yep. We still need eight. >> Council Cologne Hayes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. Council Condan. >> Yes. >> Yes. Council Crow. >> Yes. >> Yes. Council Lewong. >> Yes. >> Yes. Council McDonald. >> Yes. >> Yes. Council Sega. >> Yes. >> Yes. Council Simonelli. >> Oh, yes. >> Yes. Council Taylor, >> yes.
>> Yes. Council Winsow. >> Yes. >> Yes. Council President Lahan. >> Yes. >> Yes. So, that has been granted. >> Okay. That has been granted. Next order of business. >> Paper 335-26. Be it ordained by the Malden City
Council that the code of the city of Malden 12.12.300 inclusionary zoning is hereby amended by striking the ordinance in its entirety and insert inserting the following which is listed in the body of the paper.
Okay, Councelor Winsow for the paper. I can also recognize our director of OSPCD, Alex Pratt, to come to the podium for any questions. So, I'm going to put the podium mic back on. Councelor Winsow, do you want to >> Yeah, I mean, just briefly, you know, I
you know, I think we were um you know, I was involved with council spat when we uh developed the inclusionary zoning uh ordinance. We had a an in-depth study conducted um on what was workable. I
mean, this is like 5 years ago um in terms of the economics and financing of inclusionary zoning. um the market's changed and so I think the intent of this is try to um you know continue to
uh keep our inclusionary zoning in place but to make it um better and you know make sure we keep going forward on on on this but adapt it to what's happening uh there. So and I think uh you know our director Pratt could speak more more in
depth about that. Great. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Winszo. You have the floor. >> Thank you. Um, good evening everybody. Um, so as councelor Winsow alluded to, there is no evergreen inclusionary zoning policy. A policy that is good in one year might not be good uh the
following. So, um, the council wisely 5 years ago included a provision in our first inclusionary zoning policy that said we must revisit this every five years. Um, and I'm very grateful that we did so because the economy has changed like three times since then. Um the
inclusionary zoning policy that we adopted five years ago was based on a financial feasibility analysis um and was seen as an aggressive but somewhat feasible policy at the time. It is not working today. Uh the cost of building housing, the cost of building affordable
housing, um changes in construction market, inflation, all the reasons we've been hearing about every day for years now have uh made our inclusionary zoning policy too restrictive. That means that we are requiring too much of market rate developers in terms of the affordable housing that we are requiring such that
it is very difficult if not impossible for them to build anything at all. Um the important analogy here I guess is or the the way to think about this is you know you could require 10 15 20 50% of the units to be built to be affordable. If someone can't afford to build the
units you're getting 50% of nothing which is nothing. So what we want to do is we want to update our inclusionary zoning which we expect we will do at least every 5 years to make sure that it meets the market conditions that we are facing. Um and there are two sides of that. On the first side is the um the
requirements that we have on the development. So what is the level the size of project that is affected? What is the level of affordability that is required? Uh and what is the percentage of units that must be made affordable and then there are details within that as well. uh on the other side of that
equation. So those are the requirements. Think of those as the the sticks. We also have carrots. Those are the incentives. Um we know that it is financially challenging to build affordable housing. Uh we know it very deeply. Um and we have this um confirmed by our study as well. So the intention
um of the council five years ago was to create incentives so that you both had a carrot and a stick approach to make it easier and more feasible for market rate developers to build that affordable housing um and even in some cases to reward them for building extra affordable housing to incentivize them
to do the right thing. Um so tonight what we are um recommending is changes to both sides of those equations both the the incentives and the requirements. Um and I know you have a number of papers in front of you from us on this topic. Um and I'll start just going with the uh the memo that we provided. Um the
on the uh incentive increase or um I'm sorry, let me start on the uh requirement increase. So previously we had 15% of our units uh were required to be affordable. We are recommending moving that to 10% of the units. Um from 50% of the area median income for rental
units to 60% from 50 to 60 um%. Those changes make it easier for those projects to pencil out. It is it will still be a challenge in this high interest environment, but it makes it easier. Um, and that also aligns the change from 50% to 60% aligns us with
state and federal in um tax credits that can help fund affordable housing which could help make these things work better in tandem. Um, on the incentive side, oh, and I should say the um the home ownership is is consistent. Um we are removing uh
certain requirements around um nursing homes that were previously covered which don't really make sense to be covered. They don't operate the same way when you pay a nursing home uh rent costs. You're not paying for rent. You're paying for service as well which can be nursing services and other things like that. They're apples and oranges. You can't
build them under our policy right now. So we want to make sure that those types of uses are still allowed in the city. Uh we don't want to be a barrier there. On the uh incentive side, um we are increasing from one unit to two unit the density bonus that you get for building
um a required affordable unit. Um on the parking adjustment, um we are keeping the one parking space per unit requirement for market rate projects. However, for projects that are doing more affordability than we require, we
are dropping that to 75 per unit. Um and we've provided greater flexibility for a um 100% affordable housing projects um by special permit to be able to um go up a story um in all zones uh to a to a max
of um I'm sorry to a max of three stories in all zones except industrial um and to um give them give them more flexibility in doing so. Uh we also made some process improvements. Um the largest one um previous the policy previously required
that all inclusionary zoning projects uh follow a special permit process. We are moving the compliance from special permit to administrative. So that would be our office would uh confirm that the project either complies or does not comply with inclusionary zoning. The
important thing to note here is any project that would uh require a special permit anyway would still have to go through that process. >> The change here is that the special permit granting authority, the city council or the planning board does not need to wrestle through the wonkiness
and the particularities of the inclusionary zoning compliance as part of your special permit review. That will be done before it gets to you, before it gets to the planning board. This provides more clarity. It makes it the process simpler. it takes something off of your plate and off of the planning board's plate while still keeping the responsibility of granting special
permits for all the other reasons we typically do that uh in the same place. There are a number of other um changes throughout. I'd be happy to go through them. I know the council has had uh been meeting for several hours already and that um I don't want to to bore you all, but I'm happy to answer any questions or
focus on places that are of interest. My one question is, are you hoping to refer you hoping to have us refer this to the joint planning hearing that's in August? >> We would hope that you would refer it to the joint um the joint hearing. Whether that is I know there's been some
discussion about that being held in July or August. >> Okay. >> Our our hope is that that hearing could take place sometime over the summer. Okay. >> And that the council could be prepared to uh potentially vote favorably on this in September. >> Okay. So do our homework based on what
you've told us tonight and what's amended to the agenda and be prepared to go to that. Have the ordinance committee be at that. >> Okay. Sure. I'll maybe councelor Winsow can speak a little more to process. >> Yeah. I I I mean I I read very carefully
um what has been you know the community development department um has submitted here >> and you know in particular um the you know the deta detail about the section bysection um changes are very detailed and very thoughtful so and you know the
vote tonight would just again to get it to a hearing. I just don't think we would need to spend a lot of time in rules and ordinance nitpicking at this point. Great. you know, so I think that we could get it to the hearing, see what public comments and and then, you know, refer it back and if there's a need to
the rules and ordinance to, you know, re review re then. But, um, make any amendments. But, you know, I I think it's it's ready to go. Um, that's my point of view, but if counselors feel they need more time, but I feel it's ready to go. Thank you. >> Okay.
>> Yeah. Is that a motion? >> Could you have one more thing to add to that? >> Uh, yes. Just two things quickly. So, the summary of changes that we provided, we will be sending you an updated one. Um, which what we provided before was this is what the section looked like before. This is what it looks like
after. We're going to add some plain English. This is what that change was. It's very brief, but that'll make it easier for your review. Um, and then the other um one note, we made an error in um how we have addressed the payment in loop piece. Um what we are uh what we
had previously provided was that OSPCD would be able to approve or deny a developer's request to make a payment in lie. What we would like that to say is that that would go to the affordable housing trust fund board and the affordable housing trust fund board would be able to make that determination.
>> So if there were a motion I would respectfully request that the motion could amend that proposal um as I described. Move to refer as amended. >> Yeah. Move to refer with that amendment
related to >> Oh, I'm so sorry, Steve. I didn't I didn't mean >> I would move to refer to the uh joint planning board and rules and ordinance committee uh with the amendment that the payment in lie of taxes waiver uh be
required to be approved by the uh affordable housing trust basically. So, thank you. Will you be sending that to the clerk so that we can have the updated? >> Yeah. >> I mean, I understand that the if if we don't if we don't send this tonight the
way we need it to go to planning, >> it can't go. >> I'm not I'm all I'm suggesting is if you're going to refer it as amended, you should probably take a vote to amend it first, >> right? >> Vote to amend, then vote to refer as amended.
>> Okay. So, we have a motion by councelor McDonald. >> Second. >> Seconded by councelor Winsow to amend. All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed? >> What was the >> the amendment is to uh change the body
that is uh has the ability to approve a request from a developer to make a payment in lie instead of building the units. Our prior draft said that responsibility was with OSPCD. We would like to have that be the affordable housing trust fund board as the more appropriate body for that.
>> Okay. And then we had the previous motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Cologne Hayes to refer to the joint hearing to be scheduled. All in favor? >> I. Any opposed?
>> Okay, that is referred. Thank you so much. >> Next order of business. Paper 336-26 communication. The board of registars of voters respectfully submits to the city council the board's recommendation for papers necessary to the upcoming 2026
state election cycle numbered as 337 338 339 and 340 series of 2026. The board recommends these papers favorably by unanimous vote for adoption by the council. >> Okay. Okay. So, we it looks like we need to do
we need a motion to receive. >> Okay. So, move by councelor Lewong, seconded by councelor Sika. All in favor? >> I Okay, those are received and then we need a motion to adopt. Do we need to do these individually? I'm sorry. >> We can do them all at once. Do you want
me to just explain what they are? >> Yeah, that'd be great. >> Okay, so these four papers are basic housekeeping. We do them prior to every election cycle. The first one is to just um adopt the early voting hours that we will have coming up in August for the September primary and in October for the
November election. The second paper is just to designate our polling locations for the entirety of the 2026 election season. No polling places have been changed since last year, so no heavy lifting there. The third paper is to allow the chief of police to work
with the city clerk as far as placing the um police officers on details at all of the polling locations. And then the fourth is it's a little bit caught before the horse, but you are ordering me to get the warrant >> as posted when it comes down from the
state, which we don't have in finalized version yet. But what by the time we get it, you'll be on summer break and it will need to be posted in August for a September 1st primary. So these are papers 337-26 338-26. Actually, let me just read it
proper. 337-26 order that the city council adopt in-person early voting for the 2026 election cycle and to designate the city clerk's office at 215 Pleasant Street room 220 as the central early voting polling location during the dates and times to be determined as voted on
the board of registars of voters which are in the body of the paper. Paper 338-26 order that the city council designate the polling locations for the entirety of the 2026 election cycle. Paper 339-26. Order that for the entirety of the 2026 election cycle, the
city detail a minimum of one officer for each polling building to be determined by the chief of police and the city clerk or their respective design. and paper 340-26 order that the city clerk will notify and warn the inhabitants of the city of Malden who are qualified to
vote in the state primary and election to vote at their respective wards and precincts on Tuesday, September 1st and Tuesday, November 3rd, 2026, respectively from 7:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m. per the Secretary of State's election warrant. >> Okay. Do we have a motion to adopt these
orders? Okay. So moved by Councelor Simmonelli, seconded by Councelor Taylor. All in favor? I >> I any opposed? >> Those are adopted. Next order of business, >> paper 341-26, committee report, the standing committee
on rules and ordinances to whom was referred paper 317, 318, 319, and 320 series of 2026. Having considered the same, make the following report. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Luong to receive
the committee report. All in favor? I. Any opposed? that is received >> on the agenda. The first paper is 317-26, but that was actually tabled in committee. >> So, um, if it's okay with you, when
council wins, we'll skip over that. Okay. Paper 318-26 is the first paper. Be it ordained by the Malden City Council that the code of the city of Malden 2.16.04040 cemetery trustees is hereby amended by striking subsection A and inserting the
following. City cemeteries shall be under the care and management of three trustees, all of whom shall be chosen by the city council for a term of five years. Commencement of the three member board shall take effect at such time as the current five member board is reduced by attrition.
>> Okay. Councelor Winslow. >> Yes. So um yeah, Maria Louise was there to speak about the paper. Um so right now we have the board is for has five spots um for trustees. Uh one spot is
vacant and we anticipate someone um you know retiring from the board. Um, so both kind of in the interest of uh streamlining the board and saving a bit of money because this board does earn a
stipend that um you know in the budget process it was recommended that we uh trim this board back to three trustees and the um rules and ordinance committee voted 3 to one in favor of um and recommending this uh to be adopted and
tonight. Thank you. Great. Okay. Thank you, Councelor Winsow. Do I have a motion to enroll? >> Motion. >> Okay. Is that Councelor Winslow and Councelor Cologne Hayes? All in favor? >> I. >> Any opposed?
>> So, >> councelor Omali, was that you? Okay. >> Okay. Uh I mean then I would make a motion to um suspend rules so that we can uh for the purposes of ordaining tonight. Second by Yeah. >> Okay. One second.
Okay. On the motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Crow to suspend the rules for the purposes of ordaining, we need to call the role. >> Council Clone Hayes, >> yes. >> Council Condan, >> yes. >> Council Crow, yes. >> Council Lewong, >> yes. >> Council McDonald, >> yes. >> Council Ali,
>> Council Sea, yes. >> Council Simmonelli, >> yes. >> Council Taylor, >> yes. >> Council Winsow, yes. >> Council President Lenn, >> yes. Okay, so the rules have been suspended. >> Motion to Second. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Crow to ordain. We
will call the role. >> We just did. >> Council Colon Hayes, >> yes. >> Council Condan, >> yes. >> Council Crowe, yes. >> Council Lewang, >> yes. >> Council McDonald, >> yes. >> Council Ali, >> no. >> Council Sea, >> yes. >> Council Simmonelli, >> Council Taylor, >> yes. >> Council Winsow,
>> yes. >> Council President Lahan, >> yes. >> Okay, so that paper has been ordained. >> Okay. Next order of business, >> paper 319-26. Be it ordained by the Malden City Council that the code of the city of Malden 2.16.090
Emergency Management Board is hereby amended by striking subsection A in inserting the following. The Emergency Management Board shall be comprised of the police chief or their designate, the fire chief or their designate, the director of public works, the director of public health, and the director of
public facilities. Oversight of the emergency management board shall be the responsibility of a director of emergency management who shall be designated by the mayor from either the police chief or their designate or the fire chief or their designate. >> Okay. Councelor Winsow.
>> Yes. So um right now the emergency management board has seven uh members. This would reduce the number of members to five. And then also in doing so um would make clear um that um the the uh
the the um director of emergency management who chairs this would be um either someone appointed by the mayor um from a design of the fire chief or the police chief. So those are the the two
two key things. So um so those are two things that are happening. Uh, councelor Ali, um, we did, uh, make an a recommend an amendment that, um, there this language that talks about, um, the the the emergency management director being,
um, designated by the mayor from either the police chief or his designate or the fire chief or his designate, which is um, this is listed as section A, that that actually be um, the amended to be um, that phrasing be shifted to section
D1. So, we did the committee did vote to make that recommendation uh for an amendment plus we did vote unanimously to approve um this change in the board. So, great. >> So, we need to make those amendments. >> So, yeah, I mean I guess I think we
would make Yeah. So >> I'm not sure I followed what you said you changed for you moved >> so the the last phrase where um >> has been moved to a different spot in the same ordinance but that means it data. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> So just a clarity
>> amend and then a motion to enroll as >> nope. I understand the motions. I I just didn't follow the moving from section A to D. I wasn't sure what >> Okay. If it's just for clarity or flow of language that's fine. I'm I'm I'm good with that. Okay. So we need a motion to amend. Okay. So, a motion to
amend so that um the language that says um the director of emergency management um will be designated by the mayor from either police chief or his design and designate or fire chief or design and the other the other amendment was to
make this gender neutral. So, I have the clerk there, but that was a >> that was the other thing. So, so two things that councelor McDonald caught that so those are two parts of the amendment. So to change that phrase to general neutral and move it to from
section A of the ordinance to section D1. So yeah. >> Okay. So section A is going to section D and his is becoming there. >> Yeah. Just that final bit there. So yeah >> got it. Just that last sentence. >> Just the last sentence under >> part of the sentence. Yeah. >> We're going to review the entire ordinance.
>> Okay. >> Okay. That's a good policy. >> All right. >> Um Okay. So that motion by councelor Winslow. Do I have a second? Second. >> Second by councelor Simonelli. >> All in favor of amending >> I. Any opposed?
>> Okay. >> So motion to enroll as amended. >> Enroll as amended. >> Thank you councelor Crow. We have a motion by councelor Winslow, seconded by councelor Crow to enroll as amended. All in favor? >> I. >> I. Any opposed?
>> Okay. So then motion to suspend the rules so that we uh for the purposes of ordaining in one night. Thank you. >> Okay. Motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Simonelli to suspend the rules in order to ordain.
We need to call the role. >> Council Cologne Hayes, yes. Council Condan, yes. Council Crow, yes. Council Lewong, yes. Council McDonald, yes. Council Ali, >> Council Sega, >> yes. >> Council Simmonelli, Council Taylor, yes. Council Winsow, yes. Council President Lahan, yes. Rules have been suspended.
>> All right. So, motion to ordain. >> Second. >> Okay. >> On a motion by councelor Winslow, seconded by councelor Simonelli to ordain. We will call the role. >> Council Cologne Hayes, yes. Council Condan, yes. Council Crow, yes. Council Lewong, yes.
>> Council McDonald, Council Omali, Council Sega, >> yes. >> Council Simmonelli, Council Taylor, yes. >> Council Winsow, yes. Council President Lahan, >> yes. >> Okay, that paper has been ordained. >> That is ordained. Next order of business. Paper 320-26 be it ordained by the Malden city
council that the code of the city of Malden 4.12.02O building permit fees subsection C is hereby amended by striking $16 and inserting $18 in its place. >> Okay, Council Winsow, I'm just keeping your light. >> So, yep. Um, so right now, um, when
someone comes in to apply for a building permit, um, they pay a fee of $16 per,000 of value added. um and uh building inspector Miller investigated what other communities around us charge
as well as Ron Hogan and um they f found that we kind of follow the low end that the the range is sort of from 16 to up to over $20. So the thought was to um bump this up to $18. So, we're sort of in the middle range and that can
generate up to between 75 and $100,000 a year. So, it's a it's a significant amount of money. So, um the committee uh discussed it and uh then recommended this be uh favorably um recommended to
the council to be adopted. >> Okay. Thank you, Councelor Winsow. Any questions? Do we have a motion? >> Motion to enroll. >> Second. >> Okay. on a motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Simonelli to enroll. All in favor? >> I
>> I. Any opposed? >> Okay, that is enrolled. >> So motion to suspend the rules so this can be ordained um this evening. Thanks. >> Okay, on a motion by councelor Winslow, seconded by councelor Simmonelli to suspend the rules for the purposes of ordaining all in uh sorry, call the
role. >> Council Clone Hayes, >> yes. >> Council Condan, yes. >> Council Crow, yes. Council Lewon, yes. Council McDonald. Council Mali. >> Council Sega. >> Yes. >> Council Simmonelli. Council Taylor. Yes. >> Council Winsow. >> Yes. >> Council President Lennan. Yes. >> Rules have been suspended.
>> Motion to ordain. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Winslow, seconded by councelor Simmonelli to ordain. We will call the role. >> Council Cologne Hayes. >> Yes. >> Council Condan. Yes. >> Council Crow. Yes. >> Council Lang. Yes. >> Council McDonald. Yes. >> Council Ali. Yes. >> Council Sega. >> Yes.
>> Council Simmonelli. >> Council Taylor. >> Yes. >> Council Winsel. >> Yes. Yes. Council President Lahan. >> Yes. >> That paper has been ordained. Unanimously. >> Unanimously ordained. Okay. Thank you. Next order of business. >> Paper 342-26. Committee report. The standing committee
on license to whom was referred papers 273 274 and 311 through 315 series of 2026. Having considered the same make the following report. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Sika, seconded by councelor Taylor to receive
the committee report. All in favor? Hi. The report is received. >> Would you like me to read? >> You can read them, please. >> Paper 273-26, petition open air parking lot, AGM Auto Sales Incorporated, 135 Eastern Avenue,
28 spaces renewal. Paper 274-26 petition pool tables top pools incorporated 77 Exchange Street, Malden, 7 tables. New paper 311-26 petition extended hours L. Maxel 97 Medford
Street hours 7 days 6 a.m. to 1:00 a.m. New paper 312-26 petition livery company luxury fleet LLC 9 constant street one vehicle new paper 313-26 delivery driver Akush Kumar 9 constant
street new paper 314-26 petition outdoor parking United Properties Incorporated 25 Florence Street 34 spaces renewal paper 315-26 petition outdoor parking United Properties Incorporated 29 Madison Street 40 spaces renewal >> okay councelor see for the committee
report. >> Thank you, Council President. Um the license committee met this evening to discuss all these petitions. We had compliance offices with us. None of them had any issues. Um and we made a motion to refer them all out of committee favorably. So I make a motion to grant
these petitions. >> Councelor Mal, do you had your light on? Are you >> Oh, okay. On a motion by councelor Seika, seconded by councelor Ali to grant. All in favor? >> I I Any opposed? Okay, those petitions are granted. Paper 343-26
committee report the standing committees on economic development and rules and ordinance serving in a joint session to whomever referred paper 263 series of 2026 having considered the same make the following report. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Winslow, seconded by councelor Taylor to receive
the report. All in favor? >> I. >> The report is received. Paper 263-26 be ordained by the Malden city council that the code of the city of Malden title 12 and nine are hereby amended by the following as is outlined in the body of this paper.
>> Okay. Councelor Winsow. >> So um as you may recall this is the uh the paper uh that councelor Leong um as lead sponsor uh put forth related to residential kitchens. Um we had several
meetings of the joint economic development committee and rules and ordinance and we also then actually had a kind of a um a a meeting of some members along with um staff to really sort out how to approach
this. And ultimately what we sorted out was that um there's the paper has some zoning things that really um focus on allowing a residential kitchen as a home occupation. Then there were some
provisions that related to how a residential kitchen would operate under you know it was proposed under license and then there were some other issues that came up. So, so um based on the discussions with staff and then with the
committee um the recommendation um sorted out to be that um to basically sort of split this into kind of a few efforts. So um the first thing um the we would split um the sections related to
um the zoning chapter 12 which would then um uh create um the allow you know under right now we have a section that allows um some home occupations. So residential kitchens would be added as a
home occupation and be subject to the provisions of home occupations. So that is um is there and there's um there would be some definitions related to what a residential kitchen is and what um under that category there's something
called a cottage food operation that that's really um allows this type of kitchen to operate in a residential district. So um so that would go forward and the recommendation from the committee is um to send that language to
the um uh joint uh planning board rules and ordinance committee meeting. Um so that was for the zoning um amendment. Then the related to actual how these residential kitchens operate. One of the things we realized that that regulation
really falls to the board of health. um they u the regulations are under the state sanitary code and the mass department of health has guidelines how to do this and uh I think there's concern that actually now the city's
board of health sanitary code actually conflicts with some of the state regulations. So the really the recommendation then from the committee is to rever refer how these actually operate to the plan the to the board of health so that they can adopt the state
sanitary code revisions related to residential kitchens and um and and then also adopt the policy. One of the barriers that was presented first first up was that a restaurant needs three sinks. I mean basically you need a sink
to wash food off on. you need a sink to clean dishes on, you need a mop sink. So, that's how a restaurant has to be done. Um, residential kitchens, there's no expectation that someone's gonna have three sinks. So, the state policies recognize that. So, but that really
because that's overseen by the board of health and the special services um that it really makes sense for the board of health to adopt the state regulations and and the guidelines. So we the recommendation from the committee is to refer that matter to the board of
health. Um the one other issue that came up was um related to just how does trash get handled from a residential kitchen. And so um you know we have under chapter 9 we we do have our solid waste regulations that talk about how
residents handle waste and how commercial businesses. So the recommendation of the committee is that the rules and ordinance committee develop um some changes to our solid waste regulations to say that you know res residential
kitchens have to get enough bins and tags to handle the waste that they're generating. So if suddenly they're generating more waste out of their house if it takes two bins they need to have two bins. Um and then also the thought
that maybe they would if they have a lot of uh you know waste that can be composted that they would sign up for the composter grower. So those are the three recommendations and I I do note um the committee then also made sure made a
recommendation that um that under the provision for residential kitchens that um the people they they would be prohibited from wholesale or or or retail you know
sales. um but except by um uh pre-ordering. So those are those that's how that the recommendations there. So I think we Caroline has a more detailed language on that, but the recommendation is to refer
the zoning things to the joint hearing as we discussed in committee. So there's a we we discussed that. So that's the the basic stuff. So I don't know. >> So the motion is just is to refer this to the joint here. >> Yeah. I mean I guess the ultimately what
we did vote on was we voted to amend the paper to um be consistent with the language that we would um be adding definitions for residential kitchen and cottage food operation. that um that we
would a and and amend the zoning to allow residential kitchens as a home occupation uh with the proviso that they could um sell
um pre-sale. So that that was that was an amendment. So I think we have to make that amendment. So I >> So but what do we need? Okay. So I was in committee for the split of the paper. I understand part of it's going to board of health and part of it's going to the hearing. >> Yeah. >> Do do we So do we need I'm unclear what
we need to do right now. >> So >> you have a sorry let me take counselor you have a point of >> Yeah. I was just going to ask the the clerk. So, we're going to split this paper and I'm assuming that the title 12 zoning will keep the 26326
paper number. And do you think that the section 9 that's going to go to board of health will get a new paper number? >> When we've split papers in the past, usually what I've done is just add an A. >> Okay. >> So, same paper number A. >> Okay. That that makes sense to me. >> Okay.
>> I just that was my only question. So my understanding is that title 12 is going to get referred as amended to joint planning and ordinance and that section 9 is going to get referred to the board of health in this new paper format >> 263A-26 would be title nine going to the board
of health. Yes, that was my section. >> So that would be I guess the first thing to split the paper into two goes to board. So I make that recommendation that the paper be split into two sections. uh section 12 to be referred to uh the joint hearing in this the
section. >> Do we need two motions to split and then refer or can we split and refer? >> You do not have to vote on splitting a paper. It can be done. >> Okay. >> At any time, but you do have to vote to amend. >> Right. So then Okay. So, so I guess with the consent of the council, the
recommendation from the committee is to split the paper into two sections. So, >> okay. I do have a light from the sponsor. I'm going to go to councelor Leong quickly before we take the vote. >> I if we could just be um if we could I know it went back and forth in committee >> and I just want to make sure we're clear
on what exactly the two different sections are going to read. Could you go do you have those those prepared? Um city clerk if you could >> Well, I don't have them prepared because they were kind of just thrown at me in the middle. So I have to go back and and
re listen to the >> meeting. But um basically what I can tell you is that on paper 263 there were the the draft paper was written with
amendments to 12.2830 mm >> to 12 32060. There were three different sections. I have to open it up. And then when we came into committee tonight, the
language on those sections were basically struck and rewritten. Um, I swear to God, we've been here so long that the Wi-Fi shuts off and I can't get into I can't get into
>> I'm sorry, the Wi-Fi shut off. >> Thank you. So, but I I think everybody we I guess the consent is to split the paper into two sections. I guess that's the first thing, right? So, >> okay. So, >> so that's done. I guess by consent or >> then it just figure out what the
language is. >> There was just one part um there was >> I want to make sure you're comfortable. >> I'm sorry. Yeah. No, I just wanted to make sure. So, there was the one part which was under home occupation. >> Um it was it was supposed to read here on number nine.
>> Mhm. this paper here. We were amending it at the very last statement to read on-site sales shall be limited to pre-arranged pickup. >> Oh, I did write that down. >> Do I just want to make sure that that's included? >> Yes, that I that I have. Yeah, that was
that was right. I've got that. So, the body of the first part, the number one inserting into MCC that whole first section, >> that's the amendment we need to do. >> Right. that was being struck the the very first one on my paper.
So I just want to make sure those two changes that make sense. >> I'm going to look at my paper quickly. >> I'm just looking at the amendments as they >> it kind of feels like it was yesterday. It was
Yeah. >> Yeah. I don't know what what we were striking the section. What I wrote down was that we were adding this >> to nine except >> all of the proposals that we were adding A B CDE E and F are now being struck and we are simply inserting this new
highlighted section 9. >> Yep. >> B9. Yeah. So >> a residential kitchen cottage food operation permitted to produce cottage food products as regulated by 105 CMR 590 and regulation of the Malden board of health as it may be amended and provided that no retail or wholesale
transactions are made on the premises except for pre-arranged pickup >> on-site sales with pre-arranged pick limited to pre-arranged pickup. >> Yeah. And so that would be that's so that would be the that would be one. And then there was then there the
definitions they adding definitions of a retail residential kitchen cottage food operation >> and cottage food products under 12.3.0. >> Yeah. So those those are the we would we were striking the original language of
for chapter 12 and substituting that. So that was the recommendation. So yeah. So yeah. Sorry. Okay. Great. >> So are we ready to vote on that amendment? So that so the paper's split. We need to vote on amending that language. Councelor Ali made the very
helpful suggestion in committee that we add that language back in so that we could hear from the public as to what they think about allowing on-site pickup, which I thought was a very smart suggestion. We've gone back and forth on that a lot. I think it's time to move it to the hearing and hear what the public thinks of it. >> All right.
>> All right. So, I had councelor Winsow made the motion on the amendment. Do I have a second? >> I just have one more. >> Oh, I'm sorry, councelor Leong. >> And then the second part was to make sure that was what was written in for the board of health was that they were going to go back. We were asking them
just to be clear to go to the to the um regulations dictated by the state's regulations on residential kitchen sanitation. I just want to make sure because there's a clear difference with how that's written. That's all. because it go because we're asking them to adopt that.
>> We're going to ask the board of health to adopt the rules allowing residential kitchens consistent with Massachusetts sanitary code 105 CMR 590. >> Perfect. >> In the guidance developed by Massachusetts Department of Public Health for residential kitchen operations. >> Yes, that's it. Thank you.
>> All right. So, so first we have to do the amendment of the the paper. So, make that amendment. >> So, and I'll have councelor Leong second that. >> Okay. >> All in favor of the amendment? I >> I any opposed? >> Okay. So that is amended. >> So make a motion to refer that to the
amend paper as amended to the joint uh planning and rules and ordinance committee. >> Okay. On a motion from councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Lewong to refer. All in favor? >> I I any opposed? >> Right. >> Okay.
>> Then I guess I make a motion, you know, per as Michelle just explained in in the language to refer Um the uh you refer it to the board of health for development in consistent with the uh residential
kitchen uh regulations of uh under uh under 105 CMR 590 and the guidance of the department of health. >> Okay. On a motion by councelor Winsow, seconded by councelor Leong to refer that section to the board of health. All
in favor? >> I. Any opposed? >> Okay. And then the third recommendation that the rules and ordinance committee take up uh amendments to the solid waste regulations to accommodate res. So yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. Um Michelle, I'm just going to put
you on that one, too. >> Okay. >> Okay. Uh a motion by councelor Winslow. Can you restate that? I'm sorry. So, a motion to uh request that the um >> rules and ordinance committee take up drafting uh amendments to our solid
waste regulations to accommodate uh trash from and composting from residential kitchens. Thank you. >> Okay. All in favor? >> I >> I Any opposed? >> Okay, that is >> that is it >> all set then. I think >> all right.
>> Next order of business. A lot of things going on tonight. So, >> we got it through. >> The docket is clear. Does anybody have personal privilege? Oh my god, everybody does. >> Yes, councelor Condan.
>> I'd like to uh address that paper. >> Okay. >> And uh >> the cottage kitchen. >> Oh, you wanted Oh, you want to talk about National Grid? >> It's already on the >> Yeah, I'd like to continue to leave it on the table. Oh, okay.
>> The table focus. >> Good job. >> Rough treatment tonight. >> Are those new glasses? I like those glasses. >> Oh, man. Okay. Counselor Crow. >> Thank you, Madam President. So, I
thought I'd start off the 4th of July announcements. So, W one and W two will be hosting the annual um movie night in the park on the 3rd of July at Green Street Park. Um we start at 6:30. We have some music and we'll have some
inflatables and other things. And the movie starts about at sundown. So, that's usually about 8:45. So, just to plan accordingly. And they we always give a hint of the movie and it's when Buzz and Woody first meet consider when
they're on their fifth side. >> So come on over. Come on over. Just keep an eye. We we will reschedule for another time if there looks like rain because we tried to move it last year and it's not as easy movable. not something close but so and on the 4th of
July um at Dev Park from 9 to 12:30ish um in the Dev Park is next to the Irish American we will have inflatable rides water slides races pony rides face painting cookout frozen treats a
threeon-ree basketball tournament and so if you're in grades or going to grades um 5 through 8 you can sign up through the recck department it's a lot of fun and we have um and we'll have just a lot of fun. So, I hope um everyone comes down and enjoys. We're always looking
for volunteers. The more hands the better. So, you can reach out to me or council condon and um have wonderful um independence day. >> Thank you, councelor Crow, Counselor Sika. >> Thank you, Council President. I just want to wish all our Malden um public
school students a wonderful summer. I spent the afternoon with a bunch of them bowling. Um, including little Miss Phoebe and the mayor. They were hysterical. Um, we had uh we had I don't know there might have been a hundred kids there. It
was really nice cuz a lot of them were we I actually had more older kids today than I had younger kids which was really awesome. So, we had a lot of fun. So, I just wish them a a safe and happy healthy summer. Um, and then I'm going to keep it short and sweet. The 4th of
July at Lynen Park is on the 4th of July, Saturday. Uh we open festivities at 8:45 a.m. and we go till about noon. Um it's the usual same same every year just about. And we got a few little
surprises up our sleeve for the 250th um birthday celebration of America. So I hope to see all my W 8 residents there. Thank you. >> Thank you, Councelor Seika, Councelor Taylor. Thank you, Council President. Um, so ward 5 sleeps in a little bit. We will
be on the 4th, but we start at 10:00 a.m. Um, and we go till 1:00 p.m. And um, we do have our petting zoo back. So um, that was a lot of fun last year. Slush, lunch, races, and inflatables as
well. So come down um to Forestdale Park at 10:00 a.m. and and enjoy the 4th of July with Ward 5. Thank you, Councelor Taylor. Councelor Cologne Hayes. >> Thank you. Um, first I just want to say
thank you to everyone who showed up to our Junth Freedom Celebration here in Malden. It was tremendous. Um, all the community groups, all the performers. It was just a day that started off rocky but ended up being a fabulous celebration. So, I just want to thank
everybody for that and our fabulous team. We're going to be doing a debrief if anyone has any notes they'd like to text me on. um how we can improve or what we did great, please send them to me. Um and also Fuji um Friends of Oakrove, Inc., we're having our fishing
festival this Saturday, 9 to 12 at um we're going to have the mass wildlife um anglers there and I'm hoping I'm going to pronounce this right, but the traveling acry is that right? Okay. Okay, good.
>> Yes. So, um they'll be there and very excited about that. that um there'll be some games and um we teach folks how to fish and help them learn there. There's no prizes. It's not a um it's just a relaxing day. And then um our pride, I'm
sure a lot of people are probably going to bring this up too. I was actually just following up with some things with them, but Pride celebration is Sunday the 28th from 12:00 to 4 at Cordal. I'll let you go into the details of that at your park, but um I am super excited about that. It gets bigger and better
every year. Thank you. Thank you, Councelor Cologne Hayes. Councelor Omali, >> Ward 4 is Independence Day. It will be on July 4th, also 9:00 a.m. Quartermly Park. Uh, and I actually just want to give a nice shout out to Kadoose, one of
our students at Malden High School, who got a great grant from Social Capital, Inc. to do a rain garden at Cordmaly Park. So, Kadoose Karen Buck, the DPW, and the water department spent our Saturday all day installing this rain
garden. So, go check it out. Uh, when we put the path in with a community development block grant a number of years ago, um, the bottom of the path near the basketball court would always flood when it rained a lot. And so, um, you know, with with this collaboration, we were able to put this rain garden in.
And literally, like not even a couple hours later, we had thunderstorms that completely downpoured and we were able to prove that the rain garden does work. >> It's not It's not a petting zoo, uh, but it's a rain garden. So, >> please stay out. Thanks. >> Cool. Thank you, Councelor Ali.
Councelor Winsow. >> Great. Um well, I I do want to say if anybody's around tomorrow at 11 at Trafton Park, we're going to have a a ribbon cutting for the um the new shade structures there that um you know uh that are for picnic area. Uh thanks to
the Beard Foundation for donating that funding there. Um, you know, we have some spots in in Trafton where we can't really grow trees effectively. So, having shade structures over the picnic benches is a real nice amenity and councelor uh Lahan will not have to put
up a tarp anymore if she goes over there. That was kind of one of the inspirations one time, but um >> forever be remembered for my tarp. >> We we are going to be Sooners this year um for the independence celebration. We are going uh W 6 is happening on uh July
3rd at Trafton Park. So uh our festivities are u noon uh 9:00 a.m. to noon. Um you know we start out with uh pledge of allegiance uh and the and that and then we uh open up things to our
races, bouncing houses, water slides. We have pony rides that start around 11:00. Um we have food that um Henry catering um is Henry's catering is is catering again. Uh Richie slush face painting. Uh
races and games our basketball shootout. Uh you can come out and show off your costumes or your talent. And we do um have some special 250th toys we're giving out. So So you all aren't busy on the the third baby. If you want to drop by if you have a moment, I'm sure you're
going to be pretty busy. but um that we're we're starting things out. So um everybody's welcome to come out to uh Ward 6 on Friday uh the 3rd. Thank you. Great. >> Thank you, Councelor Winsow. Well, seeing no other lights from the chair, I'll invite any anybody who's around, I just want to give one more reminder
about the 4th and W three. We're going to be celebrating at Ambridge Park on Saturday the 4th from 10:00 to 1. So come on down. And if anybody's interested in volunteering, of course, we always love to have more volunteers. Um, with that, do we have a motion to recess to the call of the chair?
>> Yes. So moved. >> Okay. Motion by councelor Crow, seconded by councelor McDonald. All in favor? >> I. We are adjourned at 9:55. We are recessed. We are recessed at almost 10, but not quite. Thank you everyone.