Yeah interesting. This meeting is called to order in accordance with the open public meetings law in accordance with chapter 231 of the public laws of 1975. Adequate notice of this meeting has been provided. This meeting of April 20th, 2026 was provided to the Curry News and Star Ledger and
placed on the burrow's website and placed on the bulletin board at Burough Hall. A copy of this notice is available to the public and a copy of the statement shall be included in the minutes of this meeting. Mayor Gallagher is excused this evening. Council members Terresa Bonner >> here. >> Andrew Kiy
>> here. >> Glen Deny >> here. >> Randy Pittz >> here. >> Gina Stravik >> here. >> Roger Verm >> here. Please stand for the salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the
republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> I'll go through the department notices. Effective April 1, garbage bags of solid waste are no longer allowed to be placed on the curb for pickup without being
placed in an appropriate garbage receptacle. Uh the new hauler starts on or about May 1st. In April 2026, the tax office will have extended hours until 6:30 on the following Wednesdays to better accommodate residents during the
tax season. So, April 22nd, April 29th, May 6th, July 22nd, July 29th, August 5th, October 21st, October 28th, and November 4th. Election District number three will be moving from Somerville
High School on Davenport Street to the Somerville Rescue Squad, which is 135 West High Street. Election District 8 is moved from Lincoln Hose on Warren Street to this location, the Somerville Civic Center on 24 Roberson. The Memorial Day
parade will be held on May 25th, assembling at Culver and East High Street at the monument at 8:15 a.m. followed by the tour of Somerville, also on Memorial Day. Uh so obviously expect delays and detours. Committee reports. I will start with Andrew. uh historic
advisory committee did not have a chance to meet this month, but we did all get together for the um zoning board meeting and talked about the preservation of historic buildings uh and their importance to our downtown and historic districts.
>> Thank you, Gina. >> The uh rescue squad uh responded to 145 calls in March. uh through this time uh April. They've been dispatched for 78 calls. Um the uh board of health um will
meet the third Wednesday of May. Um they um have been working on various things. Um but they will be um working with the puppy pulooa program on Sunday uh doing vaccines. So um the they are working
together with uh the folks at at Bur Hall. So, um, thank you to all the volunteers on those two committees for all they do. >> Thank you, Glenn. >> Great. Thank you. Uh, the fire department's been very active. They had 55 service calls in March, including some outside fires, activated alarms, an
elevator rescue, and a weather related emergency. Uh, just last Sunday on April or sorry, two Sundays ago on April 12th, the members uh cleaned up the train tower, and participated in some other drills as well. So, we thank them for their service. I know they've also been busy with some calls recently, too. Uh
as you mentioned, Tour of Somerville will be held on Memorial Day after the parade. Uh it's the 81st running uh it's the uh premier uh bicycle racing in the country and there is an enhanced community zone that will be able to you'll find it between Bridge and Grove Street and lots of other improvements to
that. So keep your eyes out as uh some of the swag and other things will be coming out as well uh related to the tour of Somerville. And then uh the environmental commission uh we met last week uh right here and we want to invite all of you to come out and celebrate Earth Day on this coming Saturday the
25th uh for a townwide cleanup. We'll be meeting at 9:00 a.m. on Division Street and we'll disperse from town there, help clean up, and then come on back to uh celebrate sustainability with some local vendors and organizations for our green fair from 11 to 2 also on Division
Street uh come rain or shine. Additionally, uh the whole weekend, Friday through Sunday, we'll be instituting a townwide swap. We've done this in the past couple years. It's helped a lot keep a lot of things out of landfills. So, if you have some gently used items um that might find a new home
rather than the trash bin, uh you can put them out on the curb and uh people can take and swap them. And then uh anything that's left, we do ask you to bring in on Sunday, however, and find a suitable place to donate it. So, Environmental's been busy. Thank you.
Thank you, Teresa. >> Thank you. Um, so the Somerville Public Library is celebrating National Library Week all week. Um, there will be great programs for kids and adults ending with a concert by the Somerville School of Rock. That will take place on Saturday
the 25th from 12:30 to 1:30. The Library Board of Trustees quarterly meeting will be held this Thursday evening here at the Civic Center at 6:30 p.m. and the public is welcome to join. Thank you. Thank you, Randy. >> Thank you. Just a quick reminder, the
Somerville Police Department is asking residents who have Ring cameras or other home security to consider registering them. This is completely voluntary. No one has access to your system. It It simply helps our police know where where the cameras are if anything happens and
they need to follow up. You can register right on the bar website under virtual community watch. It's a small step, but it goes a long way in helping us look out for one another and keeping Somerville safe. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh from the Somerville Recreation uh senior real estate seminar
is going to be held on May 13th as part of the 2026 senior programming. Uh the Frank Quinn family fun ride which is before the uh big tour of Somerville race. Uh that registration is also currently open. Pool memberships are available now and you can register for
that as well. and junior pioneer baseball clinic with coach Navolo uh will also be is also available for registration under 2026 summer programs. So with that uh we have the uh public
hearing of the 2026 budget, but we have to uh have a a amend it first before we can do our hearing. Uh, so the amendment, and Paige, you can correct me if I'm wrong, is just some, um,
>> okay, that's fine. All right. So, uh, motion for the public hearing. >> So, moved. >> Second. >> Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Kiy, >> yes. >> Glen Deny, >> yes. >> Randy Pitts, yes. >> Gina Stravik, yes. >> Roger Verm, >> yes.
So, the public hearing on the uh on the budget is open. If you have any comments, you can approach the microphone. State your name and address. Mr. Mayor, good evening. Dennis Sullivan, 8 South Richards Avenue. I would strongly
encourage the council to adopt the introduced budget. Uh I've been reading online and in the papers for the last several weeks about the uh local and school budget proposals throughout the area and um some market increases this
year. Today at Piscatoaway announced and Piscato's got a lot of raidables, a lot of resources. Their burough taxes are going up $89. Bridgewater just to our north, again a community with a lot of resources, is
going up $151. And to my understanding, the introduced budget here called for a $27 increase. That's pretty good. And I think it's important for the public to understand that a budget for this fiscal year
doesn't happen by accident. it it really goes back probably several years if not a decade. So it's a cumulative effect. So the fact that the budget this year is extremely responsible and manageable
I think is a testament to anyone that sat in those seats since the turn of this century. So I would strongly urge you to support the budget with the necessary amendments. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Any other public comments on the budget? >> Motion to close the public hearing. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion. >> Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glen Deny. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. >> Roger Verm. >> Yes.
>> Uh next up we have uh amending the 2026 municipal budget. >> I'll kick that to you, Paige. >> Is this on? I guess so. Yeah. Okay. Um, so we just had to make some minor housekeeping changes for this amendment.
We had um $200,000 outside of the cap um for the reserve for reval because we're going to be doing a reval ordered by the county. So rather than raise it in an emergency over five years, we are putting it in a reserve so that we don't
have to do that. So we had it outside the cap. The state wanted it inside the cap. That's basically why we're amending the budget. So, it it's inside the cap. And then we had three grants that we added since we were doing the amendment anyway. And uh that's that's the extent of the amendment.
>> And it does not change the bottom line. >> It does not change the bottom line. >> Fantastic. Um so motion to amend the 2026 municipal budget item 138. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion.
>> Council members, I'm sorry. Are you ready? >> Fine. Council members, Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Ki, >> yes. >> Glen Deny, >> yes. >> Randy Pittz, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik, >> yes. >> Roger Verm, >> yes. Uh, so now, uh, with the amendment motion to approve the 2026 municipal
budget and userfriendly budget. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Council members. Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Kiy, >> yes. >> Glenny, yes. >> Randy Pitts, yes. >> Gina Stravik, yes. >> Roger Ferm, >> yes. >> Uh, next up we have a item for
discussion. This was uh going to be uh a resolution at a previous meeting 279926-0420 amending article 7 chapter 5 of the burough code by adding section 5-67 which is establishing a public art
advisory board. >> We're open for discussion. >> Yes. >> Why is this necessary? Per our current ordinances, public art is something that falls under DSA if it's downtown. I know we have arts on division is another organization that we've designated
charge of arts. I also generally think the government should not be dictating anything about art um and just let property owners that want to put up whatever murals or paint their house whatever colors or put up a statue in their it's not for us to say one way or the other how people express themselves.
I'm just curious as to the need for establishing a new additional third public art advisory body uh in town. >> Certainly. And I'll I'll throw this to Kevin because I know these discuss these excuse me, these discussions came up previously.
>> Sure. Thank you, Councilman. The um so there was a discussion uh adding this um changing the municipal code to include that really for several purposes. We have obviously the ARB that they focus pretty much on signage that comes in
front of the planning board. So the the applicant does not have to go to a full planning board meeting um to to do that and and their expertise is in that area. The signage um the DSA is predominantly focused within the special improvement
district. Um we do have another arts group that's not affiliated with the municipalities. uh some of the art um and and they have their own mission as well. The idea of this was as the municipality continues to grow, whether it be in development or
whether it be open spaces or just in general, to look at areas in which we can infuse arts into either development or or elsewhere. And to have the idea of the folks sitting on this would be they would be um very very much in that space
of art art whether it be sculptures, digital art or or or hand art whatever it may be. Um for the most part uh government employees we don't necessarily possess those skills. Um but the idea of this committee was to look
at areas in which we can somehow add more art to the municipality um in any way whether and and that we talked about with this group maybe anytime the municipality goes uh anytime there is an opportunity for a development to occur
to infuse that mandate into into that whether is if there is a tax incentive to ensure that uh those properties are are putting up properties at also would engage the public from an artist point of view. But that that that was the idea
of the committee. There's no one slated to be on the committee. The idea would be um people would submit resumes and and just like we do with all our other commit or like you do with all your other committees, evaluate those resumes and determine whether that person fits
uh the c fits in that category. Well, >> yeah, that was my next question is who gets to uh appoint the members of this advisory board? Is it mayor only? Is it council? Is it? >> So, I I actually wrote the ordinance. Um, and I just followed the kind of the the template that the burrow form of
government tends to follow. It's not mandatorily statutoily required. Um, but generally the mayor makes an appointment and and the governing body, the council uh consents to that appointment. So, therefore, if if the mayor if the mayor was to appoint someone that the council
didn't agree with, the council doesn't consent. And vice versa, if if the council wanted someone that the mayor particularly didn't want on the boards, um then then the mayor doesn't make that appointment. So ba basically everybody has the equal authority. It's pretty consistent with most of our committees
with exception to the ad hoc committees. The ad hoc committees are usually the mayoral appointments and the other statutory appointments like the board of adjustments, the council appointments like that. So, I just followed kind of uh pretty much how your appointment
structure works in the book in the code book. This is not wouldn't be an ad hoc committee. This should be an or a committee established by ordinance. um you know and and we do um for the most part not to get too lengthy is is there's areas that that we could
certainly from a government side um you know use some expertise in that area committee to kind of help um guide or or provide some policies on on on uh on whether it be murals or sculptures and so forth.
>> Question. Are there any limitations to the appointees? >> Um, I I don't think it uh I have to recall I it's not limited to I don't think it's limited to residents to be honest with you. I I >> Oh, there are no term limited limitations.
>> So, what happens is is a one-year appointment. I guess that's the term limitation. It's a one-year appointment that would be renewed every year, similar to some of the committees. Um, I know Councilman Pitts and I talked over the weekend if if the governing body
want to do stagger terms or or make them three-year terms, we can make that adjustment in the ordinance itself or you could establish a committee and they can make those recommendations. >> And could we keep it to residents? We we just I would love to see people that have skin in the game.
>> Sure. That that would be entirely up to um Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah, I think I think the vision originally was just a you know we it wasn't talking about residency. It wasn't talking about um it was looking for people that are expertise somewhat
expertise in that space. >> And Kevin, this was also uh something that would be inclusive of areas outside of the SID as well. It wasn't just uh concentrated on downtown. >> That that's correct. It would be a
burrow wide. That's why it would go beyond the DSA's review. >> So, I think it's two years ago now, we had a public meeting and we talked about what we wanted the police station to be. It
was a visioning meeting and the consensus from the community who came out was that they wanted it to be uh some type of arts center um music, dance, that type of thing. And you mentioned development. Does this tie
into finding someone to fund and and build and run a art center for a community? >> No. No. When I mentioned development, it was currently right now a a developer or a builder uh appears in front of the planning board. Usually
a discussion about arts is not had at that board. Um it's about the construction, the building and so forth. um this group would this committee would basically you know talk about that development and maybe there's an opportunity to add um you know art space
on the roof or or maybe maybe there's a public walkway where you publicly walk through the building that's available to to to the public. discussions of that nature would take place or or they could simply, you know, um request, you know, a sculpture in the back or something
that that um would lend itself to a more um public space where people would come in even though it was a private development and and be able to um enjoy the uh opportunity for public spaces. Um and and and it could also be in a park.
It doesn't have to necessarily be on development, but when you talk about the visioning, that was strictly a development vision. Um, I think I think it's it's more than that. >> This is more than that. >> Yeah, more than that when it comes to the art artist space
>> because I thought you just said it was less than that. It wasn't for development. I understood that it was not for the redevelopment of a of a space itself, but for the allowance and the review of art that would might go into a public space. >> That's correct. Yeah.
>> Right now there's no, you know, the idea again was to look at opportunities where where public spaces and not just public spaces, private spaces. You know, it's very common in certainly urban areas to to position the municipality in a in a in an in a
location where where where a developer or a private investor could um add arts into whatever they're doing. And right now I I that that's you know there there's no one that's that that that committee is lacking. It doesn't exist. >> And and I think you based on the the
statues we had a few years ago and then there was also the installation on the courthouse lawn. I think the thought was that to try to institutionalize some of this to try to help um increase Somerville's destination possibility and have some, you know, some framework for
how those arts are are laid out. But Gene, I think performing arts is a different that's not under this that's a separate thing from this. >> Thank you for clarifying. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Sorry about the computer. The DSA will continue to do right now they have a grant out for for a mural. They'll continue to do their work within the
Special Improvement District. It it it's a collaboration barrowwide. >> This as a uh as any other board we have, would this require a council person to sit on it? >> Uh the ordinance doesn't read that way. It could certainly be amended to reflect
that if that's a desire. This is an intro um I'm sorry, this is a discussion, so we don't have an introduction yet. Right. So what if if if staggered terms if if residency requirements if if a governing body member sit on those are things I could
put into the ordinance uh prior to introduction >> good >> worthy discussion >> fantastic thank you Kevin all right uh with that we're going to move on to uh opening up the meeting to the public um
for public comment session do I have a motion to open public public. So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion. Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. Yes. >> Glen Deny. Yes. Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. Roger Ferm. >> Yes. Uh public comment section is open.
Please direct your comments to me. Uh and uh we will address them at the conclusion. >> This is this is the open public session. So this is for everything right now. Um, we will have public hearing on the items in number 13. Um, but right now this is
open public comment. >> Oh, >> number 13 is the ordinances. >> Okay. >> Yeah. The all of the >> the storm water and everything else that's coming up. The public hearing for that is coming up >> right now. This is just the general
public comments. >> Seeing none. Going once, going twice, sir. There's a lot of folks here give people on people watching on YouTube don't know just your name and uh main address sir. >> Sure. Timothy Cullen 285 West Summit
Street. So my question is we've just changed the uh disposal company and now the uh garbage has to be inside of I'm assuming one of these green uh containers. My question is we've never really just been limited to only two
containers. There's always the containers. Plus, you could have a bag next to it. How do we What's the plan for the uh the neighborhood or plan for Somerville when somebody has a third bag but not another container? I mean, I I don't have a five containers in my backyard. I only have the two that we
normally allowed and then you were allowed an extra bag. How are we disposing of that extra um material if I don't have another container? >> So, right now this is comments. So, we'll take your comment and I'll address it at conclusion. >> Okay, great. Thank you. >> You got it.
Any other comments for the public session? >> Seeing none, motion to close public. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glen, >> yes. >> Randy Pitts, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik, >> yes. >> Roger Fern,
>> yes. Public session is closed. So, um, the cans, the whole concept behind the cans, and I know that there's been a lot of confusion out there on all sorts of, you know, various, uh, social media websites. Um, the display that we did a couple meetings back was just to talk
about a sturdy type of can. Uh, the the bid that we put out discussed because a lot of companies are moving to single operator and arms. Um, those were just again displays. As far as the bags go,
um I have a 96gallon toter that I've had for the better part of 10 years now. Um there's five of us in my house and I've I've counted on one hand the amount of times that I've had to throw out another bag. Usually what I do in those kinds of circumstances, I'll just go to my
neighbor and say, "Hey, do you have room?" Uh and vice versa. I know that uh I have found or or have had a text, you know, in the middle of the night saying, "Hey, can I throw a bag in in your uh trash for you there?" Um, so I I understand that it it seems limiting. Uh, the whole point was to to show that
with some of these more sturdy cans that are out there that it would eliminate the need for that. Um, and there are other things that that we can discuss down the line. I know folks are are looking for, you know, um, mass disposal days and things along those lines. Those are comments that that can be brought up
uh, later on. Uh but as far as things go right now, it is two cans up to 75 pounds, but in all honesty, if you fill up that 96 gallon, it's going to be a little bit more than that, I would imagine. >> Um thank you. The the um Yeah. So the
the ordinance for cans was a 2024 ordinance. >> Yes. >> Um which went into effect in the beginning of I think in the beginning of 2025, which the bureau just didn't enforce it knowing that it was going to change haulers. We did meet with the new hauler. Um the new hauler plans on
operating with a mechanical arm uh truck on a rear load opposed to what you see out there now. They will have two people on the truck. One will be driving that operates the hydraulic arm and one will be on the on the rear of the truck because again the burrow of Somerville does have bulk waste as well. So it
lends itself to kind of two people. Um we ran through a demonstration um and and and like council president said we we were able to fit about six bags in a can. So um the ability to put in a can
is greater than what you had before or what what existed before. So, um, but if if there are those instances, as we've had before, if you had more if you had more bags than you were allowed to throw out, you do have to get a sticker for that and that the the person on the rear
of the truck would would pick that up by hand. Um we we don't expect with the increased volume that you're allowed to throw out under the new ordinance opposed to the old ordinance that uh based on our history uh we it appears that we'll be able to get everything
into the sturdy can so they could be lifted. Now there there were questions and I apologize for taking the time. The the truck lifts the um has a hydraulic arm that lifts lifts the can. If the can is a sturdy plastic can and it can't
still can't be lifted by the hydraulic arm that will just get dumped in or picked in like the old time. Um so the the hauler does start on on May 1st. That's the plan. Um we felt that with the trial and everything it appears
okay. Uh but again we we do expect some some issues. There's there's no doubt we will struggle with on Main Street in some of the areas that seem to still have bags on the street. uh we'll work through them. The people will be notified um that they during the first
beginning of the process that they need to uh either purchase a can or put it in the can. Um and then we'll we'll evaluate and we'll we'll communicate uh e either via Facebook or or directly to that property owner. Uh our plan is also if you're throwing out something that's
that that's not in the can, there'll be a notice placed on it. Um Emy though it will get picked up in the beginning the property owner will be noticed saying that that was they need to correct that item >> and our goal really was to get bags off the streets uh because then you open it
up to you know possible rodents getting in the bags and things along those lines. So the more we can keep our garbage in the containers for the garbage pickup the better off we are. Right. Fantastic. Okay. What >> you on?
>> Yeah. Okay. I couldn't. That's fine. I can speak louder. You don't really want that. All right. Uh we have an ordinance for introduction. Uh that is ordinance 2800 and it is eliminating chapter 112 of the burrow code entitled newspaper
recycling listing chapter 112 as uh it will be changed to reserved. Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion. Just to be clear, this is we had an ordinance that said you could uh stack up some newspaper at the curb and
we would take it and now we're since the county picks everything up in their containers, we're now no longer need this provision. Correct. >> Councilman, thank you for clearing that up. The um because the title is the title in the book and I really can't change that, but yes, that's correct. Uh the old ordinance says you could throw
newspapers out on the curb and someone will pick it up. This is just a very very dated ordinance that was found while we were doing some research that we had to get off the books. >> Thank you. >> Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. >> Yes.
>> Glenda. >> Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. >> Roger F. >> Yes. Uh now we come to the uh ordinances for public hearing and adoption. Uh the first one for public hearing is 2791.
that is amending schedule uh 12B of the burough code to add a midblock crosswalk on Park Avenue. Do I have a motion to open public comment? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. Yes. Lensy. Yes. Randy Pitts.
Yes. Gina Stravik. Yes. Roger Verm. >> Yes. So public hearing is open on 2791. Seeing none, move to Oh, >> my apologies. >> Name and address. >> Hello. Yes, Jeff Kaiser, 23 Vandervir
Avenue, Somerville. So, this is uh so there going to be some white lines basically going across the the street. that intersection right before when you turn from Main Street onto Park Avenue, the the lines are really rough in that section anyways and cars come, you know,
pretty quick off of Main Street onto there. Is there any consideration of maybe adding some sort of like, you know, painting to that portion as well since we're adding, you know, doing some some some painting on on there as well. So, just wanted to bring that up. Maybe we could address that at the same time.
>> So, I can tell you um right now a temporary paint job has been done. Uh, as a matter of fact, the lines for the midblock cross on Park Avenue already there. Um, it's been already sprayed out. The existing crosswalk at the end of Park Avenue that meets up with Maine
has also been sprayed over again. Um, thermal paint will be done once PSEG is done with the road. Um, because with the PS with with PS&G coming through to river everything up, thermal painting is expensive. So, right now it has been touched up. it was it's much better than
it's been. Um but it right now it's just a temporary fix to highlight that there's actually a crosswalk there. So thank you for that comment. >> But thank you. >> Any other uh comments for or during this? No. >> All right. Motion to close public hearing on this ordinance.
>> So moved. >> Second. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glendon Eye. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. >> Roger Verm. >> Yes. Motion to adopt. >> So moved. Second discussion. >> Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. Yes.
>> Andrew Kiy. Yes. >> Glen. Yes. Randy Pitts. Yes. Gina Stravik. >> Roger. Yes. Uh the next ordinance for public hearing is 2792 which is chapter 149A- stormwater control. Do I have a motion
to open public hearing? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glendon. Yes. Randy Pitts. Yes. Gina Stravik. Yes. Roger Fern. >> Yes. Public hearing is open. Please approach the mic. Name and address.
>> Good evening. Uh Tim Deal, 76 Culver Street. Um hi guys. Uh the chair of the Somerville Environmental Commission. Um thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight. I prepared um something so I'm pretty much just going to read it. Um the Environmental Commission has spent
considerable time with this ordinance. Um, I want to share a little bit of our perspective specifically on four enhancements um that to my knowledge were not addressed during the planning board phase and are not reflected in the ordinance before you tonight on the
agenda. Um the ordinance that you're voting on um adopts the real rules um which they are a meaningful step um in the right direction and are a much better um you know en enhancement of
what we have um currently in adoption for the the town. But the real rules are really just a floor. They're not a ceiling. Um so what the planning board sent forward is essentially the updated state minimum requirements for storm
water management. Um and the environmental commission uh we believe that Somerville can and should do more um than just that state minimum um because we are not the average New Jersey municipality when it comes to
flooding and storm water. Um so we we need uh we need further than just the minimum. The ECA has spent considerable time developing four targeted enhancements grounded in the watershed institutes um 2023
enhanced model ordinance that they provided. Um these are not broad rewrites to the whole you know 80ome pages of the ordinance. They are specific additions that go further than some of the state requirements and they
apply exclusively to major development um already subject to storm water review and they do not regulate new categories of projects and do not impose any additional costs on homeowners which um is is a concern for for everybody. Um
the four enhancements include uh number one, water quality treatment for all imperous surfaces, not just parking and motor vehicle. Um two, a forested baseline for all pre-development calculations, closing the 5-year
loophole. Um three, an annual storm water maintenance permit with inspection reporting. and four, an expanded major development definition that covers all imperous reconstruction. Um, as you guys know, to support the
council in understanding these measures, which are dense and technical in um in nature, the environmental commission distributed an educational video and supporting materials last week on April 15th to each of the council members, essentially just outlining the technical
basis for these four enhancements in detail. Um, so I I hope you all had the opportunity to to review those ahead of time. Um, so I'm not going to go into to great detail tonight about those four enhancements since you guys were provided those materials um in advance,
but I'd like to take a moment to speak about um the cost because I know that that has been um a a concern throughout this process. Um, numerous studies have been completed relating to climate disaster impacts,
um, including the National Institute of Building Sciences and the US Chamber of Commerce. Um, their findings make a really compelling, uh, case for actually investing in resilience and mitigation
ahead of climate impacts. The most conservative estimates from the NIBS assert that every $1 that we invest right now on resilience and mitigation saves us $6 down the line um in avoided
damages, cleanup costs, and economic impact. So, $1 right now in storm water management efforts really means um pretty pretty solid return on investment down the line for for the the
municipality. And $6 is the conservative estimate. I've seen seen it um up to $13. Um so really the question is is not whether uh we can afford these enhancements. The question is who pays when we don't adopt
them. Um, so that answer is pretty clear. It's the Somerville taxpayer um through infrastructure repair, emergency response requirements, and flood damage that falls on residents um who had little to no say in the development that
exacerbated these weather impacts. In addition to these numbers, uh, Somerville can leverage annual storm water maintenance permit fees to offset any burough administrative cost under a state level um, law. Uh, additionally, a
stronger maintenance program qualifies Somerville for FEMA community rating system discounts on residents flood insurance premiums. So really, this isn't only an environmental um, you know, argument. It's a fiscal one as
well. Uh so one of the things that's come up um is how Somerville's flooding is made worse by the runoff that comes from Bridgewater. Um because they that municipality surrounds ours. Um and I'm
afraid that that argument has sometimes served as a fallback for inaction. At its core, the argument is correct. We are definitely impacted by Bridgewwater's impervious cover. But Manville and Brown brook are downstream
from us. So, how can we ask our upstream neighbors in Bridgewater to do better if we aren't thinking about the communities that carry our own runoff? Storm water is a regional problem. It
doesn't it it does require regional accountability. um which is actually an idea that the environmental commission included in the draft of our master plan which is currently under review for the planning board in regards to storm water management in Somerville. So this
ordinance is really um our opportunity to lead by example um in a region that is um significantly impacted by flooding and storm water. Almost done. Uh Somerville will continue to grow um and that is honestly
exciting. Um, as a resident here, I love living in Somerville. It's such a great place to live. Um, we have such a vibrant downtown and the council, the DSA, the burough administration, um, every all the different entities work really hard to make it both a
destination and a really good hometown. There is real ro there is real momentum here in Somerville. And that means that major development will continue to uh come come before the council and the other boards for approval. Every project
that moves forward under the minimum standard for storm water management is essentially a decision that we are making right now uh about what our infrastructure looks like a decade or two from here. I would hate for us to look back after a generation of
successful planned growth and realize that we had every opportunity to set ourselves up for success and we didn't take it. Developers will still want to build in Somerville. Our business districts, our transit access, our community itself make it a very
attractive market regardless. What we can control is the standard that we hold that development to. We are not trying to stop growth by any means. We are asking that that growth be held accountable for its impact and that it be completed responsibly in the face of
weather patterns that are already changing and will only continue to do so. This is not a burden on developers. It's just good planning. Um, so the Environmental Commission is prepared to draft amendment language for
all four of these enhancements that were put forth um last week for your review if that level of um input is is requested. Um but for tonight uh we are hoping that we can at least table the
ordinance for now and work uh to include some of these enhancements which we feel are very important for our community. Thank you. Thank you. >> Any other comments? >> Hello again, Jeff Kaiser, 23 Vandervir Avenue. Um,
hi everybody. Um I'm the vice chair of the environmental commission and I'm a proud volunteer who has the pleasure of working with some of the best community leaders back there and also watching tonight um on the on the EC and also the green team and led by you know our fantastic uh chair Tim. Um I hoped you
all watched my presentation that I sent out. Um I spent a lot of time on it as the EC has spent a lot of time on it since for the past five years since Ida understanding and and working on storm water management. After Ida, I was promote I was appointed to the ad hoc
flood advisory board um set up by Councilman uh Roger Vroom. And that was is when my deep dive into storm water management occurred. Since then, through my education in this field, I have driven the effort by the EC to draft a well-crafted storm water ordinance for
your consideration and well-crafted storm water educational information for you and the planning board to absorb. So on a personal note, these are some of the best pieces of work I believe I've done for the town. And tonight comes as the conclusion as to now have brought
the storm water conclusion. And now that you've brought the stormwater ordinance up for adoption. During this whole process, I've learned two major things about our burough's government and operation and about its representatives. I've learned how frustratingly difficult
it is, especially on such a technical subject such as storm water, to try and have an organized and constructive effort between all the bodies of our government and come up with a well-thoughtout result we can be proud of. I believe this ordinance you are set to adopt is a culmination of a
government pro process which is not the standard we should set for ourselves. We can do much better. We should and we will. I've learned that our second that's number two. I've learned that our two governing bodies, the council, mayor,
and planning board, say for you know a few people view their their decisions on storm water through two primary lenses. One, how much extra cost will this create for the homeowner? And two, how much extra cost will this be to any anyone willing to develop in Somerville?
Money. Money does come to my mind as well, but after a few other things. What if you were to read and watch what the EC has said? And what if you were to fully understand and believe what it did say that an increase to in cost to the homeowner is actually the result of
decreasing the cost to our developers. I urge you to read and understand the four amendments we are proposing and realize that the two primary lenses most of you, not all of you, uh, view this issue through are actually at odds with each other. They're inversely proportional.
The four amendments the EC is asking you to consider would not increase the cost to our residents since they are dealing with major development. I'd like to make the case that inaction on these amendments would actually increase our cost to our homeowners and our burrow as well. Inaction would result in the very
thing you're trying to protect. The storms are coming again and we and they'll be stronger. The rain is coming and will be more frequent and without forward thinking storm water measurements, we will pay more. Then again, these amendments would likely increase cost to the corporations and
people developing in Somerville. And I understand that this might make you nervous or extremely hesitant to adopt such measures such measures since that is your chief concern as you work to shape Somerville into a more vibrant burrow. But I think it is prudent of you to weigh the cost of not adopting these
four amendments. We ask that you weigh the implications of increasing the cost of developers versus increasing the cost of the homeowners and the burrow. As our climate will continue to make storms more problem problematic into the future, increased rainfall and stronger storms are going to result in the damage and damage to our property and our
basement, furnaces, hot water heaters, m washing machines, dryers, precious belongings, and damage to the burough's land and infrastructure. All that costs money. So, I simply ask you to consider the cost benefit of these amendments to the ordinance you're set to vote on.
Controlling storm water volume and pollution coming from the largest lands and land areas in Somerville would benefit all of us at a cost we can afford now that we are a destination town, not a burrow desperate for developers attention. I urge you to give
this matter some attention as deserves now rather than after another large development is built on a floodprone area in town and after Ida makes you realize that you had an opportunity to act now before the storm rather than after. Thank you for volunteering and spending
time doing as doing what you do. I hope you will table this and consider our amendments and then move forward and let's set a better example for how our government generates comprehensive legislation and leads on solutions to
our future problems rather than following minimal standards. Thank you. >> Thank you. Jared Dathio, 46 East Main Street, Somerville. I am one of the elders on
the environmental commission and I first of all, I want to just express my joy in listening to what you've just heard and the hard work that went into this. I don't know if you're aware of the number of hours spent in this room, that room
on these issues, but what I want to say, I'm not going to read anything. I'm just going to speak from my heart. Somerville is better than just good enough. New Jerseys regulations are just good
enough. The planning board heard us and they said, "Well, New Jerseyy's regulations are just good enough. They're good enough. We need to be better than good enough." When our country, when this United
States was formed by our forefathers writing our Constitution, they didn't say, "Oh, let's give them a little freedom. It's good enough." or let's just make two amendments or two articles rather than seven. It's good
enough. And when Jefferson wrote the document, the the independence, the >> Declaration, >> yes, of independence, he didn't say some men are created equal. He said all men are created equal. He didn't say let's
not give them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Let's just give them life. That's good enough. Well, it's not good enough. Somerville deserves more. Our forefathers had the foresight to see 250
years down the road what was necessary and would still be alive. Our people are asking you to look down the road. Not just about you today, not just about us. What about your grandchildren or your great-grandchildren?
Our constitution was written for a future. These regulations should be written for a future. The storms are coming. We know it. It's not a mystery. Somerville floods. I lived here. I next
week will be the seventh year that I have lived in Somerville. I could have lived anywhere when I sold my house. I have that freedom. I chose Somerville. Why did I choose Somerville? One, it's a comm it's a
community that cares. I drove the streets of Somerville before I even committed to coming here. And I listened and I looked and I walked on Division Street and I loved what I saw. And more importantly, I love what I
felt. And I have not been disappointed in living here at all. I'm a part of the environmental commission. I'm happy to be that. But I'm a citizen here. And I'm asking you,
is a minimum good enough? I think we're better than that. What do you think? >> Thank you. Good evening. Jeff Lamour, 32, Lisa Terrace. Thanks, Jerry. You can kind of
see where some of our fire comes from on the commission here. Um, I hope we can kind of learn from our elders. I won't I won't call her that, but we we we learn a lot from from everybody that's on the commission. Um, I'm going to push you one further direction and offer some opportunities that will cost residents
money uh for with regards to storm water. Um as a part of that ad hoc flood committee uh there have been many developments that have come through in the state since then. Uh one of them is a a stormwater utility and for those who are unfamiliar with that uh this is a
attacks of sorts on any property in the municipality or what even even in an example that's occurring now through a couple municipalities or region where those costs are shared for how to put the capital improvements the maintenance
and otherwise adhering to standards that are coming from the D or from otherwise for us um this uh storm water utility is an option in town. Uh a little bit down the road, Readington, New Jersey, uh Ruby Red over there has passed theirs
about a year ago. It's nice to see them go through with it. There's other municipalities that have done the same. Um we put this into our draft of the master plan for the planning board for review because we think that as a region in particular, uh we can go into the
watershed as it is would be beneficial to jump into this. Um, well, I I think it's a great idea because it holds any property that has impervious surface or what their development is on accountable. That includes uh normal non-radeables that are usually non-t
taxable, county buildings, hospitals, uh etc. um there's a lot of research left to be done on whether it's the right move but um I believe that a regional collaboration is something that we should continue to do and and further uh Bridgewwater who I have personally
engaged with um is willing to talk about these ideas um even going far as far back as 15 years ago there was a commission called the uh uh excuse me the Ritton Milstone Rivers Flood Control Commission. It's inactive nowadays, but
um it was a a plea to the Army Corps and the federal government. Let's work on Manville. Let's work on areas that have been decimated by floods and continue to do so. I think we're going to find ourselves in a position every 10 years or less where we're having flooding
that's significant here. Um, I'd like to propose that uh the council consider uh what it means to push forward to have a uh a review of of what is on the books currently for uh Somerville. I'll read off the communities that were previously on it. Bridgewater, Manville, Hillsboro,
South Bound Brook, Franklin, Milstone, Rocky Hill, and then the county itself in Somerset. uh revisit the idea of pursuing a storm water utility or some other regional storm water because what's on the books for us is important but uh what we consider abroad from our
where the rain goes comes down to us is is important as well. Um so I think uh we can do a little bit better than that and I do recommend the four enhancements the four amendments that Jeff and Timry have brought forward. I think those ones in particular are are worth considering. So thank you.
>> Thank you. Any further comment? >> Hi, Jenny Mariana Selius. I'm 23 Rimer Street, Somerville. Um, so I hear a lot about like the cost um being a concern here uh for this project like for to
implement this this other uh recommendations. And all I could think about was the flood that already happened here. And it is not about like we're we're thinking about just the cost. And as a resident,
I feel like I rather pay a little bit more in my taxes now than knowing that we are increasing in the amount of damage that is going to be done. But it's not only about all the physical
things that get destroyed. you know, with the water, but it's about the lives, not only how they're impacted, but like we know that people died in the storms. So, I think that I will be happy paying a little bit more in my taxes if
I know that that will save lives. And I think that if we are going to be saying like no the cost is too high, we should understand very clearly how much are we willing to not pay
and just live with the consequences of not doing that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Any other for the public hearing? All right. Seeing none, motion to close. Second
>> discussion. >> I would like to thank the environmental commission for all their hard work and for the public's uh listening. I know it's a lot. Um I I I don't usually prepare statements, but I I did do a lot of work and a little bit of research. Um
based on everything you heard today, I I I will highlight with a couple of things. Um, so know that this ordinance was supposed to be passed in 2024 in a less form. For whatever reasons, it's been kicked
around. Um, the environmental commission has brought it to forefront um with the new second the second state recommendations, the these real rules which you just heard about. We're remiss and we are not meeting our obligations
as a state. not having them approved. So, that's the first piece. The other piece I want to remind you of, I did a little research and as uh Jenny from Remerry just pointed out, um we need to
think about our future. We need to think about water flooding again. So FEMA and their website uh states that there have been 14 federal weather disaster declarations from 2011 to 2023
in central New Jersey alone. And that's just federal FEMA reports. That doesn't include the little flooding that we had if you remember this past July when we were spared but planefield got hit and people died. We also um had an
occurrence in December 2023 when um our OEM had to respond for flooding in our banks. So, as the environmental commission speakers said, these incidents keep going and it's not going to change and as as Jerry pointed
out, the minimum is not enough. Um and Jeff, I'm happy to approach the county again. And I did speak to him when I was chair of the environmental commission about utilities, storm water utilities when they first came out. Um, and we can revisit that. Um, as things have only
gotten worse. Um, so I can only support this minimum as a temporary um, ordinance and I think we have to do better as as it's been said. um and
temporary in the fact that we want to have something in place should there be other legislation, other con construction, other major development projects coming before us. But but I will um beg my fellow council people
here to take the next steps to fix this and make it the strong ordinance that it needs to be to make Somerville the leader in our state and in our region for sound practices. >> You don't have to beg. >> Thank you. I don't think you'll have a
problem. And I also just want to clear something up. I don't think anybody sitting up here right now is worried about the cost. That's not Nobody here right now is worried about it costing us too much to do this. That's
not a thing. Just to clarify that. >> Okay. Council members, you have a motion on the floor to close the public hearing. >> Yes. >> Right. So, you need a vote on the public hearing right? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Okay. >> I I didn't want you to lose sight of where you were.
Uh so let's let's do a roll call and then we'll have uh we'll go on to the adoption. >> This this is the you had a motion and a second to close the public hearing. Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glen, >> yes. >> Randy Pitts, yes. >> Gina Strait, yes. >> Roger Ver,
>> yes. Uh so now it's a motion to adopt. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Uh discussion. Um, I'd like to speak up for a second on this. Uh, as an environmental planner by education and a person who works in the sustainability
field, I hear everything everybody said and I 100% agree that we should do better. Um, but at this time, what we have on the books is not enough. And between the time it would take us to get the amendments fully integrated uh that
you're asking for if we tabled it this evening, there may or may not be new applications that could skirt around and use the old rules, which again are not enough at this point. So I would recommend and the reason I made the motion was so that we could get this
minimum in place. Uh and then I think we also need to discuss enhancements to that very quickly. So um my comment is merely uh I hear what everyone's saying. I 100% agree and more we need to do more
to give the water a place to go that's safe and free of people. Uh and we need to do more to make sure the water doesn't end up in Petersburg immediately uh or in everybody's street immediately. It needs to be retained especially by the largest most impervious properties
uh for as long as humanly possible before it impacts flooding throughout the municipality. Uh but without these rules that are in front of us tonight uh it will only be worse uh if someone decides to try and build something monstrous in the meantime or apply for
it, let's say. So that being said, uh as I said, I make a motion that we pass this tonight. I I would like to say to the members of the environmental commission, thank you. I've said it before uh when you guys came through previously, the time that's spent putting this forward and working
on it, uh it's immeasurable and this town is better because of the volunteers that are a part of it and that is the absolute truth. Um you know, some of us end up here and some of us keep doing the work behind the scenes, but it's all appreciated and that can't be over understated. um uh or overstated I
should say, excuse me, overstated enough. I will say sitting on the planning board and and this is important to understand is that the discussion around storm water doesn't stop with this ordinance. We're currently looking at the Eastern Central Business District
and there's been a very lengthy discussion about Park Avenue and about the area around Veterans Memorial Drive. These discussions are continuing. what the what the water means because it's not just one spot in town as we all know. Um the planners that planned this
beautiful burrow knew what they were doing. They looked and they said along the Peters Brook we're going to make that parklands and it served us well but now we've got to think about where we're going to in the future which was an important comment that was made before. Where do we see ourselves? So it's not
just this ordinance. The planning board is considering all of these things. And I I do recommend if you have the opportunity, it's the second and fourth Wednesday of every month meeting right here in in these chambers at 7 uh 6 pm, sorry, uh to come out again. We're having these discussions. We had at the
last meeting, we had quite a lengthy discussion about what does the what do the flood waters mean and then what is the zoning in those flooding areas and making sure that our books uh follow what the D classifies as those flood zones. So this is not we're looking at
one ordinance right now, but understand that these conversations are existing across everything that we're doing because everyone at this table and at that table understands the impact that water has on our burrow. But again, I before we vote, I just want to say again
and I think everybody in here is is of chorus of this. Thank you very much for your feedback. Thank you very much for what you have to say. Um and it all of these things are still being considered. So please do not think this conversation is over. Yeah, we're not letting it go. >> Roll call.
>> Council members, Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Kiy, >> yes. >> Glen Deny, >> yes. >> Randy Pittz, >> yes. >> Ganus Travik, >> yes. >> Roger Verm, >> yes. >> Uh, I'd like to make a motion of resolution from the floor. um to direct our planner to draft amendments based on
the enhancements suggested by the environmental commission and to direct the planning board to review and draft their response to us before the end of May such that we can take this back up this summer and adopt any necessary amendments from here.
Second >> council members Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Kiy, >> yes. >> Glen Deny, >> yes. >> Randy Pittz, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik, >> yes. >> Roger Verm, >> yes. >> Okay. Uh, next up we have uh ordinance
2793 replacing chapter 159 entitled taxi cabs in its entirety with a new chapter 159 entitled taxi cabs and transportation network companies. Do I have a motion to open public
hearing? >> So moved. >> Second >> discussion. Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. Yes. >> Glendon. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. >> Yes. >> Roger Ver. >> Yes. >> Seeing none, motion to close.
>> Not here for taxis. >> So move. >> Second. >> Council members. Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. Yes. >> Glen. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. >> Roger Firm. >> Yes. >> Motion to adopt. So moved. >> Second.
>> Discussion. >> Roll call. >> Council members. Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glen. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. >> Yes. >> Gina Stravik. >> Yes. >> Roger F. >> Yes. Uh, next up we have ordinance 2795
approving two amended and restated solar lease agreements and authorizing the execution thereof including associated easement rights. Do I have a motion to open public comment? >> So move. >> Second. >> Discussion. >> Roll call.
>> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glen. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Ken Stravik. >> Yes. >> Roger Furham. >> Yes. >> Pol is open. >> Seeing none, motion to close. >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Council members. Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. Yes. Glen. Yes. Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. >> Roger. Firm. >> Yes. Uh motion to adopt. >> I saw a move. Move it. Second. I'm getting tired. Discussion. Uh I just want to point out again that this is uh
solar leases on the landfill to help close the landfill uh finally uh properly and to put solar on top of it so that it can become a community solar project whereby the residences can uh sign up for that project and receive a savings on their bill credit uh from
that program from the solar energy that's produced. So, not only is this going to provide a lease to the municipality, it will close our landfill uh with state money and money from the developer at zero taxpayer cost to the municipality. Uh and ultimately provide
the benefit of solar energy and savings on your electricity bill should you so elect to participate in the program. So, just want to point out that this is a pretty big win for a landfill that's been not properly closed since 1986 um as long as I've been alive. So, I
just want to throw it out there that uh kudos to all that have worked on it. Colin for all the time that you've put into it. Uh and I'm I'm glad we're finally here this evening. >> All right. Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. >> Yes. >> Glen, yes. Randy Pitts, yes.
>> Gina Stravik, yes. >> Roger F. >> Yes. Uh for these next three, we're going to be taking them individually, but I would like to ask uh our land use folks to come on down uh to the deis and uh just give a brief before I open up
public comment uh for the public hearing, I will ask for just a brief synopsis and then we will open up uh the hearing to the public. So the first ordinance that will have public hearing and adoption is 2796 amending chapter 102 entitled land use
and development article 11 zoning to create the affordable housing overlay ah-2 zone on block 153 lot 4.22 in the burrow of Somerville and provide appropriate development regulations. Therefore uh
the block and lot Kevin are for that one. 153 >> for the for 2796 >> uh block 153 lot lot 4.22 but that's the um >> what address is that in town?
>> Well, I apologize. I I I know you have the Mountain Avenue property, you have the um the Granite building and and you have the Bell Avenue. I'll just have to look to see what order they're in. >> Okay. >> Sorry, I know that was off the cuff. Kevin 2796 is the Mountain Avenue
property. >> Great. Thank you, Mike. >> So, this is the Mountain A property um almost across from uh the end of u Brookside Avenue if I'm not mistaken. Okay, so quick synopsis like I don't know who wants to start.
>> I just want to thank you for allowing us to do this, Mr. President. I'm going to kick it across to Christopher being our affordable housing attorney, but as you know, we there's a lot of work for the last 18 months gone into this. So, I'll
let Chris do the talking. >> Thanks, sir. >> Uh, council, good to be back. Christopher Zingo, Reon Cofflin, Mello, your affordable housing council. I'll try to keep this um relatively short been here several times over the last 18 months. You began in June 2025 with a
housing element in fair share plan that set forth the mechanisms that the burough would use to satisfy its affordable housing obligation. And through the course of a number of um procedures, processes, we've reached the point now where under the statute um the
amended fair housing act, a burough a municipality needs to adopt the implementing zoning ordinances um in order to effectuate that plan. And that's what we're here tonight to finish up the last u approval of the last mechanisms. So there are three
ordinances and these ordinances are overlays. They overlay the existing um uh existing uh zoning. Uh the Mountain Avenue um is an existing zone. It's simply being modified to increase the density by a small amount from four to
six. >> That's correct. >> Four to six uh units uh an acre. Correct. >> Correct. um all exist all existing um regulations are still in place and that will capture um four additional units. Now what's
important to recognize is that this is not a development commitment to a specific project. If a developer comes along, as they could always have and wanted to develop these this parcel, they would have to incre they could increase their density and that would capture some additional affordables if
they choose not to or if they're not able to because of the plan. You know, it's clear in the planning board process that they can't meet a higher density, then there will simply be fewer affordables built on that site and we'll address that. Uh but this simply meets
your obligation to put the zoning in place for the next 10 years so that the property could be um could be developed the remaining uh excuse me so that uh units can be uh so that there can be a potential generation of units to meet
your obligation. Uh the other two's overlays are um the other two excuse me zoning ordinances are similar. One is a bell a is the zoning for Bell Avenue. That's a specific project that's already been before you with a settlement agreement. And then the remaining uh
project is zoning that's uh tweaks the zone zoning for West Main Street. Uh so those are those are before you today. With that, you'll we will have completed your fourth round process and you'll receive a compliance certification. It gives you protection from build to
remedy lawsuits through 2035. And I think it's important to note as you said there currently is no plan in place for Mountain Avenue. >> Uh that's right. So your obligation is to put the zoning there if a developer comes along. >> Correct. Okay. Uh so at this time we'd
like to open up public hearing for uh ordinance 2796. Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy. >> Yes. >> Glenn Deny. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. Yes. >> Roger Verm.
approach the mic. Uh name and address for the record. >> Good evening. My name is Kim Wartman and I live at 289 West Summit Street in Somerville. I'd first like to thank you for your service to the community and allowing me the opportunity to speak
here this evening. based on my review of the Somerville Burough housing element and fair share plan which was revised February 11th, 2026 and the proposed ordinance for block 153 lot 4.22.
I'm submitting the following concerns regarding the potential high density respectfully 426 is high density and it also represents a significant increase in development. The ordinance allows six
dwelling units per acre and a 5.04 acre site. While Mr. Kohl's report states it appears there are only 3.3 developable acres. Other public records
indicate 1.1 acres are wetlands which mathematically leaves 3.86 developable acres. potentially allowing over 23 units.
This represents a significant again with all due respect a significant increase in density to the original proposal and constitutes a high density largecale development at this location.
So originally I had um two asks but actually after listening to the environmental commission I have a different ask. My request is that the burrow acquire the space and create a park. Use green acres to actually create
a park. We have significant flooding. I was on council when Floyd came. I don't want to watch more people being pulled out of their apartments and their homes. Now, if you don't do that, I still want to go on record with my other request.
My second option, less desirable now after listening to this evening's presentation, is twofold. First, reduce the maximum density. Put a cap of no more than 12 units on that property.
You can't fit that many. I I invite you to come. I'll walk the property with you. Please come see what you're proposing. And two, affordable homeownership. Home ownership. I stress that word. Amend the
affordable housing component to mandate owner occupied rather than rentals and here's my reasons why. So first my first option which is green acres we're flooding. So please whatever if you need a volunteer to go fill out a grant I'm
your girl hero. I'll be there. I'll help you. Second, if you don't take that route, the reason for this is there is significant ambiguity with regards to the wetlands. The exact developable acreage is unclear
creating a risk. I know you don't have a developer, but all you all know once you develop the or you know, once you put the ordinance there, it paves the way. All they got to do is show up and comply. So, if six dwelling units per acre is applied to a larger thanex expected
developable area, we're going to be laden with 23 plus homes. Traffic, I don't know how many people, and we love our neighbors Immaculata, but come down our road on Mountain A and try to get to 22 at 2:35 p.m. in the
afternoon when they're dismissing. You can't get down that road. It's a game of chicken trying to get around and you watch folks going in the other lane. So this particular property at 165 Mountain Avenue will exit onto Mount Nav. So that
actual density is going to pour out on top of children who are coming out of school and individuals who are coming off 22 and out through town. So further density is only going to exacerbate this safety hazard.
Infrastructure stress. Oh my. The local sewer system. It's already strained with residents, including myself, experiencing necessary infrastructure replacements. I just went through it a month ago. It was horrific. And three of
my neighbors have as well. Adding highdensity units will further overburden the system. Furthermore, the I don't know if you've ever been in that neighborhood, but the surrounding streets don't have sidewalks and limited lighting.
This is going to add to an unsafe condition for our pedestrians and our children who ride their bikes in that neighborhood. And lastly, I know I talked about the affordable housing, but in terms of housing mix, given the numerous high
density projects, everyone spoke about it. Great place to be. Everyone wants to live here. We have lots of rental properties. I would encourage you if you pick option two, which I like door number one, which is the green acres, and I'm going to continue to stress that
is the affordable home ownership ensures a mix of housing opportunities for all our residents. Thank you for your consideration. >> Thank you. >> Any other Good evening, Henry Hughes from Six
Prospect Drive. Um, ma'am, you took almost all of my uh available data, but just one thing to add, um, I did provide for the record and for your viewing exhibit A, which is a document outlining the plot and the uh, wetlands there. So
just to add there um 40% of that track is uh deciduous wooded uh deciduous woody wetlands which does in the uh which does have a 50 foot setback requirement. So it's not 3 acres it comes out to be about 1.44 acres of
developable uh land if those setbacks are maintained putting the density closer to 20 units um per acre rather than the six. If you are if you were in some way to get a total hardship um a total hardship relief and have those
setbacks set all the way back to the line, you're now looking at a 10 uh lot per acre density, which now not only are you going to have that increased density on that site. You're further stressing the wetlands, further stressing that um
with those impervious cir uh impervious surfaces. Um so I won't belver the point. Just the only additional thing that I'll add is these quotas that are these quotas that we're provided with as our um number of units. Uh Somerville
should not accept this as a done deal. There are several of our neighbors that have had these quotas adjusted based on improper land allocation. Um Hillsboro is in the process of looking to get their quotas um reduced by 50%. Bridgewater has had their quotas um
reduced by 11%. And uh Raridan has also had significant um reductions in their quotas of this affordable housing. And it's not an it's not an opposition to affordable housing. It's to provide the fabric of this community to as many
people as possible and not have it destroyed by completely changing the density of uh of our neighborhoods. Thank you. Thank you again. Tim Cullen, 285 West Summit Street. So, I've been on Summit Street for a few years. I think it's
coming up on 30. And uh we had a development across the street that was fairly large. And uh the doctor who lived there wanted to split it up and put like six or seven homes on that property with a common driveway, you know, and uh I know that at the time we
also had a lot of concerns about it and were against it in the neighborhood because of just changing the whole fabric of the neighborhood from single family homes to now this fairly dense piece of property. So ultimately, one home got built on that property. But I
will tell you from living across the street, firsthand knowledge when I used to walk my dog in front of that new home that that poor person who owned that house must have had four generators in the basement pumping the water that was filling up his basement on a daily
basis, whether it rained or it didn't, from the water runoff. And it was coming out to to West Summit Street. as you would walk along. For the longest time, I thought there was going to be a sinkhole on Summer Street at any particular time because you could physically see what the water was doing
to the road where his sump pumps were pumping it out. So, I really uh when uh the environmental commission folks got up, I was really happy to see that because I will tell you that that area has got such a runoff problem with water. And uh I know that when we saw
this property um it took down the house that was on it that this was going to end up happening. And uh I really I'm against having high density housing at this section of town because literally that impervious coverage is going to cause a major
um water problem for these homes, the neighborhood, the the homes around it. and uh I'm just uh against having this kind of a high density in that particular area of town. So, thank you for listening.
Peter Roose, 190 North Midor Street. Um, everyone here has stolen my thunder here. So, I I would like to just parrot everything that they said right back at you. Uh, one of the things though on this whole thing is additionally the
concept plan included as appendix F uh of the revised February 2026 housing element shows a proposed disturbance area of just 2.7 acres. The bureau's own documents consistently point to net acreage. yet the ordinance says gross.
Maybe we could clarify that, too. Thank you. And I don't think anybody is opposed to affordable housing. It's just the density thing that's that's got everyone up in arms. Thank you. Hi, I'm Heather Burgerer, 18 Prospect
Drive. Um, I echo everyone else's comments and I agree. I'd like to add on to the Greenway comment by asking the town to adopt an open space easement over that space so that we can secure for the future a permanent um ease from
potential development and flooding and all that in the area because there is a tremendous amount of it. In addition, against the density um for the neighborhood. It's not consistent with the town plan for an R1 district and you
know really think that if we're talking about maintaining the integrity of the town um the plan as well that's in the appendix has a lot of flaws and I just want to point out I have great concerns about if you have an HOA it's not really
affordable housing anymore. the cost to maintain a bio retention pond as well as the retention wall and the streak snow clearage and all the associated really does not allow for affordable housing
with that kind of density. Um the other point I'd like to make is what the future development is for the remainder. Um as they mentioned the gross not net is a problem. Um at 165 is not the only
address in that section. Um the Mountain Avenue or the Prospect Drive uh property carriage house is also part of that lot. So I'd like to know what the intent if it's going to go all the way through to the depth of the neighborhood because as you said that's not final. So there is
the potential for that overflow high density to go deeper into the neighborhood as well. Um the tree canopy is an issue. There's a lot of old growth trees and there's a significant amount of tree canopy in
that area. So raising all of that for new development I think would be a huge detriment to the community. So those are my additions. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Good evening. Rick Proctor uh to Prospect Drive. Um, everyone else has
pretty much said everything, but I just want to uh note one thing. Um, I live my property is right behind that property that we're speaking of. I backed right up to it. Uh, recently I tried to extend my driveway, go through permitting to extend my driveway. Um, I asked if I
could use stone um just extend it like 30 feet by 10 feet and I was denied because of impermeable service uh surfaces and stuff like that. Um, this property, like Henry pointed out, could add 20 properties, which could be 20 houses, 20 driveways, 20 decks, 20 just
covering that over. I don't understand how, and I'm not asking you to answer this question, but the flooding in that area is terrible. And that's why they wouldn't allow me to put stone down. And stone is permeable. Like the the water can go through stone, but it's not going to be able to go through all this. I also like to point
out as you said the um property is right across from Brookside Apartments which as we know that floods all the time. Anytime there's storm issues in Peter Brook Peters Brooks is right there. Um adding and developing this this area is just going to continue to make that you
know flooded even worse. Um so I just wanted to add that because I'm right there and I see it happen all the time. So thank you. >> Thank you. Hi, Teresa Angus Reese, 190 North Middle Street. Um, everybody did such a great job and said everything I wanted to say, but I just said a couple things. I had
looked at about um the potential for um tax assessments and um I'm going to read to you in summary. This is a summary is zoning changes can lead to an increase in the tax basis of properties resulting in higher property taxes and it just said property owners should be aware of these potential changes and may need to
respond strategically to protect their investments. So I don't know how that would be but or in the future. That was one of the points I wanted to make. Um, I also wanted to say that about a week ago, um, I witnessed I was coming up from 22 and Immaculata was picking up.
They were getting an early dismissal, I think. But again, it was a very dangerous situation that someone was trying to turn left while it was probably way past the Ruben Estate. Cars were waiting to go into the parking lot um into their parking lot and a car two cars behind me passed me and the car that was waiting to go left and almost
got hit ahead by a car coming down. Um, I called the police department, asked them about it, and they said they had to do some kind of traffic study. Uh, years ago, there was one, but anyway, again, it's just going to be I think there's going to be a safety issue the for the children that walk there. Um, there's only one way in and one way out of that
of the estate. Um, so I just wanted to Kim already touched on that, but I just wanted to say something about that. And um my other thing is a couple of my neighbors that are abudded to the property have had constant water in their basements and they're that's we already people already talked about that
but that's something they wanted to bring up that they said that their basements flood all the time. So the development it just you know if they're taking away the the trees and everything like that and making it you know per not semi-permeable or whatever it will cause an issue. But I just want to go on
record that um you know that I'm not opposed to affordable living but a density will be a problem. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you. >> Any further? >> Uh you get one unfortunately. >> Yeah, it's only one per person. I'm
sorry. >> Good evening. I'm Brett Ratty. I live at 289 West Summit Street in Summerville. Um just a quick ask. So obviously, you know, we all pay uh portion of the county open space tax. So I'm not sure the last time the bureau received uh
funds from that particular uh tax, but I would ask if you would be kind enough as the council president uh to reach out to the uh commissioners at the county to see if there's any way that we could acquire that uh space uh through the open trust uh county tax fund. I'm sure
we don't have a big enough trust fund at the at the local level um to to accommodate that ask, but I was wondering if you could approach the county and see if we could purchase or if they could purchase that property on our behalf or even consider eminent domain at some point if that's if that's a possibility. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Any further comment on this ordinance? >> All right. Motion to close. Second >> council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. >> Yes. >> Lendy. Yes. >> Randy Pitts. Yes. >> Gina Stravik. >> Yes. >> Roger Firm.
>> Yes. Uh so I will say that you know uh obviously we hear what you're saying and I think it's important to go back to the testimony from Mr. Zangara is that anything that would be built on that property would have to follow all of our zoning guidelines. and that refers to
wetlands and that refers to all of the other different things uh that would come before the planning board for example the planning board were would still hear this application if it was a conforming use um whether it's whether depending upon the size and again there
is no plan at this point and I think that's that's the most important piece but as far as traffic studies it's part of planning you have to present a traffic study to the planning board and they consider that in the application uh storm Storm water management is part of your planning board application. Density
is part of your planning board application. Um, and that's that is the key thing that I I do want to make sure that everyone understands is that it all goes through that process. And just because it says that there can be a certain density in there does not mean
that it'll necessarily make that density based on the environmental features of that piece of property. And I think that that's an important piece. Um Mike, would you like to speak to >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Um
the density the the zone stays intact with the only exception. It's single family, same bulk standards with the exception of the density and the burrow frankly has no control over the density because the COA round three presumptive minimum presumptive density is six units
per acre. So it has to be six acres per units per acre. Right now it's four. So, uh, to back this up, it's the only developable lot in round four identified in the vacant land analysis. Since it
was identified as vacant land, you have to come up with a plan to address that. So, the fair that's why the the burrow had it on the the fair share plan. So, the density right now, the R1 zone is roughly four units per acre, 10,000
square feet. The R2 is 7,000 roughly 6,000 7,000. So the burrow has no choice but to change the density because the COA round three rules require six units per acre. So that's where the six units
per acre came from. Now regardless uh the storm water management, the wetlands, the flood hazard elevation, all that stuff has to comply with RSIS, everything has to comply with traffic, everything. Regarding the question of homeowners association, it's typical
that any development here, be it's four units, seven units, 12 units, it's going to have storm runoff. That oneoff has to be treated on property and it's common to have a homeowners associated and take care of the storm management facilities. So, it's envisioned that there simple
lots single family with common space. The common space is going to have some vision, some type of stormwater management. Hence the reason for our homeowners association to maintain the common ground. That's why that language is in there. But the language is
identical ex with the existing bulk standards with the exception of the density. And the burough has no control over that density. It has to be six. It can't be five. Can't be four and a half. It has to be a minimum of six units per acre. So what you have in front of you
is the minimum requirements by the statutes in front of you that's required. And it's still single family. It's not multif family. It maintains the integrity to the extent possible in the R1 single families. And back to it says
four units. Uh the the the housing element fair share plan says you round up. So if you have 12 units, you're going to generate three units of affordable. Why? Because it's more than two. 2.1 2.2 goes to three. So it says four, but in reality if it's nine units,
it's going to be two units of affordable. It's going to be 20% of whatever ends up being developed there. And what's going to be developed is we don't know, but it has to follow all the statutes that we're all aware of. >> Correct. And I I think there was another comment made about whittling down our
numbers. Uh the three folks that are in front of you and Mr. Luca did a lot of work uh through mediation to get our number down as low as it is because I think that there was quite a large number thrown at one point. Mr. Zenar, what was that number? >> Um
>> well, I'll just quickly say that numbers are were recommended by the state, right? We started there and then municipalities like the burrow that have an insufficient amount of developable land have the opportunity opportunity to take a vacant land adjustment and that substantially reduced what you
affirmatively have to plan for. And so um I I Mike, do you have the exact numbers? >> It was in the 300s and it took a few months to go from 320 or 340. This is what fair share housing was at. There
was a to answer the question there was an assertion made by fair share housing that the bureau had to satisfy round one two and three and that number was I think concept was either 330 or 34 340
and that number went from 340 to around 100. Um and then the fair share plan took the vacant land adjustment and got it down to a much more manageable number essentially. So, we've they've done the work and that's important to understand
is that this this has been again as as Mr. Singara said in the beginning, we've been going through this for over a year now. Um, and it's it's important to really clarify and Mike did a great job of that that zoning still conforms and
that we are held by uh by state factors unfortunately for >> for uh what the recommend not even the recommendations for what they require. Uh motion to adopt. >> Can I ask two questions? >> Yeah, me too. >> Well, let's Motion to Motion to adopt.
>> Motion. Uh so moved. >> Discussion. >> Uh Chris, can you explain to us what a builder's remedy lawsuit is and the results of that? >> Yeah. Uh so the way the the way the affordable housing um process works is
that if a municipality does not have a plan that satisfies its constitutional obligation for a housing cycle, which is typically a 10-year period. Um if you do not have a court approved plan, a builder can approach the municipality
with a proposed alternative plan for satisfying an obligation. If your obligation is 100 units, if your obligation 70 units, well, uh, the balls in the developers court as to how large a project they can provide, um, if the courts find that you don't have a
compliant plan that's been certified by the courts, they then move on to the stage of awarding a builder's remedy, um, and they strip the zoning authority out of the municipality's hands and apply, uh, and determine what project should be placed. Um and so that builder's remedy lawsuit that be that
that risk begins as soon as the court finds that you don't have a compliant plan and we have pretty strict statutory deadlines this round. >> Right? So just to be clear theoretically and I hate working in hypotheticals but let's just think if we take in an action on this and don't do it and we have this
is our only vacant property in land in our burrow that can be developed into affordable housing. A developer could show up, a court could give them the ability because we didn't comply to recommend whatever they want even though it wouldn't meet our zoning requirements. And we could end up with a
tower that fits 70 to 100 units, all affordable housing, as opposed to developing a neighborhood that is 20% affordable housing that has to meet the underlying zoning requirements. Uh that's kind of to some degree the trade-off we're looking at with this
ordinance tonight. If you don't have a compliant, if you don't have a a compliant plan, that's the bill of remedies are are always out there ready to be brought. >> The argument would be the bureau is not meeting its constitutional obligation. Therefore, the developer wanted to do multif family, >> right?
>> They could certainly make the case and say, courts, we have the need, the burough has a need for 100, and this is how I'm addressing it, >> right? And I'm I'm new on council uh newest on council. So I cannot uh explain by any means why other councils
prior to this have not taken up affordable housing, but I'm happy to be part of a group that is taking it up. Uh but I do have the question that it was raised and I don't disagree with uh it might be a great idea. We passed this ordinance in order to make sure that we
are compliant and are and within our requirements. Um, is there anything to stop a future council from making such a decision to raise the money through funds of grants or otherwise to turn part or all of this into an conservation easement or a park?
>> Just to give the really fair legal answer, that's a complic it's a very complicated process and I only say this uh there's going to have to be a lot of moving parts. You're going to have you certainly could raise those funds and what you'd have to do is make sure that you work to ensure that there are other
properties that you're amending your plan. So, there's going to be some procedural hurdles um or steps to get there, but that's a process you could discuss and um certainly pursue. It have to go back to the court. You have to amend your plan. So, there are definitely steps along
>> and in the meantime, we'd have to hope that a developer doesn't show up with something compliant on the property until we purchase it. >> That's fair. Sure. >> Yeah. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other comments, concerns?
Well, my question the same was could we still pursue open um space uh funding if we approved it? Um and you're saying yes, but it'd be difficult. >> No, I'm certainly as to the open space funding. I'm not going to comment on the
procedures for acquiring open space. What I'm saying is that if the burrow chose to pursue the acquisition of this land, it would need to make sure that it followed all the all the we need to make sure it follows a path to speak with fair share housing center to speak with
to go before the court to amend its housing element. Were it to simply unilaterally choose to simply purchase this property effectively removing it from its plan >> that would complicate >> but we could find a trade-off somewhere else. Yeah, you have to come up with the
four units. The housing element plan would have to come up with the four units somewhere else in the burrow. >> Gotcha. >> Right. >> One last quick question kind of building off of what Gino's uh councilwoman's mentioning. Uh could private citizens or a private organization or a nonprofit decide to collectively go out, collect
the money, and themselves purchase the property to keep it from being developed into what is written here? >> Theoretically. >> Theoretically, yes. The process is that five years from now, the burough has to give an update to the
courts on where we are where the burrow is in this affordable housing. So if we're not making the numbers or the anticipation, it'll have to be addressed at some point to answer your question. Is the number 40 units? No, it's four. Is it could it be is that a huge hurdle
in my opinion? No. >> Thank you. And as part of this process, and Mike said it before, we had to do a land assessment and we had to have a plan for all vacant land. So, this had to go to the state. And where we sit right now was achieved through multiple rounds of
mediation to get to this point. >> Yeah. And it's been expensive. >> All right. Roll call. >> Council members, Terresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Ki, >> yes. >> Glendon, >> yes. >> Randy Pittz, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik,
>> yes. Roger firm. >> Yes. >> Uh, next on the agenda is 2797 which is amending chapter 102 entitled land use and development article 11 to create the affordable housing overlay ah01
zone on block 127 lot 4 in the burrow of Somerville and provide the appropriate development regulations. Therefore, quick overview on this one, gentlemen. Sure. Uh this is a implementation of the
zoning for a previously um settled for property that was part of a challenge to our affordable housing plan. This zoning implements the um this implements the zoning for to make that project possible on Bell Avenue. That was uh a settlement
agreement was previously brought to you at the last council meeting uh that incorporated this uh zoning. And this was um this zoning was developed through a very complicated um extensive negotiations and uh court med court mediation. And so we're here on the
second reading. >> Thank you. Uh motion to open the public. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Second. >> Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. >> Yes. >> Glen, >> yes. >> Randy Pitts, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik, >> yes. >> Roger F. >> Yes. Uh public session is open. I'd like
to approach the microphone. Yeah, every once I open it back up, everybody gets a fresh start, >> but unfortunately we can't come up and then sit back down and come up. >> Yeah, no problem. Same question. Uh Rick Proctor to Prospect Drive. Um just because I'm ignorant to it, but I I I'm seriously wondering why does Brookside
Apartments and the senior housing not satisfy >> the affordable housing? And if we have known that we're supposed to be doing this, why couldn't it go in all those apartment complexes that have been popping up all over the central business district, which are already like rental
areas? Why does it have to go in a homeowner area instead of the rental areas? That's all I forgot to ask that last time. >> Evening. Uh Jim Gilroy, 53 North Midall. Uh, apologize. Just came from the fields, obviously. Um, so sorry for
you're wearing suits. Um, the problem, and I know the state's making you do it, but you're changing the rules. We bought houses in single family zones. And never dreamed that you guys would change the zoning in the towns, right, in the places that we
lived. And now we're dealing. I bought my house. I knew Midall Street was the Daytona 500. I get that, right? I have a backyard. Bell Avenue. There's a church on Midaw. Good luck getting down Bell Avenue on a Saturday because churches, they have church on Saturdays on that
church. Right. It's a one-way street. There's a daycare behind my house. Did you guys know that? Right. I know it's renters and we're just talking about, you know, everyone was here talking about four houses on uh Mountain Avenue.
I'm talking about 38 more properties, 80 cars on a road like Bell Avenue and you're not even putting it out to Midall planning put it out to Bell Avenue that does not have the infrastructure for
this. I know it's the record and and you're being forced to do this. I'll just simply say I'm look I'm looking through the ordinance and it said that you're adding these units and then you're putting in 10 chargers
uh EV chargers right so I'd ask you to look at that because not only is Bell Avenue now going to be incredibly congested but now PSEG is going to come and upgrade my 15 my 14 KV that's out in front of my house knock down those poles
and probably put in subtransmission 69 KV because you're requiring to put the EV chargers in. Like these things have consequences and it's just very hard. And this neighborhood is not like I don't mean in a bad way like you know the Mountain Avenue neighborhood. I got
renters. I have uh elderly people. Uh and you know we're not up here screaming, but it's just very hard when I guess the rules are changed from the beginning. And I mean my wife said call Pat Kelly. So, I hope I'm still wearing
orange later. Thank you very much. >> Back again with a different board. Mike, George Palco, 21 Bell Avenue, Summerville. Uh, I wasn't really planning on speaking today, but after listening to the environmental commission and uh, the gentleman just
spoke as well as the Mountain Avenue people, a lot of my concerns are the same. I'm on Bell Avenue, the other end of Bell, almost in Rarit, about 100 feet from Raritan. U, guys are whittling us down. Um, we've lost one of our neighbors, uh, deceased
last year. Another one has dementia is no longer with us. And we had a pretty full house here for the zoning board. And we felt the zoning board really had an idea of what was going on because the Bell Avenue property didn't really fit a
lot of the zoning restrictions, too dense, buildings too tall. Um whole lot of different issues. So first I have a question after this. Where do this does this go? Does it go back to the planning board? Does it go to do you
guys make the final decision on does the builder have to resubmit plans? >> I'll address that when the hearing is over. >> All right. Uh, as the last gentleman said, our street, it's it was a quiet street. Uh, we've got people on there
been there 40 years, 50 years, retire. Uh, we've got combat veterans such as myself. Some of us have PTSD where we like quiet and don't like noise. that's going to change. Uh, a lot of the issues we brought before
the zoning board, I assume you guys haven't even heard unless you watch the video of those proceedings. Uh, and so we feel like, you know, it's going between this board, that board, the rules have changed as the last speaker said, and you can see there's only a
couple of us here today. People are getting frustrated. uh hopefully not giving up because there are still issues and a lot of the issues we have are the same as the issues that uh the first group of people uh on Mount Avenue brought up the density of the
units. It's just too dense. And if any of you, and I hope you have, have gone down Bell and actually looked at the property and envisioned all those buildings, that's a lot of people coming into a very quiet and subdued street that some of the houses have been there
over a hundred years. Uh, parking and traffic. The last gentleman also mentioned that our street is a one-way street if there's cars on both sides. So, it can become basically a one lane bridge. Uh, you know, I looked and
followed very closely the reports that Mike had done and developers initial plans. And of course, they always paint the rosy picture. It's only going to be this many cars. Well, they they're kind of using like 1955 stats that, you know, the wife stayed home and cooked and the
husband went to work. Those days are gone. Not accounting for visitors on a Sunday or holidays. you know, we really don't want our street packed on both sides, which I think is going to happen, you know, and then seniors look out the window at night if they see cars in
front of their houses. I'm not calling myself a senior by any chance, but some of the neighbors are. Uh, and you know, they get a little worried like, why is that car there? You know, you know, I don't remember that before. We have issues of the water water remediation.
Uh, the mayor himself has been to my house on Bell. I brought into the zoning board 13 by19 pictures that I blew up of our street during not only hurricane but a tropical storm. It's underwater. Our
sidewalks are underwater. My backyard is an actual lake. I mean, it is almost up to my house. So, I'm paying for flood insurance even though I'm not in a flood zone. Hundreds of dollars a year just to be careful. Um, we've got issues with,
you know, um, toxic dust from demolition. The developer says, you know, it's all cleared out. Do we trust him? I never quite do. I mean, they have experts, but I worked in the court system for a lot of years. And the
prosecution has expert witness. Defense has an expert witness. Both experts, two different opinions. So, we want to make sure the town really checks that closely. And we only hear years later that you were bringing in toxic dust from demolition
sewer system. The other gentle gentleman mentioned that how is that going to impact? U again storm drains are not working in our street right now. Uh the water comes from Bell Avenue down towards Cornell which is the end I'm on. And I can show
you numerous pictures from different times where our street is totally underwater. The storm sores just bubble up. get back up. And when they redid our roads under when uh Christy was governor, no one really knew what was under there.
It turned out our road was hollow underneath with some kind of steel bars going under. No one knew why they were even there. So, a lot of our storms just no one really knows what's there, what pipes go where, what sizes. Uh the mayor
came in my backyard. They brought it through. They lifted. there's a big storm crate in my backyard and they kind of said, "Well, this doesn't make sense because big pipes going into a small pipe. That could be part of the reason." So, we have a lot of issues on this. Um,
you know, I understand the affordable housing part and I realize summer kind of backed itself in a corner again. I think it might have been you that mentioned or one of you guys mentioned that probably should have been done before. uh maybe with the city that's
behind us uh but it's not to be. So to go back to my im original question uh where do we go from here? >> Like I said at the end we'll I'll go once I speak. Okay. Thank you.
Appreciate your time. >> Thank you. Hi, I'm uh Vicki Tarantino Proctor. I'm on to Prospect Drive. Um this is my first time speaking at a meeting here
and so I I thank you for all that you do for the town. Um I've sort of just sat back and listened because I don't generally involve myself in in matters, you know, really and It's inspirational
listening here. I I feel as though um perhaps with more regularity I should. However, I just would like to um in addition to echoing all of the concerns that have been raised on both properties um Mount Nav and Bellav. Um you know, I
echo the concerns and the questions in particular that were asked along the way here. And I just wanted to ask also that um when the answers are given to some of those questions um to please to please
not ask us to accept the best case scenario or sort of ask us to oh we know that the ordinance is going to allow all these things but please know there's no plan because as it was said earlier we do know that it's it's setting the parameters for exactly that to happen.
And so when um you know when we were discussing the last issue and I think it and it relates to the Bell Avenue issue, we were asked to consider the worst case scenario which is why we should be in support of the issue because the worst thing possible could happen if it's not
passed and yet we're asking you're asking us to have a pallet for it because once it does pass don't worry the best case scenario could be that you know nothing would happen no developer might come just because it is. Um so I just ask that um or would rather suggest
and just add to the commentary here that when the answers are given um perhaps they not include an answer that says oh but please just hope and assume that it won't happen um because one of the reasons given why we should accept it was that the worst case scenario would
be if we didn't. So what is the worst case scenario then for us as residents if these things do happen? Um, I mean, it sort of echoes the last gentleman where he said, you know, where does that leave us? Because I would be remiss if I didn't echo Mr. Gilroyy's commentary of
young families that have invested in a certain thing that we thought we had. It very much looks like that's not going to be what we have anymore. And we know the value of what we have right now. We enjoy it. And so when we really see a
steep potential decrease in our future, there's a lot of unfortunate reasons to consider leaving because it's just it is it's real money right now for young families that could potentially be impacted. So again, I just I just ask
that question and when the answers are given that we please not be asked to assume the very best case scenario um when also being asked to assume the very worst in in tolerating them. So just consistency in that please. Thank you.
>> Motion to close. >> So moved. Second. Council members Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Kiy, yes. >> Glenda, yes. >> Randy Pitts, yes. Gina Stravik, yes. Roger Fum, >> yes. Uh, so I will say um to the last
comment, the the takeaway that I I think for myself that I wanted everyone to understand is that there are zoning regulations. And that's really the big piece of this that referring back to the previous um the previous ordinance that
we passed has to conform to zoning. The one that's in front of us right now uh this plan was created through mediation. So this went to the courts. It was through mediation that it came to this. And since it was brought up that it was at the zoning board, it is no longer
going to be going back to the zoning board. will be going to the planning board from this point forward. But I will let Mike talk about the concessions that were that occurred from the original plan that was heard at zoning to what currently uh was approved through this mediation. >> Thank you. Uh the original plan was 38
units. Uh the board of adjustment had issues with that. Uh the fair the original fair share plan envisioned 30 units to take the two buildings off. Uh the planning board was comfortable with that and as Chris entered this we went
through a very lengthy mitigation mediation program and the settlement was 34 units for sale with the option of the developer either rental or for sale for the the additional affordable housings. So uh
the swing was 38 to 30 to 34 was the ultimate settlement agreement. Um It it wasn't my number one desire or the planning board or I think the council's number one to have 34, but uh that's how
it went down on settlement agreement and it was again three buildings. So the buildings furthest to the east with both the board of adjustment and the planning board and concept had a problem with are not there. So there's green space up against the residents toward the east.
Uh, and there's three buildings that are half town homes that addresses. >> Yes. >> And I'll just also note that there are a lot of components of the settlement agreement. And one of the items that the burough was able to obtain were certain
uh design um certain concessions on design elements uh that were built into the ordinance that were part of a negotiated settlement. There were a lot of components that the bureau was able to walk away with. um uh despite reaching a settlement. But yes, the the
the um excuse me, the developer would need to come before the planning board uh to obtain planning board approvals and that's and that'll be uh obviously in the future. Again, that application has not come before the planning board at this time. Um but it it may come in the
future uh with the design that has been set forth in the settlement. Um, >> yes. Uh, >> I think there was a question about why this wasn't done and in incorporated in other parts of town before this, but I really wish the mayor was here so he
could help explain the logic behind avoiding any of these obligations prior to this. But unfortunately, he's sick, so we wish him well. But I am, it's important to know that I don't think any of us were really comfortable with the way in which this developer had us over a barrel during this process. They were very opportunistic in putting us in a
position where we could not not have a negotiation over it uh in order to settle this. Otherwise, we would have been subject to to worse potential outcomes. Um but um you know, I I I wish I had more answers as to why it wasn't addressed prior to this in other denser
parts of towns. Those are questions I have as well, which is what led me to be up here. So, I have to say thank you for all of you participating in government tonight. And I'd love to see you all come back and want to participate more because the more we hear from you, the more we know what we're talking about
here. Uh otherwise, we're just going off of what our neighbors say to us or what we can best judgement in what we know. Um but I I don't have an answer for you as to why it wasn't uh addressed earlier, but it is being addressed now. Um we'll I'll take the responsibility
for taking responsibility for it. >> Well said, Andrew. And and Mike, I I think this might be the perfect time to see a as we work through the planning board plans when development comes to be, you know, what can we bargain for with additional agreement infrastructure, can we look at the
issues on Bell Avenue and the surrounding area and see if there's other things we can do? We've done pretty successful things like uh the rain the the rain gardens on on um at Carol Pedro Park. um how that captures a lot of the downhill runoff and maybe we
can look at some some simple things that that aren't overly costly that will bring solutions to to the residents and the flooding issues. Um and continuing with what uh council is saying the entire burrow because there was
questions about uh currently why we're focusing on a few of these areas and I think the important thing to understand is that again going back to uh the land use uh uh mediations that we went through the one area on mountain is undeveloped land that can be developed.
That's why it's part of this plan. Um the location on Bell Avenue was also mediated which is why it's being approved right now. And the Granite area was just uh we just created that as a redevelopment zone and that also falls
under the fair fair share housing agreement that we came to because it is a uh impending redevelopment. So when you're asking why it's certain these certain places, it's happening as a mechanism from us getting to this fourth round with our housing element. Um
understand that the entire burrow has an overlay zone over it for affordable housing. So it's not just a few pocket areas. We captured through previous ordinance that across the burrow affordable housing can be created. Um
and and Chris, if you'd like to speak to that. Just cl just one uh council uh council person just one item. The set aside basically says that if a developer comes in and uh brings an application to develop a property under the existing zoning that's in place that zoning
applies. You just have to meet a set aside of 15 or 20%. 15 for rental if you're doing a rental project 20 for for sale. And that just means whatever zoning is in place, you go to build, well, you got to incorporate affordable housing units into that uh development
proposal >> anywhere in town, >> anywhere, >> anywhere. And if it's development that's less than five units, is development fee. There's exceptions to one and two family homeowners, but the development fee is a equalized assess one and a half or two and a half%. And the purpose of
that is for the bureau to rehab and to uh promote affordable housing. >> And again, that's all in our previously passed ordinance. Uh the other question before we move on was about the car chargers >> by the DCA. We are required to have a
certain number in new developments or redevelopment areas where we're supposed to have a certain number of parking has to have um chargers. It's not it's not a Somerville rule. It's not negotiable. It has to, unfortunately. Um, and we've actually had previous conversations with
the planning board about that um because we've we've had discussions about where they should be placed uh due to concerns of other issues that that come with electric vehicles. So, we've we are aware of that, but I I know you said I know, but unfortunately, it is what it
is because of that. >> It wasn't your fault. >> No, it's the state statute. The state >> the state statute says says it point blank the bureau cannot issue variances or waiverss for the EV mandate. >> Yes. And it has >> it has to go on.
>> Yes. And it has to be within a very it has to be in proximity and on the property. It can't be at another location. That's another thing. Uh because we've again at planning board we've tried to be creative about that. Uh so at this point motion to adopt.
>> So moved. Council members Theresa Bonner, >> yes. >> Andrew Kiy, >> no. >> Glen Deny, >> yes. >> Randy Pittz, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik, >> yes. >> Roger Verm, >> yes. >> Uh, next up we have our our final uh
ordinance for public hearing and adoption is 279 uh or 2798 amending chapter 102 entitled land use and the development article 11 zoning to create the affordable housing overlay. uh AH03
zone on block 130 lot one in the Burough of Somerville and provide appropriate development regulations therefore and this is the granite area um in the new redevelopment zone that was created there was a redevelopment zone created on that side of town um specifically
naming the Granite area but others in the triangle that's there and that's um New Street and >> Somersets >> yes in that in that triangle there could could opt in. At this point, the only redevelopment in that zone currently is
the Granis building. Did I Did I get that right, Mike? You have it right. Fantastic. Uh motion to open public. >> So moved. Second. >> Council members Theresa Honor. >> Yes. >> Andrew Kiy, >> yes. >> Glenda, >> yes. >> Randy Pitts, >> yes. >> Gina Stravik, >> yes. >> Roger Firm,
>> yes. Motion uh public session is open if you'd like to approach the mic with any comments. Kim Wartman, 289 West Summit Street, Somerville. Thank you and thank you for all of your input and your thoughtful exchange. And I actually hadn't planned on talking about granit, but now given I
probably should have been here a few other meetings. I've been busy in Bridgewater um attending those meetings for Cornell Boulevard. So, I guess I'm going to pivot back to Somerville. So my question is Bridgewater actually created
an AH3 zone on Cornell Boulevard and on that specific lot it is a 100% dedicated affordable housing. Is there anything to preclude Somerville from doing that with the Granite building to achieve that
density which they actually got a 10 times requirement like so they put in 15 units and they got 10 times that amount in terms of credit. So they got credit because they created a specific affordable housing zone just dedicated
to affordable housing and they got credit for 150 units. So my question would be why wouldn't we do something like that with the granite building which would alleviate the need for Mountain Avenue as well as Bell Avenue potentially. I know it's a little late
to the party, but um I would certainly respectfully request that something like that be considered because Bridgewater did a fabulous job with theirs. >> Thank you. I don't I don't agree with that one, by the way. >> We understand. >> Any other comments on this
>> Janice Mace Holder, uh 13 Bell Avenue. Something that surprises me the when we talk about um people, we don't talk about children. You're getting all these
new apartments or or homes and you're not talking about children. is we know from living on Bell Avenue that there are cars driving back and forth from
Rariton um and from someville to 206 and it's amazing that no one has been killed. Many years ago, one little girl almost
was killed um because she couldn't hear and I ran out in the street and caught her before she was hit. Now, my point is you we're going to have all these um new
homes. will have children and h I have nothing against against kids because I taught for 29 years but I'm concerned that that never comes up. I've been to other kinds of sessions, not here in
Somerville, where people never consider children and um that needs to be considered because we're going to get a lot of little kids running in and out of the
street unless and somebody might just lose their child. Thank you. >> Thank you. Nancy Bellow, 8 Spear Street. I didn't plan on speaking tonight. I wanted to come here and hear what people
had to say. I wanted to see what you all look like and what you were about. And I have a couple of things that I'm I am 58 years old and I grew up here. I was born here
and I have seen this fascination with developments with this place. Let's bigger bolder bigger Westfield like you know brand new spanking. When I grew up,
this town was was rated number one by Homes and Garden as hometown USA. And that was the the town that I grew up in. Everybody knew each other. Now, granted, I do know quite a few people here but
everybody knew each other. Everybody, it was safe. We didn't think about, oh, let's redistrict and let's do this. And I think Something you guys need to think of is, you know, I see all this stuff coming through and you know, yes, yes,
yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. Let's just Yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. We want new development, but you guys are the only people who have the power to stop it. You need to really think like I love some of these comments like Kim made, you know, like why didn't anybody here
on any of these boards figure that out before you get to a point where you're behind the eightball and now all of a sudden, oh, we have to do this, we have to do that, we have to do that because we've been mandated to do that. But somebody
somewhere needs to stop the craziness. Like they said, you know, we've got all these kids that we need. We love our kids. You know, I'm sure you love your kids. I actually, unlike some of these people, I don't butt up to those
properties. I live on a dead end street. It's not going to personally affect me. But what does affect me is the fact that the character of this town is going to pot. And that bothers me because I grew up
here and I have a very grounded background here. My mother used to work for him. My father helped build Lincoln Hose. My family started the Kelsey fund.
I have a, you know, there's something here in Somerville that's a little different than other places. I left. I moved out and I came back and I thought I would retire here. But the way it's changed, I don't think I'm going to do
that because all I hear is yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. Without really considering, could we possibly have another alternative? Maybe there's how about here's a thought. Oh, this property is for sale. Let's buy it. Let's put let's put a low
income there. Let's put a low income there. Why do we need to have like this gorgeous property over by Immaculata be turned into some, you know, crazy area? And I love Kim's idea that it should be owner occupied because I can tell you I
was a landlord in town. I was one of the good ones because I made sure that my tenants were good tenants. But I can tell you there's a whole lot of slum boards in town that are going to bring in a lot of crap if it's allowed.
And you need to think of this stuff like someone said, not just tomorrow, not just while you guys are here. What legacy are you leaving for the future? Because guess what? Once you put those buildings up, they're not coming down.
You're not going to change this. So, that's just something to think about for the future for you guys, you know? Don't just say yes. Think maybe there's another way around it. Just just something to think about.
>> Motion to close. >> So moved. >> Second. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki, >> yes. >> Glen, >> yes. Randy Pitts. Yes. Junice Traffic. Yes. Roger >> F. Yes. Uh I will address obviously I know your comment was tongue and cheek about having one spot be the entire
thing. I I think you said that. No, you were serious. >> Um I know they did. Um and I know that that's part of the conversation um on that lot. But the this council and the planning board did not want to stigmatize an area of the burrow um and
have it where everyone knows that that's the lowincome area of town. Um and that that whole conversation revolved around the concept and that's why the entire burrow is an overlay zone. So the entire burrow has the opportunity when there's new development for there to be um
low-inccome mixed in with everything else. And that was kind of the overarching. So it's not the thought process is and I know the mayor would speak to it if he was here as well, but the thought process was to make it so that it is across the entire burrow, not concentrated in one location. Um and
that is that is what the ultimate goal is. So the entire as I said before the entire burrow is an overlay zone and affordable housing can be created in any part of the burough um through redevelopment or whatever the case may be. Um as far as uh saying yes yes yes.
Um there are plenty of conversations that occur at the different boards that all of us are on. We all do not just sit up here at the council table and make these decisions with horse blinders, ear muffs, and gags. Uh we are on these
boards. We talk to our fellow um members of these committees. We have very thoughtful conversations. It is, as the councilman was saying before, an absolute pleasure to see this many folks here at this passionate about these issues. Um we've been having these
conversations about affordable housing for over a year. Uh, as a matter of fact, the affordable housing conversation started, I think, if I'm not mistaken, Kevin, six years ago. Um, we had a consultant come through and kind of start to direct us into that to
that um, mindset. So, these are conversations that continue to go on and and things that we have thought very hard about. And there are certain things, as we've said before, unfortunately, that through
mediation we've arrived at. Um, part of it is state requirements, part of it is through court requirements that we are that we have to meet. And we understand as a council that hearing these things, some of you it may be for the first time, some of you may have known about this coming up. Why does this have to
happen? And as I've said before, everyone on here lives in town. Everyone on here has children uh that have gone through these schools or will be going through these schools. Um, and so all of these things are considerations
when we make these decisions because every single we all live in in different parts of this burrow. Uh, as far as safety goes and the and the concerns about traffic and things along those lines, again, that's addressed through the planning board when the applicant comes forth and creates a a a um a plan
as far as transportation goes. But the um Councilwoman Bonner here is the chair of our safety and pedestrian committee uh that was reformed last year. Um and they meet on a regular basis and and come up and I even uh threw some things
out to her committee so that that we could look at them. Um we've tried to do uh calming measures. I am sorry about the ringing. We've tried to do multiple calming measures in town. Now I know that they are successful and not successful. I know everybody wants a speed hump on their road and things
along those lines. We get that. Um but bring your concerns to us and we can address them if there are things that we're not aware of. Um we certainly want to do that. We certainly have the opportunities to do that whether it's uh through the safety committee, whether it's at the planning board level. Um you
know, one resident reached out at the last meeting and wanted us to influence the zoning board. That's an entirely other operation. They are of their own entity. But again, we encourage you, especially as some of these things might be coming online, to go to these
meetings. We are currently going through zoning. We are currently reviewing the master plan. A lot of the things that you're talking about, we want your input on because they're going to go into the plan. That plan is going to be approved by the planning board. That plan is going to be sent to the council. And it is right now it's taking us a long time
to get through because we are being extremely thoughtful about it at the planning board level. But you if if The thing I can say is that as as passionate as you are right now and we appreciate it and and I know it feels like you're not being heard, promise you
you're being heard because we've all had these discussions. Um but coming out to those meetings and looking at what those agendas are, especially when it starts to be areas where you're that are near your homes or or areas that you're concerned about, come to those meetings
and make your voices heard. Um because again we want to hear from you and your your voices are not unheard. We're not brushing them off. It's I and again I know sitting in these chairs they've already made up their minds. There are certain things that we
have to do and that's always hard when you sit on that side of the table. When you come and you sit on this side of the table you sit there and you go I get it. And it's a tough thing because it's very hard. And you'll notice when I vote I'm looking at all of you. I don't want you to think like, you know, I have my head
down. I need you to understand we when we vote, we're doing it in what's the best interest of the town. And I know it doesn't always seem like that, but I promise you, we've have multiple conversations about doing the right thing for and that's why we're all here.
Every single person that's sitting up on this deis right now is doing this because we want to do the right thing by the burrow. And that's what I I we we would like you to understand. And it's hard sitting there and and feeling like you're not heard and we we understand that feeling. Um but we really truly
want to see what's best for this town. >> Council president, may I may I make one comment on the 100% affordable? >> Yes. >> Just just for some uh perspective on that. The speaker was certainly correct that the amended FHA provides bonuses for 100%
developments. However, the legislature also recognized that 100% affordable projects are very financially um it's difficult to build them. It's difficult to finance them. So, as a result, the amended FHA contains um
contains checks to make sure that if a a municipality is relying on a 100% project, it has to show a developer. It has to show proformas. There are a number number of things. So, it's not simply I'm going to create a zone, mark it as 100% affordable, close the book,
and walk away. There are a number of items that require that you partner with developer that you facilitate that development. So, it's not it's a little bit different than doing overlay zoning where you're just simply providing the opportunity for 10 years. So, um I just
wanted to make that one comment to provide some context around those 100% affordable projects which are very unique getting the developers in the door. um it during the planning process can be complicated and often you have you result in a lot of density to make those projects possible but it's not
simply the creation of a zone and the closing of the book. >> Thank you. Um motion to approve. >> I uh could I just say one thing about the Granite building? Um, I'm This is
one of the only developments that I'm happy about because they are rehabilitating the building. They are not tearing it down and building a crazy looks like every other cookie cutter multi-use apartment building.
It is going to bring the granite building back to its former glory and uh also will have affordable housing units in it. So, I just wanted to put that out there. That's this is like the only one
I'm yay about. So, there you go. >> Motion to adopt. >> Second. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. >> Yes. Glen, >> yes. >> Randy Pitts, >> yes. >> Genus Travik, >> yes.
>> Roger Verm, >> yes. >> Um, again, I I can't say it enough. Thank you for your comments this evening. Um, again, they they are they don't go unheard. Um, and I know I know it's tough to come up and speak
in public. It's a it's a daunting task for a lot of folks. Um, and we just appreciate you taking your time tonight for what has been a long meeting to this point. Um, but we appreciate you you feeling passionate enough to come up and speak. This is it's been it's been long,
but it's been wonderful to have you here. So, thank you very much. Uh, next we have consent resolutions. Are there any that council would like to pull? All right. No, thank you, gentlemen. Sorry, I should have dismissed you. My apologies. Thank you for your time. Um, all right. So, we're going to go in
order. Um 139 authorizing the award of a contract to advance landscaping in the amount not to exceed $50,000 for maintenance service at Carol Pager and Michael Le Park as needed per quote date February 10 2026.
Let's conclude. >> 140 approving Bridgeville ice cream truck as a renewal vendor for six months. 141 authorizing the acceptance of a grant award for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection Green Communities Grant Program in the amount of $20,000 for a municipal tree
inventory and updated community forestry plan. Uh and 142 opposing pending legislation Senate Bill S1836 concerning the conservation, excuse me, the conversion of religious and nonprofit organization property to
inclusionary affordable housing developments. Do I have a motion? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Discussion. >> Roll call. >> Council members Theresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ki. >> Yes. >> Glen Deny. >> Yes. >> Randy Pittz. >> Yes. >> Gina Stravik. >> Yes. >> Roger Firm.
>> Yes. Uh I make a motion to pay bills and vouchers in the amount of $681,9406. >> Second. >> Council members Terresa Bonner. >> Yes. >> Andrew Ky. >> Yes. >> Glen Deny. >> Yes. >> Randy Pitts. >> Yes. >> Gina Stravik. >> Yes. >> Roger Verm. >> Yes. Councilman Pitts motion to adjurnn.
>> I make a motion to adjurnn. >> All in favor? >> I opposed. >> Council meeting is concluded.