--------- Evening, I'd like to call the Special City Council meeting. City of Westfield City Council. June 23rd, 2025. Meeting to order. Roll call. Madam City Clerk Bean. Yes. Rey. We're here. Here. Burns. Here. Banyon. Here. Biggie. Here. Harris. Here. Matthews. Kane Here. Meow. Here. Morgan Alley? Here. Ky. Here. Sullivan. I'm not sure where he is. Uh, he's not, he's on vacation here. Okay. Adams here. Allie Here. Thank you. Uh, first item is financial overview.
Item one, city auditor Vicki Morrow presenting a financial overview of the city. Should we, should we? Hello everyone. How are you? Here we are once again. We made it through budget. So far we're not quite finished, but we're there. Almost there. Um, I guess Vicki Morro city auditor. I probably should have introduced myself anyway. Um, so you'll notice again, this year's budget is a little bit paired down and a little bit more, um, of analytical data in the back. And that is trying to, um, get those pages ready
for submission by the end of, uh, September. 'cause it's 90 days from the day that the budget gets, um, approved by city council that you can submit it for the gate, your budget. Um, and so those pieces are a little different than they were last year. You'll see there's free cash information in there, charts. Um, there's tax recap information, average tax bill information, A lot of that stuff the Department of Local services, um, provides for us, which is very helpful. They culminate all that data and they, and they put it all into one spot for each community.
You can even go there and look at compare different communities and how each community similar to yours is doing. So those I added to the back, um, because parts of the requirement for the, um, GFOA budget, um, parts of those are mandatory. Um, so you'll notice that those are a little different from last year. Um, as far as the financial outlook, um, as much as we have had a tough budget cycle slash season this year, I think we're still in a, we're still in a, a favorable position. Um, we have healthy stabilization reserves,
which I believe Eva sent you guys all the, um, the balances. Um, you know, for this, for this go around, um, you know, there's $10 million in the regular stabilization fund, which can be used for any purpose rainy day fund. And there's $7.1 million in the reserve for debt decline. So that if we, um, build a new police station, you do a new, um, high school, you build a new city hall, whatever that may be, there's money in there so that if our debt goes above
and beyond what we normally have in our budget, we can take it out of there. So we're not, if we need another million dollars for instance, we're not taking it away from our department to pay for the debt so we can keep those level services. Um, those are pretty healthy. Um, we, we will also still have some free cash left over, um, that we will carry forward that will get recalculated in for FY 25 for the 26th usage. Um, I think when we sat down and spent and kind of put together a list the mayor did of what we spent our free cash on, I think we spent it pretty wisely in terms of projects
that the city needed to accomplish. And the free cash is that way, um, to go. Um, while we did take some monies out of free cash for things that we cut out of the budget for FY 25, um, I've, those will take away from the certification of what gets free cash for FY 25 into 26. But I still think those are going to be pretty healthy. Um, just looking at it across the board and what hasn't been spent and what's not encumbered yet for this year, um, I think it's still gonna be pretty healthy. It might not be at the levels of the $16 million, but it will be healthier than it has been.
Um, you know, for the beginning of, you know, 19 and 2021. Um, and next week you'll see the $2 million, um, appropriation to reduce the tax recap, which was on the mayor's recap sheet, which we used to balance the budget for this year, um, which is less than last year. But I don't feel that it's a unreasonable amount of money to be able to give back the citizens the level services that, you know, they're kind of used to. Um, the one thing I would say that, um, my office and the departments could probably pay closer
attention to is grants in terms of if you apply for a grant, you just kind of go, okay, great, well I, we need to know how is it gonna get reimbursed, you know, what's the details of it so that we're not stuck at the end of the year, which we haven't been, um, yet stuck at the end of the year where we don't get the reimbursement. And then the free cash due has to absorb whatever grant money has that been spent that we haven't gotten reimbursed. So we're trying to figure out, um, work with the departments to get them to give us that information ahead of time. And uh, lastly I took a
financial, a five year financial, um, projection class that was put on by the DLS and I'm working on that projection right now. Um, it's backfilled with a lot of data from 20 to 25. And then what will happen is we'll be able to use it as a tool going forward where you can, um, put in percentages and it will project out like the average of what you might get for state aid or the average you might get from aga from the government or the average you, um, might get for local receipts. Like if it'll, you can look at it
and say, oh, well okay we, we went up, you know, 2% of local receipts and you can project that out, what that might be for the next four or five years. The one piece that I'm working on right now is the historical data for the employees. So I have to load in all the employees and on the contracts and where they are. And then you put in what those next steps are and it should project out. You know, how much do we think this is gonna cost us in year, you know, in four or five years down the road, even though you might not be in the middle of negotiation. So I think that financial tool will be super helpful.
It's just taking a lot to backfill all that historical data and we will be able to use that going forward. It has information for general fund enterprise funds. It has information for debt, for salaries. Um, so I think it'll be a useful tool going forward where you can kind of look and say, oh, you know what, we might not want to do that this year 'cause we would have to pay X, Y, and Z in years two, three, and four, whatever that may be. Whether it be purchase of services, whether it be salaries, whatever that may be. So, um, that's kind of where we are right at the moment. But I feel like even though we had a tough budget season,
I think the city's in pretty good in pretty good standing. So Pete Yeah, thank you for being here, Vicki. Appreciate your work. You're work. Welcome. It hasn't been an easy year, obviously and uh, gotta grind it out with the team you have, so I appreciate that. Um, two things. One, any prediction that you just talked about, some of the stuff you can kind of plan out mm-hmm. The software, or not software, but the formulas that you're using. Um, one, I there's a political ramification in that mix too, right? I mean, depending on who's the governor within five years. Mm-hmm. Right? So that, I'm curious on how accurate they'll actually be in the long run.
But any discussion about free cash and where that might be in November once certified? I haven't looked at the exact figure, but it, it's, I'm not holding you to a number. Yeah, I'm just, it's been record high, that's Why. Yeah. It won't be record high, but it will still be, um, comfortable. Okay. So it'll be favorable for sure. Okay. Fair enough. Thank You. Councilor Adams. Yeah, thank you Vicky for all the work you do. I know, um, when money's there, it's a great thing and money's not there. It makes your hard, you makes your job that much harder. Um, could you just explain again, I guess I'm having a tough time with, with the health insurance.
Okay. And I know my business had never moved, so I guess I have a hard time seeing the cities moving at the 30% or whatever it was. Could you just explain that again to us? Because I'm having a hard time and it certainly isn't, I'm not saying it's your fault, I just wanna understand if it's a city thing or if it's the health insurance. I don't know why mine didn't go up, but the cities went up 30%. Is there a reason for that? Um, I think it's a, a municipal, well it's, yeah it would be a municipal, um, health insurance thing. So other communities, it's interesting 'cause the financial forecasting class, I was listening
to people talk about how their insurances were going up 2120 5% and I'm like, oh, that's not us. We're gonna be fine. Well lo and behold we got hit with a lot of claims. So the health insurance trust has had a, had a, a pot of money in it and it was growing and it grew, um, to where it seemed like it was a little too high. So we didn't raise rates and um, we gave hot premium holidays because the thought process was to give back to the people who put the money in there, you know, so
it kind of ate away a little bit at the, the money that was in that health trust. Now over the past year and a half, let me back up. Previously to that, we've had pretty good claims where our claims weren't really high, so we weren't seeing exponential, um, increases in costs to the city. And so it was actually adding money into that healthcare trust, if you will. But over the past year and a half, you know, they've skyrocketed and so it's eaten away at that trust where we don't want the trust to go below a certain point.
So we ended up having to increase in order to make sure we don't eat that trust. Because if the trust is gone, we don't have anything to fall back on. And so last year we raised rates 7%, um, and it wasn't quite enough. We maybe should have went a little higher. Um, I know there's been some thought as to over the years we should have done it instead of do 0%, we should have done two, four, 5%. But I think the struggle was how do you increase people's rates when you have, you know, $15 million in your trust that's sitting there. So it was kind of a balancing act. Um, and there are quite a few claims
and we went over 'em pretty as deeply as we could without violating any HIPAA laws of, you know, the categories of claims that we have for the city. They're not astronomical in that you have people who have millions of dollars, but you have 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 20 people who are $150,000 claims a year. That's kind of adds up to a lot of money. Um, so in order to not eat away that trust and to keep up with those claims, we had to rate those rates. Um, so Well thank you. I just
wanted an understanding of Yep. Thank you. I appreciate that. You're welcome. Councilor Halley. Uh, thank you Mr. President. So I know like in the past, um, he has for different reasons, whatever we, we would have these premium holidays. Um, so obviously we, we probably shouldn't have been doing that because then you would've had that reserve to kind of Right. Like counselor Adam just said, yep, it's better to have some money and then it's a reserve, but it's reserved for a purpose and you can sort of balance it out just like any kind of debt or obligation you're trying to juggle.
Okay. Um, so probably we shouldn't have been giving out as many premium holidays as we were. Right. So going forward, um, if we weren't doing that sort of thing Okay. Given like the amount of claims that kind of came in mm-hmm. This year, um, 'cause those are pretty much one time things Right. In these claims are for particular year. For Yes. For the year. Yeah. Right. And next year will be different. Correct. Um, do you see us being able to, with the reserves, we have kinda ride this out without such
an increase to be able to sort of, you know, like if we could make a commitment where we're not gonna be giving out these premium holidays 'cause it was a nice thing to do and we did it for different reasons. Mm-hmm. But in hindsight it may not have been the best thing we could have done and we could have like had that reserve to kind of balance that out. Right. Right. Now you're trying to protect the, the reserve or the trust. Right. You know, and have that at a healthy balance. And so, um, I guess my question is, is that if we knew that we weren't gonna be doing too many premium holidays
and that sort of thing with what we have coming into that, or do we need to make other adjustments and let's say employee contributions and nothing going forward to just sort of balance it out where it's not this, you know, giant, you know, increase. So I think we have to see, um, next year where the claims come in, there were a few months right after we passed the increase, we're like, oh wow, these aren't so bad. But then the next one, you know, you get a bill for a million dollars, which isn't huge, but then the next month you get one for $2.1 million.
So you're like, okay, um, it's, we thought we were going kind of in the right direction, so we're hoping that we don't eat too much into that reserve. There's gonna be no more premium holidays. Um, so we're hoping we don't eat too much into that reserve where we wouldn't have to raise the rates at that level. We might have to raise them, but we might not have to go to that 27%. You might go 5%, 10% to be able to, you know, manage that level. Okay. 'cause if I, if I may just as a follow up, yes. Okay. Thank you Mr. President. So, I mean, we're not privy to seeing like the actual claims
and, and that sort of thing, but we were getting claims that are like $2 million for one. Well that's, that's not one person. That's all of them for, for that Month. Okay. Alright. I was gonna say 'cause I mean no. 'cause then we have stop loss where after $250,000 that kind of kicks in where they take, take the rest. Correct. Yeah. But if you have 15 people who are making claims every month of $150,000 and it's for the whole year, it kind of adds up. Right. So is that sort of like, like there's a lot of things, you amortize things or you kind of look at, you know, what are average costs
for let's say over five year period of time, seven year period of time. And, and then you can kinda smooth things out and say, okay, well we can ride this out unless things keep going crazy. Yeah. You know what I mean? Um, and so did you guys do that kind of consideration when you're looking at these percentages rather than year by year? Um, yes and no. I mean, our, um, hub, our um, insurance consultant kind of gives us those percentages. Like if you did this, you would eat into this much of the trust and he doesn't go out too far because it's pretty unpredictable.
Right. Um, so we didn't go too far and it's like the next year or two just to kind of see where we are. But he does go through those with us. So they tried to predict what it could be and when he was predicting when we were positive and we didn't increase the rates, he was predicting us to be short, but we were actually adding money. And so it was, it's kind of a little, it's hard I think, um, to know what the market might do in terms of like what People's council meow. Thank you Mr. President. Um, thank you for talking about that new program.
Can you tell me is the step information gonna get included too? Or will that still be some weird mystery for me? Right. When you do the projection for the five years, the last time we were going over a lot of contracts, I wanted to know how it was gonna affect us later and we couldn't figure out exactly what was gonna happen with the percent as they increased because different people would be on different steps. Will the new program include that information? Is it that detail? Um, it's by position. So it's not necessarily individuals. Um, like, you know, you could have,
I mean mine is pretty easy 'cause I have a contract, but, um, you know, you have a clerical who's at a 10 you and they're a step one, you're just gonna assume they're gonna do 2, 3, 4. But if somebody new comes in, then you might, you might change that information. Yeah. Right. So the, when it calculates it out, is that stuff included in there or are we just sort of gonna Fuzz No, I'm trying to go position by position. It's, it's position by position will feed into that other spreadsheet. Yeah. The department of local services analytics department put this whole thing together and it's, it's pretty cool.
Okay. And It just takes a little while to get all that information in there. Um, and if I may, if the health insurance thing, it's very interesting, uh, from an actuarial point of view, especially with our population. Um, and I just wanna add the reminder that given the historical contamination here, we really need to subrogate those costs. Those shouldn't be carried by the victims. And so anything we can do to make sure that we assert what has happened to us and how that needs to be paid for by the polluter and not the victims. Um, any help you need, please reach out. Thank you.
Anything further further the honor Council burs? Yeah. Thank you Mr. President. Thank you Vicky for all you do. Everybody else. Um, I just have a question on the, uh, enterprise account for water. Mm-hmm. What's the forecast for this this coming fiscal year? I knew you were gonna ask that question. So I brought my information. So it looks as though, um, they're gonna have a favorable undesignated fund balance. They've collected, um, a good majority of monies with that increase this last quarter. Um, and with us stopping, um, any unnecessary spending,
um, you know, whatever purchase orders they had, we let them keep that at the beginning before we knew what the collections were going to be in terms of, um, the revenues. Um, we made them close certain purchase orders to open up another one. So they wouldn't spend any extra money except for, um, they had some water main breaks that we had to pay for. Um, they had a piece of equipment just died die out that we have to put in emergency, um, purchasing in. But they should have a favorable, um, undesignated fund balance, um, at the end of this year.
And that includes giving back the general fund, the 106,000 bucks for those two raise, um, invoices. Well, no until November then now, Um, it won't get certified. I'm hoping to do it by act, you know, in October sometime, but I should know probably the end of September what it might look like. Okay. Thanks. Okay. Anything further? Just, just a quick council on follow Up on that. So we're, and we're, we talked about this in finance originally about that process to making sure that we're not gonna be deficit spending at this given time. So is there anything concrete that's in place
or is it just more about the communication between Your It's the communication, your Office and, and the water. Yeah. Okay. And if anything, um, you know, if someone happens to put in a requisition to for purchasing, Tammy will come to me and say, Hey, did you tell them they were allowed to put this in? And I'll look at the numbers. Hannah's also been kind of looking at her own numbers, um, to make sure that, you know, there's money in there if they need something else that happens to come up that's an emergency. So. Awesome. Thank You. You're welcome. Anything further? Thank you Vicky. You're Welcome. Item two is a public hearing on the annual budget
as submitted by the mayor, which all interested persons shall be given an opportunity to be heard for or against the proposed expenditures or any item thereof. Public hearing is now open. Councilor Figi, have you got anything? I'd just like to say that I think the, uh, finance committee meetings have gone well. There's been a lot of, uh, questions from the counselor and, uh, we've tried to get all the answers that we could. I think we have done a adequate job of looking item by item and, uh, we're getting ready for reconciliation tomorrow.
So I'm very interested to hear the public Council b. Yeah, and just to reiterate from, from our chairman of finance and, you know, who did an absolute great job when it came to scheduling these meetings, it's, it's, it's not the easiest job in the world. Um, the, the bigger, um, problem that we see within finance is that because we, because of the open meeting law issues, right. With seven counselors being in the room and not being able to participate, which is absolutely ludicrous in my mind, but that's another whole discussion. Uh, we were, we did accept a, a lot of different, um, emails, questions, whatever it was through other counselors.
So we are appreciate you guys looking into this and, and, and attending the meetings. It was, it was definitely helpful. It helped spark, uh, communication and uh, hopefully, um, once we talk about the reconciliation piece, um, we can then entertain any kind of cuts at that given moment. Thank you. Anything else from the counselors? Anyone in the public like to come up and ask a question or Oh, ask a question or make, make or make a statement that, yep. Hi, I'm Kathy Hillman, 1 79 Susan Drive and I would like to thank the council for having them on Zoom meetings
because I was able to attend some of the budget meetings and the explanations to really see what was going on. So I appreciate that Zoom meeting. Thank you very much. Thank you. Anyone else have anything they'd like to comment on or question? Anyone like to, are you, Um, name and address? Jason? Assume please. Okay, cool. Uh, Jessica Britton, 36 Kasier Street. Um, to second Kathy, I would agree. I liked watch being, having the availability to watch those meetings online 'cause I was in Tennessee for business. Um, I think like, just to kind of backtrack, um,
because I wasn't able to attend live, I think in regards to the school committee budget, there's still some unanswered, um, things. My son had came to me because one of his teachers was told that they weren't going to continue on with the school system 'cause of however the teacher's union is and people get bumped. Um, and so that really kind of drove me to some of that school committee meeting, uh, budget hearings that we had last month. And I saw a lot of parents, parents come out and a lot of students in regards to
that early education program that got cut from the high school and it, or how it got reduced I should say. And so it really kind of got me to thinking, um, you know, how can we be creative and still be prudently, uh, fiscally responsible? And I think, you know, everyone's feeling the pinch, you know, all the, the citizens, you guys, um, groceries have doubled. Utilities have doubled. Interest rates are going higher, which obviously affects, you know, your housing prices, your rent,
gas prices are going up, our taxes keep going up, you know, really the purchasing power of the dollar has dropped considerably over the last five years and we need to figure out how we're gonna pull up our bootstraps and figure it out. Um, if we don't, then we're looking at a city that's gonna be a ghost town with homeowners and it's just gonna be a whole bunch of renters. Um, so one of the things I was trying to get clarification, and some of my words got kind of twisted in public speak was in regards to
the athletic fields that are being built with the I lock payments. I went to the meetings last year. I'm fully aware that the Westfield Gas and Electric has verbally pledged to give the million dollars a year for the bonding that we took in order to do the fields that we did the, the groundbreaking today. However, what kind of blows my mind a little bit is when I was looking at the city budget, how is it that the gas and electric can charge the city of Westfield for the school system, $2.7 million out of
that budget that we have to cut teachers and cut programs, yet they're gonna charge the city 2.7 million between gas and electric when they're pledging a million dollars in ILO to, um, this turf field. That's only going to be for academics or not for academics, for athletes. So it's not gonna be enjoyed by all the students. And as I said, we're dealing with all, everything rising in the purchasing power of the dollar dropping. I don't understand how we can't, how they can't donate free gas and electric to the city of Westfield students.
Like if we had that, that would solve a huge budget problem with the students and they would be able to free stuff up and bring programs back and teachers back. Like some of this stuff I just don't quite understand. And I understand we wanna build this field and we need to build this field, however, do we need to do turf, which is so much more expensive, higher maintenance, and we have to worry about whether it's, you know, kids getting hurt in the field or PFAS draining back into that area where everyone was poisoned, whatever you wanna call it, whatever is like your area of concern in regards to that.
There is like a better way to do it naturally and cheaper. And why isn't it we're not using those, um, what is it called? The CPA funds. Why aren't we using that to help build the, the fields like it's being used for grandmother's garden. Why aren't we using some of that to build the field? Why aren't we thinking about all the different things that the taxpayer's paying for and trying to figure out how we can get it done by being prudently, fiscal, fiscally responsible? Um, because it's kind of like that Spider-Man meme where they got the one pointing to the other one.
It's not me, it's not me, it's not me, but it's really, it's whether it's the tax payer, the rate payer, the citizen, we, we should just be called the donor because that's what is gonna come up to. And I think one of the other things that I've mentioned before in um, school committee is I've worked for global businesses, we're responsive to shareholders. You guys are responsive to the taxpayer and the citizen. If they're unhappy, then we fire shareholders in businesses. Like people need to realize there is another way to think
outside of the box to get this stuff done. And I just, I, I feel like now is the time that people really need to start paying attention. And I do, because I do travel for work and now I'll be going not only out to Boston, but out to Albany. I love it when my clients ask me what's new, what's going on? Because there's a lot of information I'm able to share with them on what's going on at the local level and it really makes them think. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? I, hi. Jeff Gunther 40 Grandville Road. Um, I just wanted to come up and, uh, thank you all for your partnership during this challenging budgeting season.
Um, I I've really enjoyed watching you all deliberate. I appreciated the, the remote meetings as well. Um, also coming up to speak in favor of the school department budget. Um, I I really appreciate the fact that this year the city's proposed budget is helping to restore some of the funding that we saw. Um, the, the flat to change the course of the flat funding from the city side in the schools over the last few years. Um, just, I know I've shared this in many other places and I feel compelled to share it here too. Um, that if you adjust for inflation
and student counts this year, our funding is about 10% lower than FY 19, um, in the school department side. The FY 26 budget, I think is going to do a good, uh, make some good moves to try and get us back on track to where we were pre COVID. Um, during COVID, I, we were able to restore or maintain some level of funding because the federal funds while the city side was flat. Now that those funds are gone, I'm, I'm happy to see the city contributing back and helping to restore that. I know that this is gonna be a multi-year effort to do that. Um, and I know that sometimes puts you all in an unviable
position given the size of the city or the school department budget as a part of the city's budget. And so just want to appreciate name appreciation for you all for making that challenging choice. Thank you. Anyone else like to step up and comment? Seeing none, can I get a motion? Motion to close public hearing Second. Motion made second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Hearing is now closed. Thank you. Part: 2
Bad. Good evening. I'd like to call the Westfield City Council meeting on June 23rd, 2025 to order. We'll call the members chicken. What's my Yes Here. Burns. Here. Fanon. Here. Figgy. Here Harris. Here. Matthews. Kain. Here. Meow. Here. Morgan. Ellie. Here. Oniskey. Here. Sullivan. You will not be with us. Adams here. Allie, what was the question? Yeah, here Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance. He's also here, the United States Republic, which stands?
Nation under Ballot, individual Liberty Justice. Follow. Thank you. Reading of the record of meeting of June 5th, 2025. Councilor Bean. Make a motion to accept the minutes for June 5th without reading. So moved. Second. Motion. Made it seconded. Any discussion on the minutes? Seeing none. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Now comes a portion of the meeting for public participation. Anyone wishing to address the council on something that is not on the public hearing schedule tonight? May do so by stepping forward, stating your name and address for the city clerk. And we do this in three minute
increments, which may be extended. Uh, thank you Mr. President and Counselors. Uh, based on our, uh, petition, we've had some communication with Councilor Sullivan who had mentioned that, um, the item that we had brought up at the last public hearing, um, would be potentially brought out on the floor. I believe he's un able to attend this evening, but that this would likely come out on July 7th. Just wanted to, it's my understanding. Does that sound fairly accurate or Yes. Mm-hmm. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it. Thank you for your consideration. Thank You. Anyone else like to address the counsel? Sir, if you just state your
name and address for the city clerk. Yep. Thank you. Uh, Joe Jaune 49 Colony Drive in Westfield. I'm a 33 year resident of Westfield. I'm a small business owner in Westfield, and I'm speaking you to you today as the chair of the Conservation Commission. Uh, I want to address some of the concerns that have been raised about changes to the Wetlands Protection Ordinance. And this is number 1 7 7 3. The process of updating the Wetlands Protection Ordinance was undertaken in order to bring clarity to and to better define the way that the city protects its wetland resources. The process began several years ago under the leadership
of past conservation commissioners and past agent, and has continued to the present with the current commissioners and the current agent. It was carefully crafted using guidelines set forth by the Massachusetts Wetland Protection Act and using examples of lo other local ordinances in the state. And I want to emphasize there's nothing in the current ordinance that is unique to Westfield. I want to further emphasize that this was done openly with public participation having been on our posted agenda for discussion about 30 times over the past several years. When the ordinance was sent to legislative
and Ordinance committee, it was accompanied by a document that clarified section by section the changes that were proposed. Additionally, the role of the Conservation Commission and its agent is neither to obstruct nor facilitate the development of property. The commission's duties are to regulate work within or adjacent to resource areas in accordance with state and local law. The ordinance says that we protect the rules and the regulations say how we protect the ordinance. Having passed, we've now reached the point where we're looking for the best way to say how
we have requested feedback on the proposed local regulations. Drafts of the proposed regulations have been posted for public comments and, and review on the city's website. Since the end of May, It's disappointing to the commission that the response to the request for feedback has not been a collaborative one. We will act as directed by this body, but we respectfully request that we be allowed to develop the regulations and collaborations with the stakeholders, especially those that have raised concerns about proposed rules and regulations. Finally, I would ask that you consider the following when you're debating a Path
Forward Wetlands Act as a natural filter. When Surface Water recharges our aquifer, it's done naturally and it's free. One of the topics of discussion regarding the new ordinance has been its potential negative impact on tax revenue. And I would suggest that there's two sides to every ledger. The expense of filtering aquifer water is significant. The city of Westfield has learned that lesson already. The work of the commission is partially to ensure that we do not have to learn it again and again, respectfully, we ask that you allow us to do just that. Thank you for your time.
Thank you sir. Anyone else like to address the council? Catherine Lars 40 Grandville Road. Um, good evening counselors. I'd like to thank you for the opportunity to speak to you all tonight. Um, as a resident of Westfield and a Conservation Commissioner, I'd like to take a few minutes to speak about the role of the Conservation Commission and the draft rules and regulations for new Wetlands Protection Ordinance. Our commission administers Westfield's Wetlands
Protection Ordinance, which is designed to meet the specific needs of the city of Westfield. And we are, our aim is to preserve the quality of life for all inhabitants of Westfield by managing activities in areas that require protection. As commissioners, we work diligently to find the delicate balance between reasonable land use and preservation of our natural resources that sustain our community's quality of life.
To achieve that balance, we drafted rules and regulations to establish clear and appropriate boundaries for our community. They are guidelines that are necessary to properly administer a wetlands protection ordinance and ensure our community continues to have access to the essential services that these resources provide, like clean drinking water. Let me be clear that these rules and regulations are spo What they're supposed
to mean in practice is that they are supposed to provide a framework for property owners to proceed with necessary projects. That might mean something like building a stream crossing to access their property while still ensuring adequate protection for the natural resources that are present there while minimizing the environmental impact. These regulations are not meant to constitute a taking of private, private property simply because a resource area exists on that property.
I recognize that there has been considerable concern and some misunderstanding surrounding these draft rules and regulations. And we are continuing to solicit public comment to those draft rules and regulations. These rules and regulations are not intended to in, to prohibit all development within protected areas. Rather, they provide the commission and the city with the clear guidance that we need for how development can proceed responsibly while still protecting those resource areas
and benefiting Westfield cities residents by protecting things such as our groundwater and our clean drinking water. So again, the commission drafted these rules and regulations to help our city effectively balance legitimate interest of property owners with our collective responsibility to protect water quality in this city. I would encourage us to continue to work forward through the process of collective public input in these draft rules and regulations
and continue to solicit that feedback as we move forward with this ordinance. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else? Hello. Lauren DiCarlo, 15 Angelica Drive. I'm also speaking to you from the Conservation Commission. I'm also a professor at Westfield State University and I've run a few analyses, um, based on the public comments that I heard from your last meeting and also some we've heard at the Conservation Commission about the future regulations that the Conservation Commission has proposed. Again, we are still accepting public comment. Um, the first is about intermittent streams.
So in the proposed regulations, a new buffer zone has been proposed around these intermittent streams. So streams that do not run, uh, 365 days of the year. Uh, I just wanted to know how many intermittent streams were in Westfield because in the both public comment and in the press, I saw that this, these new regulations could impact thousands to tens of thousands of acres. So in my analysis, I used the US Geological Survey. So this is the most UpToDate, uh, information online
for the streams in Westfield. And there are 65 intermittent streams within the city that are documented. Uh, over 58% of the length of those intermittent streams is already protected under current buffers. So through being close to a wetland or close to another perennial or river, uh, streamer river. So if I'm looking at all of this, uh, there's a maximum of only 534 acres of new potential buffer zone.
I say maximum because many of these intermittent streams would not count under the new regulations because they're for storm water or they're coming out of an agricultural land. Um, another point I wanted to bring up was that I also heard, um, through public comment that due to science, um, we have not been protecting these intermittent streams in the past. And I would argue, um, that's not really the case. So there's been very few studies on the benefits of intermittent streams in the, especially
through the 1970s when the Wetlands Protection Act was written in Massachusetts. There's been a great number of studies since then. We've learned that there's a lot of benefits, so benefits for biodiversity of both plants and wildlife. These, uh, intermittent streams can also help recharge our aquifers after times of drought and also help during flooding. So all things that are really, really pertain to the city of Westfield. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else like to address the council? Okay. Seeing no one communications from the mayor,
item one Councilor Figgy. Thank you Mr. President requesting immediate consideration of an appropriation of $80,000 from free cash to the indemnity. 1 1 1 F police account to cover bills from FY 25 and to replenish the accounts pay for future FY 26 bills Second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion, counselor? Yeah, this is a budget item that was, um, being followed throughout the year. The reason for an $80,000 request is that is what has been expended to date.
Any questions from the council? Seeing none, roll call. Member, city clerk Bill. Trendy? Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Figy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane? Yes. Meow. Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Hoki? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Thank you. Item two, councilor Figy. Thank you Mr. President Requesting media consideration of appropriation of $20,000 from free cash to the indemnity. 1 1 1 FI account to cover bills from FFY 25 and to replenish the account to pay for future FY 26.
Bills second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion, counsel, It's the same as item number one, that these are insurance bills that have come in and they're being, uh, monitored along the way by the city auditor. And this is what is needed at this time. Anything from the council? Seeing none. Roll caught. Madam City Clerk Beltran. Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Fige? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Meow. Yes. Morgan. Ellie. Yes. Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Thank you. Item three. Const. Oniskey.
Thank you Mr. President. Uh, requesting immediate consideration of a resolution to authorize the city of Westfield to enter into the Massachusetts Turnpike Emergency Responder contract Amendment one between the city of Westfield Fire Department and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, and allow the mayor to execute all documents related to set agreement. Second. Motion made it seconded for the discussion. Counselor? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, this would be an agreement similar to, uh, an agreement that Mass DOT has with all of the cities
and towns that it passes through and it's, it verifies and the, uh, the list of charges for services that are provided by the Westfield Department Fire Department, uh, for the, uh, mass Pike. So if there's an ambulance call, it's X amount of dollars. Fire call. It's all spelled out in the agreement. Uh, the contract runs from July 1st, 2025 to June 30th, 2030. And the reason for immediate consideration is it's required to be signed by June 27th, 2025.
Okay. Any discussion from the council? So you none. Would you like to read the resolution, Sir? If I may by title only, please. A resolution authorizing the city of Westfield to enter into the emergency responder contract. Master Agreement Amendment one between the Massachusetts Department of Transportation and the City of Westfield Fire Department for the provision of Emergency Response Services along the Massachusetts Turnpike. Thank you. All in favor? A Aye. Opposed? Councilor? Uh, thank you Mr. President, would you please ask Madame City Clerk?
Um, actually we'll do this separate to read item four and send the law city treasurer l and o and the police chief Second motion made it seconded Madam City Court. Four, requesting authorization of a bond order in the amount of $45 million of the construction of a new police station. Okay, so we are doing, uh, All in favor? All all in favor? Aye. Opposed? So you're all set this then for tonight? Yes. Okay. Yeah, we're good with that for tonight? Yes. Item five. Councilor O. Miss.
Thank you Mr. President, would you please ask Madam City clerk to read item five, send to LNO, uh, fire chief and law Second. Motion made and seconded. Madam City Clerk Five, submitting a resolution to the, to petition the Senate and House of Representatives of the General Court of the Commonwealth in Massachusetts to authorize the city of Westfield to amend the current age restriction for hiring fire personnel from 31 years old or younger to 39 years old or younger. Thank you. Any discussion? Seeing none. All in favor? A. Aye. Opposed? Item six, councilor Winky. Thank you Mr. President, would you please ask Madam City
Clerk to read Item six, send to LNO Conservation Commission and Law. Second. Motion made it seconded for the discussion Council? No. No. Good. Anything? All in favor? A. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Item seven. Councillor Harris read it. I have to Read it. Six. Submitting a resolution to accept a grant valued at $28,000 from the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission under the Commonwealth, the Massachusetts District Local Technical Assistance Program to the Conservation Commission to update the open space and recreation plan, which expires August, 2025.
Thank you. Item seven, Councillor Harris. Thank you Mr. President. Number seven. Um, and eight, would you ask City Clerk to please read those and send it to the Personnel Action Committee? Second. Second. Second. Motion made it seconded. Anything further? Abstain. Abstain on eight. On eight, but not seven, correct? Yes. These, these are gonna be just sent to committee. Any further discussion on sending the committee? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Madam City Clerk Seven. Submitting the reappointment of Peter Miller as community Development Director for a term to expire. June 20, 28. Eight. Submitting the appointment of Lisa Sunland Burns.
19 Kylie Lane as a member of the Cultural Council for a term to expire in June, 2028. Thank you. Reports of city officers. Item nine, city engineer Alison mcm, Morty and Bowman Consulting. Submitting a presentation for a roadway safety action plan called Westfield Safe Streets for All. You now have the floor. Hi counsel. Um, so recently we re accepted a grant for the Safe Streets for All Action Plan. Um, we started the process and we do wanna keep you guys updated on the process as we're moving along. Um, we are working with Bowman Consulting and this is Eric who's gonna be doing the
presentation tonight. Thank You. Thank you, Thank you. Thank you for having us and I hope those of you on this side won't be offended as I turn myself. No, we're, We're fine. We're used to it. Got it. I am gonna turn the mic however. Um, so thanks again. Eric Weiss Bowman Consulting project manager for the Safe Streets for all projects coming together for the city of Westfield. Will be appearing in front of you twice right now at the early stage of the project and then at the end to unroll the plan that we put together. So just as a little bit of background, safe Streets
for All is a federal program out of U-S-D-O-T. It's uh, a massive grant program and next year will be the last year it was five years of grants for planning and implementation with the overarching goal of, um, re reducing and ultimately eliminating serious injuries and fatalities on American roadways. Um, and I know that your time is precious tonight, so I'm gonna keep it as brief as possible. We're gonna focus on only items three and five here, data collection and the Safety Action plan.
So, um, as I mentioned, there is our overarching goal, reducing and eliminating fatalities and serious injuries and a more local level. In addition to that goal, we also will be preparing a safety action plan, which puts the city of Westfield in position to be eligible for, uh, implementation grant in the 2026 round. All of the infrastructure recommendations and programmatic recommendations that we make in this plan are predicated upon the safe system approach. You see that graphic here, this is US dots, um,
sort of, I guess you could say the five tenets that safety are all based on these days. It's a recognition that crashes are gonna happen because we're humans and we air, but there are steps that we can take to reduce the severity and impacts of those crashes. There are eight sections to every safety action plan, um, as you can see here. And I'm gonna take a couple moments to talk about the safety analysis and then the strategy and project selections. Um, so the team, you can see that long list
of the Westfield State Streets task force. It's kind of an all star team of city staff with Allison, um, at the reins. And then we've got a sizable team of folks at Bowman. Um, the leadership is these six folks here and there are another half dozen or so folks, uh, doing tasks behind the scenes. So data collection is critical. All of our recommendations are gonna be based on the actual crash data. Most of our data is coming from the MAs dot portal. Very easy to download crash data, um, with
Location information and severity and what sort of crash it was. We'll also be getting crash data from other sources, but this is the primary source We'll be doing three types of data analysis. Baseline crash analysis is the first. Essentially what this means is taking that data and translating it in in a way that makes sense to people who aren't safety professionals. So like, we're gonna have a gigantic spreadsheet, like if you printed it all out, it would be like a half dozen bedsheets all stitched together. That's no good for anybody. Nobody's gonna look at that.
But if we translate that data into a poster like you're looking at there, all of a sudden it's something that people can read and understand. Here's another example of baseline crash analysis. Turning that raw data into heat maps. This is not Westfield, this is another community that we're working with the city of Woonsocket in Rhode Island. But as you can see on the left, there's the crash heat map. That's the all modes map. So all modes of transportation. The one on the right is only for vulnerable road users, usually means pedestrians and bicyclists. We spend a little bit of time
focusing on vulnerable road users because they're so much more likely to suffer injury when in a crash i risk network is the second type of analysis. Essentially what this means is where can we predict crashes are going to happen? We look at where they have been happening, identify the qualities of those roadways, and then look for other roadways that have those same qualities. Things like how many lanes, how wide is it, what's the context of the road? Is it residential or industrial? Things like that. And then lastly, the high injury network, which is a combination of that predictive mapping along with mapping where the crashes are already happening.
So we can be both proactive and reactive as we address crashes in Westfield. We'll be layering these, this data with um, things like, uh, where do people live? The areas with higher population density have more people traveling or areas with higher percentage of zero vehicle homes. There are gonna be more pedestrians in those areas. So we might find that it makes more sense to spend more time looking at pedestrian injuries and pedestrian facilities in those neighborhoods. Community engagement is another piece
that will address our recommendations, not just data. So we will be, um, having public meetings. There is a project website which we are just about to start publicizing so we can get as many people as possible to visit on that website. There's a story map and a way of dropping pins on a map. Anybody can visit this, put a pin on a map and label it. I have trouble crossing the street here or I can't pull out of my driveway here 'cause of traffic speed, things like that. Another thing that we can do is show folks, um, examples of
how roadways can be modified to reduce crash impacts. So this is something that we'll be looking to do as well. Oops. And then there is a survey as well. A brief survey takes less than five minutes to take this survey, so you'll be hearing from us and hoping that you'll all reach out to your constituents on behalf of this program, um, to get as many people as possible around the city to take the survey and use that comment map. Finally, when we pull together all the locations that we between the task force and staff, um, want to address, we'll be looking for
how do we address those locations. There are 28 countermeasures that we'll be using that will be applying to these locations fall in these five categories. And over on the right you can see I put four examples of countermeasures. These are proven safety countermeasures that U-S-D-O-T recommends using because the data shows demonstrates clearly that they make a difference. So for instance, the third one there Simply painting the edge lines on a street wider can reduce roadway departure crashes by up to 37%. Putting a back plate on a traffic signal
that has a reflective strip can reduce uh, rear end crashes, um, by up to 15%. These are low cost but high impact countermeasures and interventions. And then as part of the plan, we have to prioritize, um, those projects. We will be having the task force, uh, vote on, uh, criteria by which they should be prioritized. Rather than give a list of say 15 locations and say, put these in the order that you think is most important, we'll be asking folks
to prioritize these criteria. Things like is it near a school or near senior housing? Does it show up on the crash data? Um, uh, is it a known near miss location? Meaning it's a place where everybody knows it's a little sketchy, but it doesn't actually show up in the injury crash data. Um, but it might in the future because it's kind of a scary spot. So that leaves us where we are today and what our next steps are. We're getting started on the data analysis. Um, public engagement, as I mentioned, has just started and you will be hearing from us. And then the next big piece to start will be the policy
and process review, which is things like when somebody who lives in Westfield has a question about, um, hey, a stop sign fell down, or I think we need a stop sign, what's the process by which that goes through within the city? It could also include a review of fines. Um, I'll give you an example of why we do that. Um, one of the communities we're working with right now is a beach town. Their fines are so low that visitors just consider that $25 fine part of going to the beach. It doesn't actually prevent anybody from
parking on the crosswalk. So, um, this is the beginning of our process and we look forward to keeping you informed. I know you've got a busy, uh, agenda here, but if you do have any questions, I'd be happy to hang on. Address Councilor Harris and Thank a thank mr. President and I really have any questions. As you know, don't you work just closely with the police department to get 99% of all the information that you just said you needed. They know all the crash sites, they know all the near misses. Most of those police officers have been here
for years and years and years. Um, it would seem to me that that is a fountain of information as opposed to trying to gather it from the general public who everybody has their own opinion as to my corner is not safe. Well, I think They beginning. Yes. So we are working with Sergeant Mahias, um, and she'll be a wonderful Yeah, she's wonderful. Yeah, she'll be a wonderful source of information for us, but the public engagement piece of this is critical. Um, it'll be difficult. They're difficult to, um, sell a plan to the public if the public hasn't been involved
and had that opportunity to put their opinion in. It's kind of standard process for this. I know It's standard. I know it's, thank you. Council Matthews King. Uh, thank you Mr. President. Um, first thank you for your presentation. I'm glad Westfield's choosing to prioritize this issue. Um, my question is, when you said federal grants, my ears perked up because not all grants are going forward. And what is the funding source do? Have we already received the funding? Can it be clawed back? Is this contingent on future federal funding? This is an excellent question.
If you had asked me this question four months ago, I might not have had as good an answer as I do today. I was getting questions like this four months ago from other communities we're working with and I had to say, I'm sorry, we're just gonna have to wait and see. The funding for the Safe Streets for All program, which ran from 2022 I think and ends next year, um, is congressionally appropriated has already been, you know, legally set aside. Okay. And for this round, our new leadership at U-S-D-O-T did not try to mess with it. There are, there were some changes to the language about how
to apply for such funds and we know for instance that the current U-S-D-O-T is not interested as interested in things like, uh, bicyclist safety as the prior administration was. But the program is going forward. There is just as much money in next year's implementation Grants Pot, um, none of that has been removed. So next June, um, there will be, uh, the final round of grants and there'll be something like $550 million available. And the only eligible bodies are the municipal county
and regional agencies that have safety action plans. So we're developing the safety action plan, which has value on its own, but added value because it then makes the city eligible to apply for that additional funding to actually build what gets recommended in the plan. Okay, thank you. Anyone else? Councilor Minky. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, I've got a couple questions for you. Uh, what is the deliverable of this? Are you gonna have a list of problem areas rated one through 10? Are you gonna do a hundred of 'em? Are you gonna list all of the, uh, problem areas
or potential problem areas that people have come up with through, uh, the discussions? And also how do you weigh in some of the parameters such as, you know, it might sound crude, but is it, uh, an accident that causes an injury? One accident causes one injury the same as 10 fender beers, for example. So how do, how do those Yeah. Weigh against each other? That's an excellent question. So the Safe Streets for All program nationwide is only interested in injury
and fatality crashes. So, you know, 90% of crashes are property damage only. So we can get all the data and immediately dispense with all of the crashes that are only property damage. Um, so that makes processing the data a whole lot simpler. Um, we are gonna start out with a very long list of locations and as we move forward with the task force, um, we will eventually end up with a smaller list of the highest priority locations, which will then get ordered. So there's no, we don't know yet how many that will be,
um, based on the other communities that we're working with, it's likely to be between 10 and 20. Thank you. And is the federal funding only for the streets that are on the list? So the eligibility for the federal funding would only be on the, let's say 20 streets or 10 10 intersections. Another excellent question. Um, it's a yes with an asterisk, I guess because we can, in addition to making targeted location recommendations, we can also make town wide blanket recommendations. I'll give you a couple examples of how we've done that for other communities. Um, one town that I work with, uh,
is very concerned about people passing school buses while the red lights are flashing. So we can't make a targeted location recommendation that covers that, but we can make a town wide recommendation and we did that says, um, uh, the town shall take, um, steps necessary to, uh, to reduce the number of drivers passing school buses since that's in there. They are now applying for a grant in this year's round.
And one of the things that they're asking for are busm mounted cameras that only get triggered as a car passes, that when the red lights are on and the stop bar is out, um, they can do that because of that single bullet line that's in their plan. Thank you. Councilor BA couple of questions if you don't mind, Mr. Please. So, uh, appreciate you being here. Thank you so much. Um, couple of things, um, survey side and maybe Allison can answer too. So if you want to trip in any time, just go ahead.
So as far as the survey goes in the past, we don't see a lot of the data within the survey in the sense of is responding to the questions. I wanna make sure that we know how many responses are there and where they're located in town. When it comes to, I don't really need to know names per se, but I wanna make sure that this is, is as uh, transparent as possible when it comes to this stuff because in the past surveys have not been, um, as far as the task force, was there any discussion about a city council being on that task force? I don't remember that coming up in discussion.
And is there a way to get somebody on that task force now? Certainly. Okay. And then as far as the, when we talk about cost and to piggyback on Councilor Matthews King's question, um, it's very expensive to do business in Massachusetts, especially on the safety improvement side. Um, mass, the OT has proven to be, you know, setting all these regulations and not really giving us any, any money, especially when it came to complete streets. You know, they give us some money, which is a little bit enticing to, to do it, but I'm very concerned that we're gonna find some, and this is gonna sound bad, but we're gonna find some real unsafe places around here
and that we're not gonna have the money to fix it, which is gonna cause undue stress on our budget as a whole. I know it's terrible to say that I know safety should be the number one priority, but the reality is it's a priority whoever is sitting in the corner office or whatever pressures that are out there because of the politics involved. So I do get concerned when we're gonna start this process and really now we really don't have funding to back it up. I know the federal side is there, it's a little iffy at best. So I i we want to address it all. We would, we never wanna say no to individuals, but I've also seen people pack the survey side just
to make sure that their item gets addressed. So I just wanna make sure that that piece more importantly is, is very transparent. Got it. So that's two things. Yeah. The first one was, um, concern about, um, having all these projects, knowing what's going on at those locations and not having the fiscal ability to address everything at once. Having the information doesn't obligate the city to address the issues. Are you a lawyer too, or, I'm not a lawyer, but I know this to be true. Okay. Um, the other piece, uh,
your other question was related to the survey. Yes. One of the questions that they have to answer is, what is your zip code? So we know that if it's a, a resident or not. Now non-residents can also come in and answer, for instance, somebody who works in the city but lives in Yeah. You know, west Springfield or whatever. We also want to hear from them 'cause they have valuable information, but it's just as valuable to know that they don't actually live here. And, um, there is an optional question to identify, uh, the nearest, um, significant intersection to where you live.
We can't ask people to provide their address. They either won't or they'll give up on the survey entirely if we do. But by asking them to identify a nearby intersection, we can identify what neighborhood they're in. And that's about as best as about the best that we can do. I I'm definitely concerned about that part. I I, I'm definitely concerned about that part. Okay. I, I mean, I don't need to know names, but it's a street where they live is, is something that we should be doing. Um, we've just seen it in the past and I'm, I'm not with not thrilled without knowing that piece. And I understand it will tamper probably the people that are responding, but if it's safety
and they're that, you know, concerned about it, I don't, I don't think it should be a problem that someone should identify themselves and what their problem is. But I understand that's not your world, so I appreciate that Councilor. All Thank you, Mr. President. Um, so does any of the federal funding flow down to the actual, uh, implementation or construction of the projects at all? Not for what we're doing this year, but the, having the safety action plan allows the city to apply for an implementation grant in the 2026 round and those funds would be strictly for the projects.
Okay. Um, and is there a matching component to that? Like the state also committing to any of that as well? Uh, Entities that are awarded grants are required to provide a 20% match that's a standard federal grant match. Okay. Councilor Morgan Allen. Thank you Mr. President. Yeah. Thank you for the presentation. Um, yeah, I mean, if Westfield has the most miles of paved roads of any city in Massachusetts, um, so we, we would probably need some funding to, to make them safer. Um, what the percentage of the grant money that is awarded.
So basically we, we have our findings. We say we want to fix these 10 things and we apply for the grants for those 10 things. Let's say we get awarded half, we get five of them awarded. Has any money come out of the city's budget for to complete the, in other words, are we ob we're obligated to fix those things now, but say no, well, they're gonna give us the money. So let's say, let's say something's a million dollars to fix one of the items is a million dollars, but they, you know, they, they give us 800,000 toward it. We don't have to come up with the 200,000 to fill the gap.
You'll, the city would have to provide a 20% match to whatever Federal Highway provides in the grant. If Federal Highway's grant is not the full ask, the city will not be obligated to do all of the work that was laid out in the grant proposal. So if, let's say, just because it's a nice round number, let's say the city asks for $10 million. If Federal Highway comes back and says here's five mil, then the city's gonna, um, take a look at the pallet of projects that was going
to be funded at 10 mill and say, well I guess we can do half of this, which half should we do? Thank you Council Miller. Thank you Mr. President. I was so good without questions until that very last bit. Um, because we are self-insured is going through this gonna put us in a position where we are aware of a hazard and if we don't immediately address the hazard, then we are then responsible for not having addressed the hazard while being aware of it. Is that what the counselor across the way was? Meaning like I, are we gonna end up with a list
that we are then now responsible because we are aware of it for, for any damage that may happen? Right. Are we making a list that people can sue us for? That's my question. Okay. Yes, I understand the question. Yeah. And uh, I, again, as I mentioned, I'm not a lawyer. Um, my understanding is no. Um, there are, you know, right now we could go and take a walk and find, um, curb ramps that don't meet current a DA standards for instance. Or, um, maybe we'll find, uh, a traffic signal
where the pedestrian push button might not be working. Um, it doesn't mean that having that information and knowing it right now doesn't mean that somebody tomorrow, um, is can file a lawsuit that says, you know, I was outta my wheelchair and the ramp was at four degrees instead of two and a half degrees or, or whatever. And, um, and, and force the city legally to, to make those changes. Okay. Okay. But what I mean is if
that same person in the wheelchair fell and we had the list of things that needed to be fixed, right. Is there an indemnification that comes with doing this project that says, because the city is making a good faith effort, there is some kind of protection? That's my question. Is there some kind of indemnification that protects us because we are making the good faith effort to find the issues to address? I don't believe so, but it sounds like a good question for the city solicitor. Thank You Councilor Adams. Yeah, thank you. Uh, being here,
I guess I'm a little miffed on why the state has determined they're only looking at fatalities because I know where the fatalities are in town or have been, most of that's been vehicle error of driver error in most cases. However, there are many intersections that have a lot of bad fender bender that are going to create a death. In my opinion, hillside Road is one of 'em, but that's not gonna be looked at. We're only looking at fatalities that, in my opinion, most of them have been driver error and not on the street. So why would the state target what they're targeting?
And I think they should be targeting the 10 fender benders that probably will create a death. I have an answer that you're gonna like. So the data that we're gonna be processing analyzing is fatalities and injuries. It doesn't mean that we can only look at fatalities and injuries when we come up with our list of targeted locations that we want to analyze, excuse me. And then propose changes to the roadway for, so, excuse me. This is why we talked to the police to find out about near miss hotspots.
This is why we talk, um, with Westfield residents, um, about where they think the issues are. Um, because they can tell us what the data doesn't. And then ultimately when we have this list, which I mentioned might end up being for 10 to 20 locations, um, it's not gonna be based strictly on the crash data. It'll also be based on what we learned from the patrol officers and where they see potential future problem spots. It'll be based on, um, what we learned from parents who are active in the parent teacher organization
with Westfield schools, um, where they see kids waiting for a school bus, but there's no sidewalk there and they have to stand in the mud or the snow, you know, all sorts of things like that can, um, will inform the decision that, um, of whether or not to include a location in the plan. Yeah. Thank you. I thought, I thought the way you said it is they were specifically looking at fatalities, The data that Yes. Forgive me if I, um, didn't make it very clear,
but yes, the data part of this is fatalities and serious injuries, fatalities and all injuries. Excuse me. Thank you. You're welcome everybody. Good Councilor Morgan, just, just one more quick question. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, so we're, we're known as the pothole city by a lot of residents, right? So people avoid potholes that go like this. Uh, I just had a resident, I was just out at Loomis, uh, street, um, just, just two days ago to look at it because of all the patchwork that's been done there,
there's a section of it around 500 Loomis. There's probably a half a mile stretch. That's awful. And I can only imagine what it looked like when there were all the potholes. They've been patched, but it's still awful. There's a one way bridge there. There's another Loomis Ridge Road goes up and there's this big, the road's caving in in a couple places. Is that something that would qualify or, or even, uh, because people are, what I'm told by the residents, that people swerve to avoid the dip in the road. They swerve to to, for a pothole and oncoming, she goes, there's gonna be a fatality.
This is gonna be an accident because people are trying to avoid potholes. Yeah. So I also live in a city that where we feel it's notorious for potholes. So I I empathize. Um, the answer is that in this grant program, it is quite specific that asks that will be considered to fall under the category of this should be routine maintenance are not going to be funded. So, um, that would include roadways that need a repave would not be eligible. However, since I'm, since I have the microphone,
um, uh, I had an excellent conversation today with another one of the towns that we're working with right now. And, uh, part of what they're asking for is improved pedestrian level lighting for a few blocks, uh, in their downtown. The process of installing that lighting requires us to tear up the street, which then has to get repaved. So as part of the budget for the grant application that goes in on Thursday, we're doing a full mill and overlay for the entire street
because we have to dig it up to put the conduit in for the lighting anyway. So there maybe ways, you know, we can't strictly target something just because it has potholes, but there may be other ways to get funding to, um, improve the street. Thank you. Yeah. Council burns. Yeah, Mr. Mr. Perza. Thank you. Um, I, to answer the question to my colleague on the other side, okay. He mentioned Loomis Street, well Loomis Street, the engineers here, it's gonna be paid very shortly. And, um, also Loomis Ridge, um, working diligently
with the, uh, DPW um, director to have that addressed. So it would've been a simple, you know, phone call to me, you know, I would've took care of that. So, um, again, I can, my constituent in, uh, ward four, if you'd like to contact me or she, I have no problem, uh, explaining everything. Thank you, Mr. President, Anything else? Thank you for your presentation. Thank you all very much. Appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you counsel. Thanks. Thank you. Petitions for Mons and other papers. Item 10 is a public hearing on an application
for junk dealer and junk collector licenses for Ian Jewelers, LLC 81 Elm Street submitted by Matthew Turon. Owner public hearing is now open. Could you step forward and just state your name and address, sir? So I'm Matthew Turgen. I live in Holyoke. I don't live in Westfield anymore, but I'm trying to open a business at 81 Elm Street. Um, opening another jewelry store. I currently own Camelot Jewelers up, uh, south Bend Road, if you guys know where Jelly Belly's is right across the street. Yep. Um, I'm in the process of closing that,
but the junk dealer license does not transfer from one place to another, so I was hoping to reapply for it. Okay. Councillor Matthews King. Thank you. Um, I have a few questions. Um, you just said you, you have a background in the jewelry business. Yes. What will be the store's operating hours? Uh, so I'm shooting for Tuesday through Saturday. Um, 10 o'clock to seven of course, like if foot traffic isn't there and I'll fluctuate those hours, but Okay. Um, will you be,
I know you'll be selling jewelry, will you be buying jewelry as well? That's, that's my ultimate goal, yes. Okay. Um, so when you're buying the jewelry, what steps do you take to make sure the person's selling them is the right full owner? So currently, uh, at Camelo Jewelers we follow all the state regulated. So I take a, do a brief description of the jury being purchased, also getting a copy of their license, reporting it to the police station or police department. So, and then we hold it for 30 days until
either A, it lapses, or b I'm contacted by the police department stating that they're looking for a piece of jewelry. Okay. Um, so I could see when I read your paperwork that you're playing to have a safe, like what other safety measures are you gonna have in place? So I have, at the new location, I plan on having security cameras, uh, motion sensors. I was looking into the, the light, like the auto lights as well. So as soon as it comes on it's like, oh, you're gonna get to okay. Smile for the camera type. Um, with that I don't have anything as like grounds
of like background checks, but that's about, I have an alarm system. Okay. Um, and two more questions. Um, have you ever had a license revoked or denied in another municipality. Okay. And what's the plan for parking? Uh, great question. Uh, so on street and also behind. Alright, that, those are all the questions I have. Any other questions from the council? Councilor Harris. Thank you Mr. President. He's been a wonderful neighbor. He's right up the street from me and there's been no issues and no problems, uh, in his current business.
I appreciate that. Anything else from the council? Anyone in the chamber like to ask any questions of the applicant? No questions. Anyone in the chamber like to speak in favor of this application? Speak in favor, counselor. Meow. Thank you Mr. President. Um, I would just like to say that although I was a yes vote when you were here before, um, I also accompanied a friend to make a purchase at your place. Um, and he was very well taken care of. And I just wanna say that not only
were you completely within, you know, your permit and everything, but you also, um, made a lifelong customer. And so, uh, I'm happy to support again. Thank you. Thank You so much. Thank you. Anyone else like to speak in favor of this application? In favor? Anyone like to speak in opposition to this application? No one in opposition position in that case. Councilor Matthews Kane. Um, should We close the public hearing and uh, refer to license Second. Motion made and seconded to close the public hearing and refer to license? All in favor? A. Aye. Opposed?
It's not in the hands of a license, sir. Thank you so much. Thank you. Item 11 is a public hearing on a petition of Christopher m Bard to amend the zoning map at 44 Tannery Road from rural residential to commercial aid. Public hearing is now open. The applicant's representative, Mr. Okay. Uh, good evening, Mr. President. Counsel, uh, Rob Levek from our Leve Association. I'm just gonna set up the, Uh, tripod here. Um, the subject property is a property that was owned by the Bard family. Uh, for those of you who don't, who Chris Bard is. Bubba is to my left. Mm-hmm.
Um, uh, the Bard family has owned the property for a number of years. They're looking, uh, started talking with me a few years ago about what could be done on the subject property. Um, it's interesting, it kind of falls near or adjacent to some existing, uh, apartments and condos. So we started looking at the potential for, um, kind of extending that area. So interestingly enough, the zoning district that those other condos fall in, kind of right near Gigi's Pizza, et cetera, those are all in a commercial, a zoning district.
Um, we did hear that there was concerns from Abutters with regard to commercial A because they would obviously be potentially concerned about mission creep for commercial A. Um, we personally have no problem adjusting the, uh, the, uh, request to be, um, resident C, which would also allow for the same type of use that we're thinking. Um, at the last public hearing that we had on a different item, um, councilor Sullivan had requested that we throw together a concept. So in kind of anticipation of that,
I had put together a concept for this evening and I can share it with you. Um, but this is, I just wanna be clear, we're here for a zone change. This is not site plan approval, but to be fair, we wanted to show you what could potentially be here so that also anybody in the audience, any abutters that might have concerns, would understand what we're thinking. So, So I, I purposefully do these by hand because they can change. So if they're sketchy, they're concepts, they're not, you know, nothing set in stone. You're Quite an Artist. Yeah. Yeah. Excuse me. Could Rob, Rob, could you pull those back just a little bit more?
Oh yeah, sorry. I'm sorry. Yeah. Alright. Thank you. How's that? A little bit Better? No, yeah, totally. Yeah. Well, but yeah. Alright. Bubble looks great from there by the way. He does. Um, so this is Tannery Road here. So the, there, there's, interestingly enough, there's the water line that goes through the front of the property. I don't know if you're familiar with the Springfield water and sewer line. Um, they, uh, own that portion of the property in fee, meaning that the bards do. Um, this is the subject property. The idea would be that we could potentially get, you know, you know, and it, it could, could vary for sure.
Um, but we're showing 32. Um, we would anticipate these would be townhouse units similar, um, in nature to what we talked about, uh, east Main Street or similar to maybe down the street. Um, in the commercial a zoning district, I did hear, uh, that potentially the planner had suggested that that area that has those other condos and those other apartments be rezoned to residency, which is actually consistent with the residency zoning. Um, but you know, however that works or whatever makes most sense, whatever amendments potentially, uh, need to be made.
We're, we're on board. We just wanna make sure that, um, the goal would be to, to try to do residential. As you know, there's a housing, housing shortage sore. Doing our best to try to help with that. Um, be happy to answer any questions there may be through the president. Thank you Councilor Matthews King. Thank you Mr. President. So I'm glad to hear that you brought up residency because I know when there's rezoning in my ward moving to commercial, the residents have, but I was just concerned, I, before I read the description for residency in, I'm gonna read the whole thing.
Districts are intended to accommodate the full range of housing types, including single family dwellings, two family dwellings, and multiple family dwellings at the higher densities appropriate in the established urban neighborhoods. Which I took to mean like the downtown neighborhoods, but you can put C anywhere You can. So the, well I can but the city council can you that's yeah. Yep. Um, so you know, I think it would be consistent with that area. Uh, if you go up south, I'm sorry, college highway and then take, take your left onto tannery, the area with Gigi's, I understand why it was zoned commercial A because you do have the little plaza and the pizza place
and kind of that neighborhood. You know, most commercial A is neighborhood stuff. So I think somebody had, you know, had suggested that there might be a storage facility or something like that. You can't do that type of stuff in commercial A anyway. But I do understand the concern about commercial, 'cause commercial A is more, you know, like villagey little centers as opposed to, you know, what you see on East Main Street or on Southampton roads, not, not that type of zoning. Um, but that said, we do totally understand and residency does seem most appropriate, especially if, you know those other properties end up at some point being,
you know, rezoned so that they're appropriately zoned for what they're doing there. Because technically they're probably, I would say preexisting, nonconforming, you know, so it would be a housekeeping effort if they did get rezoned. Okay. Council Fanon. Thank you. Thank you Mr. President. If you are going to make an amendment to this application, will you make it prior to it coming to the ZPD committee? I was hoping someone who knew how the procedure for city council could help us with that. Well your application is applying, you're applying for something. Yes, I do. I am aware of that.
They kind of came to us a little bit late in the game. So we would certainly do what's appropriate if we need to withdraw and resubmit or if there's a way to satisfy the procedural requirements under the current application. We would love to do that too. I would think that you would need some kind of amendment or something before it comes to the committee. 'cause the committee cannot change. Right. The application. So does that, can that happen on the floor of the council? So if I may, oh, sorry. As the ward counselor, I did speak to Jay Vinky at great length about this and he considered that the amendment could be done by us
as a group because we're making a change that makes more sense. The, the reason I talked to him is because I was contacted by neighbors that are concerned about going to commercial A and their concern was that they don't have a problem with the condo project. They just don't want something else. In the event the property sold then it's own commercial A now the next person coming in doesn't have to put condos or you can put a store there. So that's why I, I got involved and I did talk to Jay Vinky and he said that he doesn't see any problem with amending it on the floor, but that's up to 13 of us.
So I think that, oh, Sorry. I mean as the ward counselor, I think it's a better idea. Yeah. And I also did talk to Jay about rezoning the condos that are behind the, the pizza place because that would kind of take away that thing and make it more continuous with the rest of the neighborhood. Right. Go ahead. I do agree with you that something has to be amended or changed before it comes to the committee so that the committee knows what they're voting on. Right. Councilor Figi and then Councilor Harrison. I'll make, I'll make the motion to amend the, the application to RC residency.
Yes. Second motion made. And second, second. Discussion on the amendment. Seeing none. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? You are now amended. Great. Thank you very much. That was great. Council Harris, did you have something? Sometimes it's that easy, who knows? So I'm glad he did. I also wanna say I would totally support this. This is right up the street from me and it just fits absolutely in that entire neighborhood. And, uh, we, we need the housing desperately. Thank you. And it's a good family who's doing it. Any other questions from the council before I open it up?
Anyone in the chamber have any questions about this? Please step forward. I need you to come forward and state your name and address for the city clerk. My God, Good evening. I'm Stacey Rao. I live at 52 Tannery. I wasn't prepared to speak tonight, but I do have some questions because I just wanted to see this and I didn't want to overstep your boundaries and be behind you. Um, so I guess one thing I heard people say was that it fits perfectly in the neighborhood. And if you've bend down tannery, I'm 52, I'm right next door to the property. And the other sides of me are both houses. There are condos, and that's over by Gigi's Pizza,
but it isn't a condo neighborhood. Um, the whole street is all houses. They were residential area with the exception of that one place at the front of the street. Um, can I just ask again? Was it 22 or 32? Oh, okay. Um, yeah, I guess I would say, um, I'm definitely in opposition to it. It's not, so I guess I'll also add that for a long time we've lived next door to that property, and if anyone's driven down that street for many years, it was, um, a yard sale. And it was disappointing to live next door too.
And so, um, it wasn't kept up for a long, long, long time. And now to see it sold and, um, I guess had the lack of consideration for the people who live nearby me, um, just feels disappointing because nothing was done to make that property as nice as the previous owner's own home, who he lived behind me. And I know his property was lovely, and I don't imagine he would've liked to live next door to what we live next door to. Um, so that was disappointing. And I guess this is disappointing as well to see condos and, um, I guess something that isn't part
of the neighborhood I currently live in. So that's what I'll say. Thank You. Thank you. Anyone else have any questions for the applicant? No questions. Anyone wish to speak in favor of this application? In favor seeing no one anyone like to speak in opposition to this application? Mr. President, may I ask a question of that? I'm sorry, I can't hear you. May I ask a question of that? Yes. Um, Mr. Lebeck, can, can you tell me if this were, uh, if this were a ma, if it were, yeah, I know it isn't,
but if it were, um, would there be some type of, uh, bordering vegetation or offset? Right. 'cause the, the odd, the odd, uh, what is that southern eastern, that border is with 52, right? According to the GIS is there some type of, um, bordering, buffering, vegetative situation that would allow this neighbor to think they live next to the woods even though there are condos over there? Uh, thank you. Before you go there, that's actually a planning board issue for site plan approval.
But I, I think I can help and keep it simple with regard to the zoning. So the adjacent property, I'm assuming 52 is here, or this is the property? It's, I think It's upper. Yeah, it's off. It's behind the water line. Okay. Yeah, That one. Yeah. So the water line cuts off a lot of people's properties from the actual property. Yeah. So, and there's this wooded area back here that somebody, these folks own, right. That will be untouched. So that will all remain wooded. And then there's actually down the slope on, uh, off
of south, I think it's South Metal Road or whatever the, whatever the, where the farms are down below, behind Fowler Farms. Um, that's all, you know, there's a big slope there. So that's, that's all pretty much protected. So the good news is there will be very few, there won't be any units out front. And I know this is site plan approval, but there wouldn't be any here because there's a water line or multiple water lines, and then this is a slope, so you're kind of protected. So I, you know, the good news is it's not gonna be in right in somebody's backyard. Yep. But this border, on this, that upper Yeah, that border, that's your border. Right? I'm trying to figure out
where my house is. Come, come, Come to Here's tannery right here down the bottom. Yeah. Yeah. Do I know it? Um, oh, I, I think, okay. Um, Oh, there's my house right here and our car is in our pool. Okay. So no, is that, yeah, that's our house right here. I don't know what this is. That's just Mine. Oh, my tool. Okay. So this is my home. Um, so that's it. I just don't, I'm trying to figure out where my drive, oh, here's my driveway. Okay. And we do share that. Is that the old driveway? You go to the s house? That's what used to go back there.
Yeah. Okay. So that's the one where it's splits right here. Yeah. And I guess we always had a question because we do have a shared space on that road, and I don't, I forget what it's called. It has a name like the easement. Mm-hmm. Thank you. That's what it is. I knew it was something. Is that in jeopardy? I guess that's a question. Okay. Yeah. So that's us right here. Okay. So thank you. Thank you. Yeah. So there can be, certainly when we get to site plan approval, it could be buffering. Again, this is just back of a nap. This is a two coffee sketch. That's it. But, but like the, the, um, residency allows
for some kind of buffer for the, It requires, it does have some different requirements, density, open space, um, buffers. Setbacks. Yes. Thank You. Yep. Getting back to anyone like to speak in opposition to this project in opposition to the zone change. Can I ask a question of fact? I know we one more. Sure. So when you drew, I know that's just a sketch. When you drew that, that conformed to the first thing that you were asking for. Now I'm commercial that you conform commercial that was conforming to commercial.
Would it, would there be more protections if it was residential C? Would there be more protections? Like, Or would there be, would you there would be, would that not work for residential C? No, that's a question. Or would it be exactly. You could do exactly the Same thing. No, I get, I get your question. So there would be more protections in that there would not be allowed any commercial uses allowed. So that's one thing. However, the density, it would be based on the density requirement of residential. Okay. This area is logical for townhouses. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Council alley. Just
A quick question. Rob, can you just do with your finger exactly where Tannery Road is running? Um, On the bottom Right here. Right at the bottom. Okay. Almost, almost consistent with the bottom of the page. Right? So it's like this lady's house or driveway. Like you, you are set way, way back, right? You're not on, we're way back. You're not on tannery, but you're, We're way on Tary. Oh, I was gonna say. Okay. Right. Thank you. Um, I guess it's just hard to envision. We have just one home right there right now. Just One property. Right. Okay. All right. Can you show me the one property that exists on
that photo of the diagram? The existing house, Rob. Oh, the house. Um, yeah, it's hard to see right about here. Okay. Under, under that. Under that, under that box. That's that. Okay. Which seems surprising because it is right off the side. I think. I'm surprised because it's right here. That's 44. Yeah, you can kind of see it under there on the area. Oh, Right. So this is the one that's buried that, I guess. Yeah, the road's down here. That's the road. Okay. So this would be the water line.
The grass for the water line goes through there. Alright. So this is that whole Water Line. Yeah. Right? Yeah. Kind of. Right? Yeah. That's what's confusing. Yeah. All right. Yep. Can I take a picture of that again? Sure. Okay. Anyone else like to speak in opposition? Seeing nobody. Councilor Fanon, I motion to close the public hearing and refer to zoning planning and development committee. Second. Motion made and seconded. Um, roll call please. Madam City Clerk. Bill Sand. Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Figgy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthew Kane? Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Ky? Yes.
Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Thank You. Thank you. That public hearing is now closed. Uh, item 12 is a public hearing on an application for special permit, site plan approval and stormwater permit for a truck terminal pursuant to zoning ordinance sections 3 1 20 0.3 five, three seventy one, one six, ten one, and four dash one 10 to be located at one 60 Falcon Drive, Westfield Mass.
Submitted by our Leve Associates on behalf of Westfield Falcon one 60 LLC Kiro Lee Gutman Public hearing is now open. Mr. Leveque, you are on Mr. Uh, Mr. President? Uh, I would like to use the smart board if it's okay. Sure. I dunno if I'm qualified, but I'll try. You can't see the parties. Air, air Marine. All set. Okay. Um, uh, good evening again for the record. Rob Levek from our Leve Associates. Um, Danielle is here representing the spot companies. Uh, she's also here to help answer any logistical questions that you may have.
Um, I'm gonna try my best to operate the smart board just to give you an idea of what we're dealing with here. So bear with me please. Sorry, where am I? Okay, so this is a spot. Okay, so this is one 60 Falcon Drive. Um, so the application before you is, is actually an existing site. So Brockway currently operates within the existing facility. This is Falcon Drive here to the north. This is the suburb property. Um, you're familiar with the facility
that's proposed back behind this. I think it was Target or something like that. Right? So that's right here. Airports over here. So this property was permitted, has a special permit, but was permitted back, um, In nineties. Thank you. In 97. And when it was permitted, they had pretty much this portion of the property was permitted. It's been expanded since then. What's happened is, um, the spot companies works directly with Home Depot. Um, they're kind of a logistical consultant that works
with Home Depot to try to help them with solutions. As you're aware, in the city of Westfield, there's currently an ongoing, um, issue we'll call it, to try to solve the trailer, uh, concerns. We, uh, there's a couple noncompliant areas. There's a couple projects that we had done that displaces that trailers, and because of that, what they're trying to do is solve a problem. Um, some of the, some of these trailers have been stored on Madero Drive. Um, I think that's pending or pending resolution of some sort.
I won't speak to that, that's not this particular solution. But what we're here for this evening is for basically bringing this property into compliance. So the spot companies have a purchase and sale agreement to essentially acquire this property. For the purposes of storing trailers here, right now it's a trucking terminal and has a trucking terminal special permit. Um, there's about 42% of the subject property that was allowed to be utilized. As you can see from the, from the aerial photograph that's, it's in excess of that, probably close upwards of 90%.
Um, so what we are here this evening is presenting a plan that gets the pro the subject property back in compliance one. Um, and two, we're requesting a new special permit. That special permit would allow them to utilize the subject property. If you're familiar with your terminology, a trucking terminal includes any site that stores trailers. These would be empty trailers from Home Depot, um, and potentially other uses. But my understanding is directly from Home Depot. Um, they would store approximately 280 trailers on site,
which solves a big portion of their trailer problem. It would be stored on a property that is already developed for these purposes. Um, they don't really need the, the building. Um, they might in the future take the building out. We're leaving it for now. But what we're doing is right now this site is not completely paved and does not have all the storm water requirements that would consider it completely compliant and up to speed. So in my communications early on with the spot companies, as they got this purchase and sale agreement together with their, um, with the owner,
they, we talked about how to get back in compliance very specific to this site. This site is also in the aquifer and is also in an endangered species polygon. So when I first got the call, there's a number of items that I thought that we needed to resolve. We have been in communication with the endangered species program, and they have signed off on the property. So no longer is there an endangered species issue. They've signed, um, a note take letter and provided that to us. We've also designed a state-of-the-art stormwater system that has a treatment train proprietary water quality units.
Um, and the site is paved right now. It's not entirely paved. A portion of the site is paved. Um, when we design that stormwater system, uh, we also offset, because of that design of the stormwater system and also the redesign of the parking lot, we've also offset the amount of impervious surface under the aquifer regulations. There is a requirement normally for new projects that only, only up to 70% of a new project can be permitted on in the aquifer. This happens to be in the aquifer.
What we have done is in the regulations, it allows for a special permit to exceed that 70%. So as part of our special permit, we we're requesting to exceed that by about 13%. So it'd be at about 83% impervious. So we're, we're reducing back off of the existing, we, we would be back at approximately 83%. So we're over the 70%. And in a novel approach we discussed, um, with the planner and also with, um, with, uh, Kristen Meow,
who's been great to communicate with, with regard to water protection. Um, we've proposed an offsite location that would be considered credit land. So Mr. Giler is also here this evening on North Road. Mr. Giler has a property that he's already previously approved for the use of a contractor's yard. And the idea would be that the land that he can't use, which happens to be right at the headwaters of arm, brook could be utilized as credit land. He can't really, to be fair to everyone
and transparent, he can't really use a lot of that land, but it would provide further protection. And the idea would be we were going to provide a declaration of restriction on the subject property to protect. And initially the number was 2.5 acres. Um, we've been able to get that number to five acres. We, we have a sketch and some information that we can share with everyone, but the idea is that to compensate for that 1.3 acres or so, um, we basically would be fourfold, um, in our protection land.
So instead of a two to one ratio, we'd now have a, would have a approximately a four to one ratio. So the, you know, I'll show you the plans in specific, but I know there's a lot of moving parts. So before I get into the details of the improvements on the plans, are there any questions about the concept of what's being done? Are you good? Actually, I made sense. Yeah, we, There's been a lot of talk. Yeah, we're, we're clear. Okay. So you're good? Mm-hmm. Okay. Any questions from the council, Mr. President, if I may have we,
do you remember us ever doing like a land banking essentially? Yeah, good question. Um, so I, I don't, That kind of happens for comp compensatory storage. Not true. It also happens for Title V issues. That's called 'em the Community aggregation plan. Um, an aggregation plan under Title V. Um, you have transfer of development rights under the, the, um, I don't think it's that part has ever been used. Transfer of development rights under the city Westfield's, uh, zoning ordinance. Um, in this particular case, the mechanism under which we would be, or if the city council chooses to permit this, um,
would be under the special permit, which allows a property that, and I think it's for growth, right? 'cause if you build a property and you know, you're, you're right up to the 70% and then all of a sudden you have a great business and it goes well, you know, so I think the provision is in there to allow sites that have been previously developed up to the 70% to increase over that with a special permit, provided they do it the right way. Um, this is noncompliant. We're being completely transparent. The spot companies was not the noncompliant party. They are the new party coming in and they understand they need to comply.
So that's what we started communicating on early on. And so the proposal before you is one two pave the site, which is gonna help over the aquifer. It's gonna collect any total suspended solids or, you know, oils and grease that will then go through a treatment train to a stormwater basin that's designed based on the current DEP standards. So all of that will be happening. So that's a plus. Um, we believe that the credit land, although a novel idea is a plus, because the concept is if we were to just cut
that down on site, it's just trailers that have to be, you know, uh, located somewhere else. Right? And the idea is to, to disturb less and have less locations, ideally consolidate the concern, have it all on the Brockway site, or I, I don't wanna say all mostly on the Brockway site. Um, and that will generally resolve a lot of their logistical issues. It is in close proximity to where they're going to and from shouldn't be going. It's not, and actually the benefit also is the potential that, you know, the, the Brockway use goes away, you know,
over the course of, you know, the timeframe that they've worked out. And then it's just the trailers and these are empty trailers. That's, you know, that's the general gist of the trailers in general. They're empty. They don't, they're not storing, um, you know, equipment or product in these trailers, obviously for, for obvious reasons. But, um, that's the, that's the idea. So the reason we are proposing the credit land is not necessarily that we need it to satisfy the special permit, but we realize that it's an ask and it made sense logically to protect the headwaters
of arm brook who are that, that are not necessarily in the, they're not in the aquifer, but they flow into the aquifer. Um, and that area is sensitive and Mr. Giler was willing to work with the spot companies to Be frank. So essentially you're making an agreement under the special permit? Yes. There, there is no program in place to do this. There's a, uh, memorandum of understanding between the parties. Um, we have a drawing that shows five acres to be protected, um, of that land on North Road.
That could all be, would likely all be folded into the special permit. Um, and then if they do not, if they do not finalize the agreement, this special permit would, would not be, I'm sorry, there's still, there's no official city program for this, like open space. They Would just, you know, there's regulations, ordinance, just strictly the special permit under the aquifer. Uh, I'm sorry, the, uh, water Resources Protection District. Thank you. Yep. Councilor Adams? Yeah, I thank you, Mr. President. Well, you got a lot of moving parts here. Yeah. I don't think I've ever seen this, but it's kind of like a floodplain. It's kind of like the same thing as a floodplain,
I would assume you're buying compensation comp, comp storage. Yes, sir. I would assume. Yeah, I think That's right. And, and I, I guess I wanted to first of all, determine, and maybe the, the word counselor was probably before her time. How, how could this have happened? Um, how could this have gotten to this point, I guess, Before being, being completely developed Before Change of ownership, I guess. Yes. Um, I don't know outta sight, outta mind. Maybe just not paying attention. I mean, do you mean the by the owner or by the compliance folks at the city? I could either or Probably both. I mean, you know, I mean, I think they probably
had the need to expand. I can't speak for them. I have not had any conversations with the owner. Um, but logically, if they have a thriving operation and need more space and no one was bugging them, I think that's probably what happened. I'll say. So, so there could be litigation happening with this piece? Is that what you said? No, no, no. I don't know. There's no litiga. So I would say non-compliance that we're aware of. Oh, okay. So the new owner is purchasing this property for the purposes of utilizing it for trailer storage. Gotcha. In their due diligence period,
they uncovered the fact that there was a, a, a coverage concern. So then they called us, hired us, and we started sifting through the, the, Alright, I thought there's litigation. I'm like, how do we change this? How do we do this when this's litigation? No. Oh, that's why I was confused. Attorney for the buyers. So, oh, perfect. We need an attorney. There's no, there's no litigation going just during the due diligence period. It doesn't cover, you could see to the rear that they just expanded the parking area, it looks like over, you know, the GAS mapping that we, we reviewed. And so we just went to investigate
to see if they had applied for a special permit. And they, and so they have a 1997 special permit and just, you know, continued to, looks like clear. So we are just trying to be a good, in good faith as the new buyer to, to bring it back into compliance with the old special permit, just by, the best way to do it is to get the new special permit comply with the storm water management. Um, the credit land is a bonus for the city. So, um, you know, the spot companies is, is, um, going to be able to, um, bring it back into compliance if you can approve
this new special permit. Well, we appreciate that. Um, so I, I guess the other question I have would be, was there a reason why the last company didn't make this a bigger piece? Was there something that didn't allow them to make this bigger as to what you want it now? I guess, and maybe you don't know The answer to that one. I don't think they were aware of a need for, um, to, to, um, expand the special permit or apply for an amendment or modification. That's what, as a, you know, if I were the seller's attorney, I would've applied for a modification of the 1997 special permit if they needed more space.
I just don't think they were aware of it. So Thank you, Councilor Mellow and Council of Matthews Kane. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I just wanted to say that, uh, if you look on Google Earth, there's an option to go backwards in time and you can see where the rest of the parcel was clear cut and it happened during COVID. Um, and number two, uh, the lingering question for me is what happens if the parcels are sold? And, you know, can the law department go through everything and make sure that all the agreements are kosher? Um, I do still want to hear from the public, uh,
because we do need to know the answer of, um, ww m do, uh, right. What would Maryanne do? Um, so we still do need to hear that answer. Um, but my, my question would be what is outstanding for law? And, um, if this were not an already devastated parcel, if I did not know the distinction between what we call the aquifer as being mass deps zone two versus everything in Westfield, that is not a mountain, which is technically what is aquifer, right?
Because the, the permi permissive, right? The, the way that water moves under the ground is up to 10,000 square feet per day. So it's, it's aquifer, even if it isn't zone two. So that area by Abrook is technically in the geological aquifer, even if it isn't in our zone two, also, that other area by North Road, while you're thinking about everything is closer to private wells than this one 60. And I'm not trying to tell anybody what to think, but these are the things
that I was thinking about when we were discussing them. Thank you. And, uh, just a point of clarification, through the president, there would be a declaration of restriction placed on the property and we're happy to, you know, if the law department wants to review it, but it would be an agreement between both parties that the subject property on North Road, not this particular property, would have a approximately five acre, um, restriction associated with it on the land, essentially outside their developable developable footprint. Okay. So Councillor,
All thank Mr. President, I think you just asked or answered the question. I was just gonna ask. So on the comp property, there'll actually be a deed restriction on that? Yes, sir. Okay. That's the, that's, that's the mechanism that will protect that. Okay. Alright. Thank you. Yeah, officer Matthew. Thank you. Um, how many acres are non-compliant the way it is currently? 1.3. 1.3. Okay. Can we be offsetting that with the five acres on Northrop? Okay. So what would it take to make it compliant? Like if you do not get the special
permit, what's gonna happen? Um, so if we didn't get the special permit, they would have to adhere to, uh, 70%. So this site would, um, be reduced by a minimum of 1.3 acres. Um, and then we would, we'd we'd, those other trucks we'd have to find, or I'm sorry, trailers, we'd have to find a home for. Okay. And and beyond that though, they're just gonna put a fence up and not park it, or do they have to restore it? Um, well, it can't be impervious. That's, that's the definition. So definition of impervious surface in the zoning, I believe, um, is hard packed gravel
and, um, uh, bituminous or, or concrete. So asphalt concrete or hardback gravel is all considered impervious. All right. I might not have asked the question correctly. So let's say you, they don't get the special permit, they have to pull it back 1.3 acres. So let's just say for talking purposes, say they make it grass, They would have to do something like Yes. Restore it. Assuming I'm not the enforcement officer, but I would think that would be logical. Okay. Can you repeat what you said about that endangered species? Yes. So we submitted an endangered species review request
to the endangered species program. They came back and said, because the site is already completely developed, that it does not have habitat. And any work that we're doing on it is not subject to their jurisdiction. I can get you a copy of it. And again, you're saying the stuff on Abrook is not in the Aquifer Protection District? Correct. Okay. It's not in the zone too. Correct. Thanks. Stuff on arm Brook is at the headwaters of Arm Brook, which partially flows in at some point, I believe, to the aquifer. Okay. Thank you. Councilor Fi. Thank you, Mr. President. If this is permitted
and brought up to speed, how many trailers would not be able to be accommodated by this facility? Probably close to 80. 80. 'cause I think it's really a good idea to get as many into one spot as possible. 'cause they're currently, they're spread out all over that area up there as it's not good in my opinion. So thank you. Councilor Fanon. Thank you. Um, could you repeat what you said about the land, the ER's property that was non developable anyway.
He couldn't use it and that's where the restriction would be going. Yeah. I should clarify. So Mr. Giler has an approved project, uh, approved by your council for a contractor's yard on, on North Road, kind of behind the Cumberland Farms. Mm-hmm. Um, the access is actually right next kind of through the Cumberland Farms. Um, so we were able to permit through planning and conservation, we permitted a contractor's yard, um, the surrounding property on that. So it's about 10 acres and the surrounding pro. And I do have, uh, rack can handle this,
The new picture. Yeah. I actually, if I can, I can hand 'em out. That would be helpful. Thank you. So we're gonna pass around an exhibit that kind of shows the, uh, in, in green on some of 'em. And I think some of 'em are black and white. It, it shows the, um, the credit land over the, the property of Mr. Giler. Um, the green is the area that is arguably outside the limit of work. Um, the area within that is an area that was previously approved. So he has an approved project, but there are wetland resource areas, buffer zones, and also area outside of the limit of work
that we're protecting. So unrestricted land, restricted land and buffer zone, um, within that area would be, so there'd be a, a total of five acres, some of which is restricted anyway. Okay. Um, and some of which is not. Okay. Um, can I have a follow up question? Have you looked at any other properties in Westfield that is perhaps over the aquifer that is developable that we could have a restriction on, therefore limit any more? Yes, we have in those properties are significant in value. The tunes of tune of multimillion dollars
and likely will be developed because that person or those parties that own those properties could develop 70% of their land. And they're not interested in parting with that because they're anticipating that they'll probably do something with that. But there are multiple properties, at least the folks that we've communicated with we're not at all interested. Okay. Any more questions from the council? Any questions from anybody in the chamber? Come on up. Hello. Um, I'm Anna Messick. Um, I'm actually a resident of Feeding Hills, but I am the city's conservation agent.
Um, I am informed of this property just because I keep track of things going on in the city and I'm very knowledgeable of all the different stuff. There's no wetlands on the property, um, at one 60 drive. So, um, that is not my concern for it. Um, that as one of the enforcing bodies, I heard somebody on the council ask Why has no enforcing body taken action into looking into this, um, regarding the N-H-E-S-P habitat, the endangered species habitat that's regulated by the state. Um, so I wanted to give a few pointers to see council
as someone who has worked with N-H-E-S-P and worked with other, um, People to do either conservation restrictions or declarations of restrictions. Um, and one of those things is that the declarations of restrictions are typically only good for 30 years, um, unless they're renewed. So in 30 years, both parties will have to come back to the table and agree to renew that restriction for another 30 years, um, versus a conservation restriction, which is permanent and in perpetuity. If you recall, three years ago, a young gentleman stood here
and read you guys the Lorax concerning, um, Mr. Gil, here's property. Um, he's one of my favorite references and memories to this day. 'cause I had just started here. It was bright-eyed and happy. Um, so he rent the Lorax and that came up in conversation of can we put a conservation restriction on the other half of this property because we know it's wet and we know it's not developable. And the answer at that time was, no, we don't have any interest in doing that. We can develop it. Um, but now they're saying they're willing to do a declaration of restrictions. So, um, why not go a step further
and make it permanent conservation restriction? Protecting that property would be one of my questions. Um, the other thing that counsel should consider is to get a copy of that letter from N-H-E-S-P. Um, the reason why, um, that's a concern is, um, to the point of what happened that we got here into the situation was that's the state. They can't monitor everything. So when the land begins to get cleared slowly, and it did begin in 2019, um, it gets cleared slowly over time. Nobody realizes that nobody catches it because it doesn't fall to me to catch it.
It doesn't fall to our building department to catch it. Um, it doesn't fall to our health inspectors, anybody like that. Um, so just they cleared the endangered species habitat. That's no doubt. They're not denying that. Um, and then they can continue to use it because it's already been destroyed. And that's just how the system works. Um, otherwise you could restore it, um, if no special permit was approved. But it's a necessary thing in order for Home Depot specifically. I can attest to them. They're very responsible. Um, I know I was on site with, um, Councillor Fanon one time
and, and Home Depot, and they immediately cleaned up a site within 24 to 48 hours. That was an absolute mess. And they offered us tour of their facility. Um, so a Home Depot will be the lease of this property. They will take excellent care of it. Um, so that was, that was just my things of declaration of restriction, conservation restriction, and then the whole N-H-A-S-B stuff. As someone who was just listening, Would you like to respond to that, sir? I could hear about 30% of what was said. Um, I will say that there's no jurisdiction for the Conservation Commission, so I guess they can we're,
I don't know if we were soliciting their comments, but there's no jurisdiction for conservation. Okay. The endangered species program is, is the, the body that handles endangered species. So a little confused. Yeah. Any other questions? Any Councilor? Fanny. Thank you. Do you happen to have a, the letter from about the endangered species, can you submit that? Is it with the application? Yes. Or Can you Yep. Councilor Mellow. Um, thank you. Uh, can we just know whether
or not the conservation, the memorandum, the situation, whatever legal document you're bringing? Yes. Um, for me personally to feel comfortable that that prop, that area would need to be permanently concerned. Right. So, uh, if Director Messick would, she said there was a difference between the phrase that you were using and the technical term that preserves it forever. Yes. Um, can we make sure that the one that we see is the one that preserves it Forever? So there's a conservation restriction and there's a declaration of restriction.
The declaration of the restriction is the same exact, um, mechanism or legal document that's used by the Endangered Species program and your Conservation commission. So while they say that it doesn't protect land beyond 30 years, it's the document that they're literally using. So the idea is to protect this in perpetuity. If, um, we could always put a condition on it that, you know, in 30 years we're all around, we can put another one on or something. But I'm sorry to interrupt. It's just, it's statutory.
So you just have to renew it before you renew it for another 20 years. Restrictions are limited as the time are limited to for 30 years, and then you renew it for another 20 and another 20. And So that's just an automatic thing that the city is supposed to know to do. The City's supposed to, well, you can, you know, you can consult with your city solicitor and you can do the amendment and renewal and renew it extended. Okay. Thank you. Sorry, councilor Fanon. Thank you, Mr. President. So could you do the conservation restriction
instead of the Declaration of restriction? You can, but it's a, it's a significant effort versus the, the Declaration of Restriction. The reason why the Conservation Commission uses it, reason why endangered species uses it, is it's pretty straightforward document and it doesn't have to go through EOA and everything else that a conservation restriction would've To do. Um, I'm doing one in Wellesley now, and it's taken two years. So, you know, it'll be a significant expense for the, for the city and to go to the state approval process for it. So, but the declaration can be renewed? Yes.
The declaration infrastructure. Okay. Councilor Matthews King, councilor fan. You just stole my question, but I have another one is like, if the city neglects to renew it, like who's responsible for renewing it and what happens if they don't do it? It'd be the permit holder. And if the permit holder doesn't do it, then just like anything else, they would be noncompliant and it could be Enforced. And yes. Who is the permanent holder? The permit is who you issue the permit to. So it's either the landowner and goes with the land, or sometimes there's more specific special permits that go to a certain entity.
Right. I can, I can send the statute to the city solicitor. Im happy to go through the mechanism. I I, so does the city hold it or the landowner holds it? So the, the, sometimes the, the Conservation Commission holds it. I, you know, it depends who you designate as a property. So we're talking About two different things. So, sorry. So a declaration of restriction is a restriction that gets put on the property. Yeah, it doesn't require any stewardship or any, um, work on part of the city. So if a conservation restriction was put on the property,
there's typically someone that takes over the stewardship of that property. That's not this kind of property. This is five acres surrounding, um, arguably an industrial site that will protect, further protect the wetland resource areas. If this was a park or, you know, contiguous open space with a green, with a, with a, um, you know, a park or something like that. Those are typically what we see conservation restrictions based on. So I know that typically 'cause we've done a bunch of those actually. Yeah. But is it impossible to do it on the type of property that you are proposing? No, but it's unnecessary. It's just unusual or it's,
It provides no additional benefit other than the timeframe. And if the timeframe can be, um, and it's, it's significant. I mean, it's like you're talking literally two years and Right. I mean it's, and yeah, it's a, it's a mess. It's there, But after 30 years it could revert back to a use, Not if it's renewed. But if it's not renewed, that's, so sometimes things slip through the cracks in the city. None of us are gonna be here 30 years from now. And so it could get sent to some commission and then they forget to do it and then it reverts back and we've lost it. And I think that is the concern of,
at least me on the council, is I wanna make sure this happens in perpetuity. I'm not gonna be around in 30 years to check on This. So a condition that requires that to be renewed would be in per would, would satisfy that and that land be protected. I mean, it could also be a, in the condition of the permit with the meets and balances description of the property itself too. So that could be a belts and suspenders approach. Anything else? I You're gonna have to come up. You can't, I, I can't, I don't, I dunno who sent. Oh yes. Do you wanna ask a question? Come on up. I have forward,
I'm going to right after you're done with this. I just, my question I guess then, 'cause I have more to say later is, um, so is there any reason why, since this has been out of Marianne Babinski one 14 Rogers Avenue, sorry, I keep forgetting. Thank You. Is there any reason since this has been out of compliant all this time that I know they wanna take over this property and we know it has to be corrected. And I know we've had, and we've, people have worked for years, uh, trying to protect the aquifer.
I think that you, people sitting here have tried to do that and used it when you fought against some other projects that were coming into Westfield to stop them as a group. Not only this board, this commission, but the boards. And so, since this is a, is there any reason since we have a rule for the West with the, um, water roos protection zoning at 70%, instead of going above that this be cleaned up and only part of it be established as a 70% area,
why can't that be done instead of all this other malarkey? Thank you. So Mr. Chair, uh, Mr. President, it could be done. Mm-hmm. They, somebody could force the current owner to go back to 42%, but none of the water quality improvements would, would be made. Um, we wouldn't be resolving the, the trailer storage. Um, and We wouldn't get credit land. So those are the three things. So I mean, realistically, yes. I mean, you could, you could call, I mean,
somebody from enforcement could call them up and say, create grass and it would affect their business and these folks may not utilize the property and, and it wouldn't require the improvements. So I think the improvements are great. It's about $1.5 million worth of paving and site improvements from a water quality standpoint. It's a big number. So that you're, we're getting that the current owner, I don't know their finances, but that I'm guessing that if they're required to go back to, you know, two thirds of their current operation, they're probably not gonna be able to afford to
also upgrade for fun. So this is a way for them, for us, for these guys to utilize the property, upgrade the water quality, also provide some credit land, um, and in a perfect world, resolve the majority of the, of the trailer problem. Thank You. Come on up. Cool. Good evening. My name is Barbara Rokus 2 7 2 Lock House Road. My question, I am a realtor and when I have a buyer looking at a piece of property, it's usually buyer due, due diligence.
My buyer would not buy a piece of property, did not meet, meet his needs. So I'm wondering, Mr. Gallagher has bought property and run businesses here in Westfield. Why wasn't due diligence done on this property? I think it sets a bad precedent for someone to buy a piece of property knowing it's not going to accommodate the business or the work he wants done. And then come and try to change the rules that go with that property to,
you're shaking your head no. Yeah, I I don't think we're talking about two different things here. Well, no, you are trying now to, for, for one thing, if this had a wildlife restriction on it and it no longer has, that means whatever was, there is no more that property as it stands now from what I'm hearing, does not con conform to what he wants to put there. So now he wants to change. Now
I think you're talking about two different things. They want, they want to pave more than what they wanna be able to pave up to 70% of that property. The old restriction did not give you 70%. Am I misunderstanding? Yes. Oh yes, I'm sorry. So the, The current property was permitted to be much smaller and between 2019 and now they went all the way out to 92%. And now this other company wants to buy that property and put in the storm water. But because that first owner already destroyed the land,
national heritage is saying, well there's nothing there to save. So we don't have anything to tell you. And so, because that land is already destroyed, when Rob first approached and said, what do you think about this? I said, is there something on Arm Brooks that we can say, because everything right next to the airport was already trashed. And so that's why he sort of, it's convoluted. Yes. But the idea was that if you can preserve nature versus the destroyed lot that's already existing,
that maybe we can save more of the trees and the birds and the turtles in the water than the pot right next to the airport where it's already been destroyed. That's Destroyed, but it's not but not paved. Is that what the problem is? They wanna pave more of that land. Yeah. The, can we bring the picture back up? The the, the park the lot by the airport is 92% compacted dirt and gravel. And so that's why the question is before the council, because the lot that, the lot that they wanna redevelop
that one right, that the rules would say would be 70% is your max. Right. It's, it's already trashed is what they're saying. What do you mean by Trash? I'm, I'm gonna, I'm gonna point of order. We, we really can't be back and forth like this. This is, we gotta move on. Unfortunately, there's some confusion and that's just what it's, I think the council understands what we're trying to do here. Alright, So at this point, is there anybody that would like to speak in opposition to this project? Hi, Maryanne Dubinski, one 14 Rogers Avenue. Um, I probably could go on for days here, but please
Don't. I will not. No, I won't because I mean, when you say there's nothing to say that property's already trashed and there's nothing to be saved, that whole statement bothers me because there is an aquifer underneath this property. And I'm afraid this is gonna set a precedent for other people who come in with the same story. We wanna protect this aquifer. I thought that was our goal. And while we have a water resource protection zoning, I've been involved with Bpac for years before I was a counselor. And then again when I was on the council and back in, um, I think it was, uh,
2015 at a, um, BPAC sent a letter, the facilitator from Bay Pack sent a letter that said that members, uh, were concerned about the maximum impervious cover on a lot that is now being pushed by the city to go up to 70% because it was below that. This was not something they recommended that should be done. If we were really serious about protecting our aquifer, You likely know the importance. This is the facilitator writing, uh, to the city, uh,
to the person who was in charge of the, uh, zoning ordinance and working on trying to amend it and present to the city council in an amended zoning ordinance that would be more protective of our aquifer. So the comment was, you likely know the importance of recharge. The aquifer and impervious coverage seriously limits recharge. The higher the impervious, the less recharge for drinking water supply. Also, bay Pack had previously noted that the allowance for such a high impervious cover, so I don't understand how we can say we wanna swap this,
we're gonna trade something over there. I know what Councillor Melo is pushing for here. I don't see it as a trade. I've been involved with those kind of things over the years with a state two with trading for protecting air quality too. We were facing that ourselves in Westville because this happened. The committee at that time, the city committee that was working on improving and making changes to the water resource protection zoning presented a different percent at first, but then it got changed by the time it went from committee to the city council.
And the city council bought everything that was said about how important it was to do 70% and they changed it. So Maryanne Pac never, never, never, never approved of that. We worked on it for years later to try to get it back away from the 70%. And that was, uh, there was a draft that was written up, uh, discussions went back and forth between, uh, the committee. And I'm Gonna, I'm, I'm gonna interrupt you because I'm saying no, I, okay. So you're not in favor of the project And if I recall in the past, if you're not in favor of it
and you have some reason to support it, if I'm within the time limit, I don't know. You have it clocking me right now. It just doesn't add anything to, to this. Well, I'm just trying to make a point that I'm hoping that, alright, So you made your point. You're against the project. Is there anybody else in, in the chamber that would like to speak against the I I Disagree with that comment. I disagree with you having me sit down. I've seen this happen longer. Thank you. Very not thank, no, thank you. Okay. Anyone else like to speak in opposition to the project? Anybody in the room like to speak in favor of the project in favor? So, ANAM Conservation agent, I did just wanna say
that I am in favor of the project. It's, it's great that they're willing to bring the property up to compliance. Um, and they're willing to, uh, and especially Mr. Gi, who is willing to work with this property owner to place this declaration onto his property that we at the Conservation Commission looked at several years ago. Um, the only thing that I urge counsel to do is even on the plans that you were given today, it says conservation restriction area. So it's important to differentiate between those two things and which one it is. And the only reason why I got up when I got this was
because the Conservation Commission is the one who holds conservation restrictions. So it just should be clarified, especially on these plans, even if it is a draft, which one it is. Um, and then considered by the council, which one that they would prefer. One that we have to keep track of, of which the city, I can tell you has not done. Um, having looked through several of them and have expired and now those lands are able to be developed because they were never renewed. And now other ones which are small, even like this one that, uh, our conservation restrictions that I go out and I look and I fly drones over and I check in on them once a year and make sure that they're good.
So we get, we get it. So once again, point of water, we're getting in. It's Anyone else like to speak in opposition that we're in favor of this project? Seeing none. Councilor Fanny, A motion to close the public hearing. Refer to ZPD and Law Department. Second. Second. Motion made. And second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Thank you. This hearing is closed. Next item. Item 13 is a public hearing on an application to amend the existing site plan. Approvals of special permit and stormwater permit to include trailer storage pursuant to zoning ordinance sections three dash 1 23 5
to be located at zero North Road, Westfield Mass, submitted by our Lavec Associates on behalf of R-H-Y-M-L-L-C, care of Ryan Giler. Public hearing is open, he's back, still back. Is this some kind of penance? Rob? Is that We were done talking about this. Can we call to take out hearings on the same day? For who I'm a Yes. Move on. Why? Why pull it forward? Why pull it forward? There we go. Is there anything, is there anything left on the street we Haven't touched? Just to confuse everybody a little more, this is the, uh, Gil, her property on North Road, um,
has frontage on Southampton Road, north Road, Southampton Road is to the bottom of the page. Um, the area, there was activities, uh, permitted here. We are looking to forego, um, and kind of have, there's, there's multiple buildings I think you might remember. Um, we're basically looking to use this for trailer storage as well. So that's the adjustment. So we're not looking to change the footprint, we're not looking to change the storm water or any of that stuff. We're looking to, uh, have the ability to store the rest
of the trailers, so to speak on the subject property. And that's, that's pretty, pretty straightforward. I'm sure there's questions. Happy to answer any questions you may have. Oh, so we do have, we did have a, we have a full set of plans that went, went to you guys. This is just the, the u rather than, you know, storing a dump truck and a excavator. This would be for trailers. Councillor Miller, do you wanna start? I, well, believe it or not, we've already quite fully discussed this. Um, would you please share where the easement would be if right to North Road? Was that? Yes. That doesn't seem to be indicated.
Yep. Yep. Um, and I, on my sketch that I provided, um, there's an area here. Um, Mr. Giler wanted to reserve the right in case he ever had an issue with the Cumberland Farms. Um, reserve the right to be able to go through here, which would require further approvals at some point. We don't anticipate that it'll ever really be a reality, but, um, we omitted that swath of land right there from the restriction. Councilor Fanon. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I read on the application that this was for temporary storage of trailers.
Um, I don't know how temporary, I think it's more accurate to say storage of trailers. I believe that this would be an ongoing thing. Okay. A multi-year ongoing, so it Won't revert back to the contractors. It'll say trailer storage. Um, I, right now the, the approach would be that this would allow for trailers and I think that would be pursued as opposed to the contractor's yard. Is that fair to say? Freezing? Yeah. Councilor Morgane. Thank you Mr. President. So, um, trailers have to get dropped off. Yes, they're there and they're,
they're there for how long? So my understanding is there's a surplus of trailers that are unloaded at the Home Depot Logistics Center. Mm-hmm. And once they're unloaded, sometimes they get dropped there. I think, believe it or not, and this is probably the wrong term to use, but I think it's based on an efficient inefficiencies that they have in their logistics. So there's empty trailers that are surplus that are on site. So as a solution to that, if they're able to bring those surplus trailers from the,
the Home Depot yard, so to speak, and store them in these yards until they can be properly picked up by the trucking companies that are responsible for Them. And, and that's my question until they can be picked up. So how long are they sitting there empty before the they In words? I think they turn out, I don't know the, how, How many trailers are going in and out of there on a weekly basis. I can't say I know the specifics, but my understanding is some of them get picked up pretty quickly within days. And I, my guess is some of them stay for a period of time until the trucking company either needs it or has some, a driver going, you know, in
that direction or a free driver. So it's a very, it could vary probably between days and maybe even months is my guess. And how many spots Are you have? Uh, approximately a up to a hundred depending on how they park 'em. These are already, these are already at Home Depot, correct? We're not, we're not creating any new, this is really just capturing what's been displaced from 81 Service Star and a couple other locations. Council. Thank you Mr. President. So the entrance to this property would be how close to the, uh, entrance to the, uh, Comey's
One in the same, so the southerly entrance to the Cumberland Farms, actually, if you drive in there, has an an access point. So it's not, so it's not, the good news is it's, it's the same entrance. It's just pass a pass through on that far on the south side. I'm getting toward the traffic flow part of this. So we have it discussed in the last one, Right? You're gonna have a lot of trucks taking left hand turns into the Cumberland Farms or through the Cumberland Farms? Well, it's parking lot. Yeah. No, they don't have to go through the parking lot.
It's through the driver, through the curb cut, Correct. Same entrance. Yes, sir. Yes. You don't see a problem with that without a light or anything? Nope. No. Or, you know, having Cumberland Farms, the people going to get gas turning in there with tractor trailer trucks with Cumberland Farms was approved. One of the issues was that tractor trailer trucks might pull in there to use diesel. Yeah. And then, you know, the answer there was, well now there'll never be tractor trailer trucks because the pumps pump so slowly. But now there will be tractor trailer trucks going
through there, not getting gas, but going to park. Are you familiar with a, I think it's called a bobtail. Is that right? So the yard trucks that they use. So they, they, they'll use a yard truck, kind of like a truncated version of some of these tractor trailer trucks you see on the road, the actual truck part. Um, so they would be utilizing most likely a yard truck or something like that. Obviously street legal, but bringing, bringing them in, um, this is not necessarily if, if they're taking the trailers away.
So if somebody drops something at the Home Depot and takes the trailers away, they're, they're going on the road and they're bringing it back to wherever their logistics operation is. This is just arguably leftover trailers that likely get left in the yard after they're delivered because the, they, the contract, or sorry, the, the trucker wants to deep feet to get home for dinner or whatever it might be. And then they pick, you know, they, they would pick it up when, when they have somebody in the area. So that's, that's what I've been, I get the concept that the actual vehicle pulling the 53 foot trailer Yeah.
Is smaller. But you, you're still getting that extra traffic, essentially the Cumberland Farms or through Cumberland Farms driveway. Correct. But you know, that versus, you know, con you know, you know, contractors' yard, it's kind of the same one, one and the same. I mean, same, similar vehicles, you know, um, well, I mean, know 53 foot trailer, well, versus a, I don't know, Excavator, you know, With a, you know, a Bobcat. He's got some big toys. This guy, he does, he's got a lot of big flatbeds and I dunno how long they're, how as long as a flatbed. They're similar in my Okay.
You'll have, you'll have to convince me. That's what I'm adjusting here, because they're too two different, two different stories here. And, and with the, with the extra traffic going through there. I mean, traffic was a big issue when the Cumberland Farms were put in and that, that one entrance, which was supposed to, there were gonna be two entrances, as you recall, one entrance closer to the light, which was removed because it would get in the way of Yeah. Of the light. And this one. So you're putting an awful lot of traffic through that
Entranceway to Cumberland fires a lot of big trucks with big trailers, big trailers, trucks. Yeah. There. That's, that's all I have. Thank you Councilor Mel, then. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, little known fact that was a dispatcher to put myself for college. So I am wondering if the counselor to my left question can be solved, um, by some good dispatch in that if I will drive all the way around the block in order not to take a left on 10 and 2 0 2 without a light. But if you did it at two in the morning,
it wouldn't be that big a deal. And if people were picking up the trucks to leave, they could take a right out of that parking lot. And it also wouldn't be that big a deal if it were not during rush hour when school gets out all those other times. If it were during a quieter time, I, I can see where it wouldn't be an issue, and if it were any time near three o'clock, I could see it being a huge issue. Um, so is there an option to, you know, uh, with the new special to decide about when the hours of this kind of little truck convoy of emptiness can move,
um, so that it's not causing the traffic problem that the counselor brings up? Is, is that a thing we could do? I mean, home Depot, they gotta be able to do some logistics, right? Yeah. You could use the light over by Falcon Drive. Say if, if both were to move right in the daytime, there's a light by Falcon Drive, right. You can do more there. Where as over here, putting things on and off the property would be much better when there isn't so much traffic on Southampton Road that it, it is that something you guys can sort of noodle about?
I can definitely, I I can definitely bring that up. It seems logical. I don't do that stuff, so, but I, I mean, it doesn't seem like they're, I believe they have the flexibility in their operation to dedicate certain times, and I don't think they have in the past, to be honest with you. I don't think they've had to, but I think we could look, we could certainly look into that. Thank You Councilor Matthews County. Thank you. Um, were there, so there, there's two special permits, the one that we approved and the one you're applying for now, when was the one that we approved? Was that 24 On the side? Yeah. Yeah. Um, September,
couple years ago, maybe a year ago. September 19th, 24. 24. Okay. So the one in 24, were there hour restrictions placed on that? Uh, typically there is. Um, yes. Yes, I would say yes. Okay. And my counselor across the way is proposing to avoid traffic jams that we have them do it late at night, but people on North Road, I just went through a traffic commission meeting, they're complaining about the traffic already, in particular complaining about the traffic at night. Right. They want a restriction on the road that trucks large trucks can't drive at night. So this is already a problem there.
Um, this is gonna further increase truck traffic. I think that's the number one issue on the north side. Um, I have a lot of concerns about this. I don't know that it would increase truck traffic. It's already happening in different locations, to be honest with you. I think they have a temporary fix right now where they're going to Holyoke. So they're going all the way down. So rather than go to this location, they're going all the way to Holyoke and back. Is that right? They're going to be. Um, so yeah, I mean, I, I get it's logistical.
We're trying to solve it. Um, these are two pretty close, uh, sites to the, the distribution center. Um, certainly I think hours of operation and, and maybe even routes that they take could be dictated, um, and should be dictated the shortest route and hopefully not passed too many residential properties. Um, you know, as far as hours, you know, in terms of night versus day, I don't know, but I'm certainly gonna ask those questions. What, you know, when do they typically bring them there? Or is it throughout the day?
You know, is it, I'll get those answers for you. I don't know those answers, but I'll get 'em for you. Councilor Fanon. Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with the councilor across the way about the residents on North Roads. They're concerned of the tractor trailers on the previous special a permit. We did have a condition that the heavy vehicles were prohibited from using North Road between Road and South Hampton Road when leaving or leaving or returning to the facility. Okay. So that could be a condition that we could pull forward and put on this new special permit. Okay. Council Ky. Thank you Mr. President. I don't think those conditions are legally binding.
You could put 'em in there, but I've been told that you can't, you can't do the streets to street. Anybody can use it unless there's a truck exclusion. Councilor fan, We did ask that question. And because it's a private owner, he could have his contractors at that time. It was a contractor's yard. He could request his tenants. It would be part of their lease agreement. So perhaps it would be a lease agreement with Home Depot. Yeah, it could request, I will say that the Home Depot distribution center, when, when they were made clear that there was an issue at Service Star 81, service Star,
they were out there literally within, I think it was almost 24 hours. It was really, really good response. So I think they know they have a, an issue. I would ask the spot companies to communicate directly with Home Depot and see if we can get some sort of commitment from Home Depot. 'cause in the end mm-hmm. They're the ones that have to be on board. Anything further? Counsel At this point? Anybody in the room that would like to ask a question? I don't think there's many left. Anyone like to speak in opposition to this proposal in opposition? Anyone like to speak in favor of the application? Again?
In favor Seeing none. Councilor Fanon. Motion To close the public hearing refer to zoning planning and development and law. Second. Second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion. Seeing none. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Thank you for all your time. Appreciate It. Public hearing is now closed. Item 14, councilor Fanon. We are, um, our of associates submitting an application for a special permit site plan, approval and stormwater permit on behalf of Westlake Royal Building Products, Inc. For Lumberyard Yard pursuant
to zoning ordinance sections three dash one 20.3. Paragraph one six dash 10.1, and four dash one 10 to be located at 44. Grief Way Westfield, uh, refer to zoning planning and development and please schedule a public hearing at the earliest practical date. Second. Motion made it second. Further the discussion. Seeing none. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Item 15 Council on this. Thank You Mr. President. Item 15 is first Assistance City solicitor Shannon Reed submitting the following ordinance amendments at chapter 17 as requested by Sergeant Juanita, chair
of Traffic Commission. Section 17 dash 42, no turn on red. Adding from Franklin Street onto Elm Street Southbound, uh, please refer to Ano Law on Traffic. Second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion. Seeing none. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Item 16 Co. Matthews King. Thank you. It's a long night. If you can't pronounce my name anymore, um, I'd like to make a motion for the city clerk to read item 16 and 17. To schedule a public hearing on July 7th for both of them. And to refer to license is second. Second.
Motion made and seconded. Further discussion. I I have a quick question. Yes. How many public hearings around that particular day at this point do we know? Trying to break a record? Yeah, I Think there's only two. If these Two time we need to be mindful of that moving forward. Thank you. Can I get assigned to another committee? Yeah. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. Reports of committees finance number 18, councilor Fige. Thank you Mr. President. Finance is not on accepting a grant in the amount of $1 million from the Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation
to the Westville Barnes Regional Airport to used to mitigate noise with the community surrounding the airport on three zero vote, we voted to recommend approval of this item. Second. Motion made and seconded further discussion, sir? Yes. Thank you, Mr. President. This grant is for five years, $200,000 per year. This will cover the city's share of the match of a larger, uh, mitigation grant that we previously accepted. Um, that grant needed a 20% match from the city. This grant covers that. It'll be used for some mitigation.
Uh, they don't know exactly where yet because the noise mitigation map has not been created for the incoming new jets. Anything further from the council? Council? Ms. Uh, Thank you Mr. President. This is, uh, this is gonna be good for the residents of Ward six who are affected by the, uh, aircraft at Barnes. And it'll get everything, everything going again. Uh, as far as, uh, sound insulation. Thank you. Seeing none. Roll call. Madam City Clerk. Bill. Randy? Yes. Burns? Yes. Ion? Yes. Gie? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane? Yes. Meow. Yes. Morgan. Ellie. Yes.
Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Beam? Yes. Adam? 19. Councilor Bean. You're Ross. That's I was the last Thank you Mr. President. Finance Committee has met with a three zero approval for the appropriation of one thou or $125,000 from free cash to the flood control purchase of service account to clear trees on Little River Levy. Second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion, councilor? Yeah. Uh, pretty self-explanatory. This is going to, these funds are gonna be used for critical tree removal in the remaining section of Little River, little River Levee, which is essential
for maintaining the integrity and the functionality of the levee. So, Councilor Morgan Elli. Thank you Mr. President. Just, Uh, to the committee. Thank you. Um, What, why Wasn't this in their budget For the year? I can answer that. Yes. Council figure. This is an add, an additional, uh, opportunity for this to continue down the little river. It wasn't budgeted 'cause it wasn't planned for, but since they're already on the levy doing the work, it's just continue to the end. So That's why Councilor meow. Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, I am super glad
that this is coming up. We are like this close to the levee being infant. We are so close. Close now. Levees do not work with trees in them. When the wind blows and the trees fall down, it rips the levy apart. Cutting the trees down is really helpful. We are so close to this being fixed. Yeah. Thank You. Thank you. Well, let's do it. Yeah, that's right. I Make one comment. They would be so much easier to maintain this thing and take down trees when they're little and just knock them down with a chainsaw before they become monstrous. She's absolutely right. There's parts of this levy
that it's scary if you went to see it, so it'd be so much simpler to just stay on top of this when it's small. Anything further? No doubt. Roll comment. Secret. Bill. Chandy. Yes. Spurs? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Gie? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan Elli. Yes. Ky? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Thank you. Item 20. Councillor Figi. Thank you Mr. President. Finances met on the transfer of $145 and 85 cents from the Health department FY 25 reimbursement
account to the FY 24 reimbursement account to cover the cost of a prior year bill owed to Granger and on a three zero vote, voted to recommend approval of the item. Second, Which you made seconded further discussion, counselor? Yes. This, uh, occurred when a order for a pair of boots was duplicated by, by Grainger to the health department. The first invoice went to the health department, the second one went to the school department, and therefore it got lost between transitions.
They only found the second pair of boots still in the box under the desk when a new employee was hired and it was too late to return 'em to Granger wouldn't accept them. So we need to pay for a pair of boots. Size nine if anybody's interested. Do we have to hire someone with size nine? That's an you got size nine. Go see 'em. Bought the boots. 145. They're yours. Good price. Perfect. Roll call. Bey. Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Figy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan Alley. Yep. Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie?
Yes. Bean. Yes. Sold. Thank you. Item 21, councilor Figy. Thank you Mr. President. The finance committee is Matt on the consideration and approval of an ear marketing amount of $35,397 and 1 cents from the FY 26 reserve for future salary. Increases account to fulfill the first year contract of the ratified successor agreement between the Westfield Municipal Professional Employees Association and the City of Westfield. And on a three zero vote, we voted to table this item until the next finance meeting, which was tonight
and the finances met tonight, removed the item off the table and on a two zero vote voted to approve. Second. Second. Made it seconded. Further discussion? Yes, there was a considerable discussion at the finance committee regarding certain language that is now appearing in letters from personnel to the PAC and the rest of the council. Uh, with each reappointment sta stating in in quotes here, I'm not gonna quote it perfectly, that we must treat each other civilly and if we don't, ramifications will follow the chair of PAC
as well as myself met with personnel director to try to get this, uh, mitigated. However, we found out that it was part of the contract. So we tabled this, hoping to have a conversation with the union about possibly reopening negotiations or at least rewording the letter so it's not as threatening to all of us. I'm glad to say that the president of the union, the vice president, both agree that the way this was rolled out was not in the best way that it should have been a explanation.
The language in the contract came about due to a couple counselors back in 2019. And as a result that has been considered along the way. So the communication I got today from the president and vice president was that they're willing to, to redo the letter and even reopen negotiations to rectify the situation. The chair of PAC and I are both pleased with this outcome, so I would encourage you to support this. Anything further? Seeing none, roll call Madam Court. Judge Randy? Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Gie? Yes.
Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan. Ellie. Yes. Ky? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Thank you. Item 22, councilor Bean. Thank You Mr. President Finance committee has met and with a three zero vote for the appro, uh, as a, an item to take no action for the appropriation of $250,000 from free cash to OPE account to replenish the amount cut during the FY 25 budget process. So, Sec second Motion made it seconded.
Further discussion, sir? Yeah, I mean, so we, we've discussed this I think on the floor throughout the years. Um, this is obviously to pay our op e liability out there. And what, what the questions really haven't been answered is $250,000 is drop in the bucket. The number is excess of $250 million on a given year. So the question is why are we putting $250,000 in here? I think it's, in my personal opinion, not something that we should be doing without a, a concrete plan moving forward. We really didn't get a straight answer when it came to,
you know, the benefit of actually, uh, paying down the particular opep liability. Um, it's not, usually it's, it's tied to a bond rating and, um, most cities and towns are not gonna get to that. Uh, what's it, uh, AAA bond Mr. Chairman. Is it a I think it's aaa, yes. But there's also other things that get tied to that particular bond rating. So the discussion was that we could put it out with no action, have that debate and move forward. I personally think that it's, uh, futile in giving up $250,000 in particular free cash.
Uh, I'm probably not gonna support this on the floor, um, but I'll leave that debate up to the rest of the floor. So, so you're not bringing it up? Well, we, we took it out with no action. No action. So we're just, it's really goes away at this point. There was no negative or positive. So, okay. Council, One of the lines of conversation was that the, the bonding is looking, bonding agency is looking for a, uh, some kind of contribution to this in a regular form.
So we, we, the finance committee requested that a, a plan be put into place. That is what the bonding agency is looking for as a formalized plan of how we're going to meet our obligations. Yeah. So that has been laid off to the, the mayor. So, I mean, I, I am in agreement with council across the way that this is, we're still putting 250,000 in, in 2025 and the line item in 2026 is 250,000. So we are consistent for the last three years if the budget passes Right. Next month.
And, and So with no recommendation, are you looking for a Vote or you just gonna uh, yeah, we have to approve taking it out with no option. That can be council. Yeah. Alright. So I I just have one comment 'cause I know like years ago we actually as a council, we really, and we were pushing the mayor basically we needed to come up with a written plan and nothing happened. Got a new mayor. I, I mentioned that, but, but, um, that was one of the things, 'cause I think it was the chair of the finance. We actually, we were pushing for that and that, you know, that, I dunno if we gotta put it in a
mess plan or something, but that we really, we would need that. Right. Do you Know what I mean? And we have, we have started pushing again. So hopefully we Get, get that point that, that that would be key to be able to follow this. And then you, you know, even having the plan in place as a benefit. Councilor me, do you have some? Uh, Yeah. Thank you Mr. President. So if we remove without action and vote positively on that motion, um, then there's 250 K left that'll be swept into free cash that'll come back in the fall. Correct. Thank You. Okay, so a yes vote is to take no action.
No action. Yes. Four call Sequence. Bill Chandy. Yes. Burns. Yes. Fanny. Yes. Fiy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthew Ke No. Mellow. Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? No. Just To keep it. Yes. Motion passes. Personal action committee item 23. Council Harris. Thank you Mr. President. 23 is the appointment of Bob O'Brien. Seven seven Loomis Avenue as a member of the Council on Agent for term to expire on February, 2027. Filling the vacancy left by Eileen Rockwell and Personnel Action Committee met on oh 6 17 25.
We recommend that appointment. Second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion, council? Yes. Thank you. Uh, for over 30 years, he was a consultant and accountant providing services and taxation, accounting and auditing for projects with privately owned companies and state and municipal governments as well as nonprofits and individuals. He's volunteered at many, many organizations including the Senior center, the Genesis Life Center, Baystate Noble Hospital, Westfield Anthea, highly Valley Elder Services. Served on the board of directors for the Friends of the Homeless Springfield Library Foundation, mass, uh,
society of Certified Public Accountants, the Open Pantry Regional Employment Board of Hamden County, holy Name, church of Springfield, and the Springfield Parking Authority. Uh, he spent two years, um, also being the treasurer of the Executive Committee of Pioneer Valley Planning Commission. Better known as PVPC. That's it. Anything from the council? Council? I'd just like to thank Eileen Rockwell for many years of service to the senior center. She was a valuable member. Thank you. Roll call. Madam City Clerk. Bill Chandy. Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Fige? Yes.
Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan? Yes. Eski? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. I Go ahead. 24 Councillor Harris. Thank You. 24 is the appointment of Pope Trembley 32 Bates Street as a member of the Cultural Council for a term to expire in June, 2028. And we recommend that appointment. Second All she made it Seconded. Further discussion. Counselor. Thank you. Uh, she's a member of the Westfield on Weekends board and volunteered for activities produced by wall. She's ending her term on this board and would like to serve on the cultural council
as she has a strong interest in the arts from St. Mary's Church choir to the stage performances in college and has a degree in English with a minor in art. She currently is the Director of Advancement at St. Mary's High School with responsibilities in managing grant writing, uh, which will be an asset in her being on this council and leading fundraising, uh, initiatives and the collaborating with community partners to secure funding. Previously she worked at the Westfield News, um, on local news schools and arts. Her knowledge of all the various forms of art and cultural events, plus her understanding of grants, which is a primary focus of this council
to distribute grants in the appropriate manner along with her dedication to our city. And her enthusiasm for wanting to serve on this council makes her a great addition. Anything further? Pro call Mad Bill. Andy? Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Fiy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Meow. Yes. Morgan. Ellie. Yes. Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Beam? Yes. Adam? 25. Council Harris. Thank you Mr. President. 25 is the appointment of Carol Cek 3 23 Buck Pond Road as member of the housing authority for a term
to expire on February, 2030, filling a vacancy left by Tom Gavin. And we recommend that appointment. Second. Motion made it seconded. Further discussion Council? Yes. Thank you. Uh, this position is the mayor's appointment to the Housing Authority. She's currently the staff accountant for the Chicopee Housing Authority and regularly attends those board meetings. The Westfield Housing Authority meets on a day and time, which will not conflict with her current position, and she will be able to attend all Westfield Housing Board meetings. She wants to use her knowledge, she wants to use her knowledge and skills obtained at her current position to help our own community. She states she's very detail oriented with the ability
to communicate information in a clear and understandable format, and is very proficient in producing documents that are readily used and streamlined information efficiently and accurately. She has a BS from Northeastern University in Boston and served on the board of the Westfield Community Theater. Her knowledge of all the workings of the housing authority and responsibilities and its mission would make her an excellent appointment to this board. Anything further? Roll call. Madam City Clerk. Bill Chandy. Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Figy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane? Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan? Yes.
Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Zoning Planning and Development Committee. Item 26. Councilor fan. Thank you Mr. President. Uh, zoning planning and development met this evening and gave a favorable approval for a special permit site plan, approval and stormwater permit for a contractor's yard with associated site improvements pursuant to zoning ordinance sections three dash one 30.34 dash one 10 and six dash 10.1 to be located at 81 Service star Industrial Y submitted by our LE Associates on behalf of Nicholas Stefano.
Second. Second. Motion made and seconded. Further discussion counsel. Thank you. Yes. Um, we had our public hearings on this piece of, uh, this contractor's property. Um, there was a couple issues that were addressed during the public hearings. One was plantings, one was conservation. If the Conservation Commission approved it and if the previous conditions on the special permit were gonna move forward, we addressed all of those issues within the special permit. We found that the, the four required findings, um, we approved the four required findings relative to site plan. All eight uses, um, were fulfilled.
There were conditions added to the special permit. One of the conditions, the first condition was all conditions governing the operation of the use as imposed by the previous special permit are incorporated here with and shall remain in force except where contradicted or superseded below. Number two, the site plan shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved site plan entitled proposed contract yards recently most recently, revised 5 27 25 as prepared by our Leve Associates. Three. The maintenance of the stormwater management system shall be in compliance with a submitted long-term operation
Maintenance plan dated 4 1 25 as Appendix G of the stormwater report. Inspection rep inspection reports completed not less than once annually shall be submitted to the city's storm water coordinator. This condition shall be deemed to constitute an operation Maintenance and Inspection agreement building on all subsequent owners of the land. And the fourth condition was the processing reclamation of earth and construction and or demolition materials is not authorized by this per permit, nor was the same, requested or proposed. Any such use shall require an additional permit under section three dash one, 30.3, paragraph seven.
Thank you. Any further discussion? Scene none. Roll call. Madam Rey. Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Gie? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane? Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Eski? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Thank you. Item 27, councilor fan. Thank you Mr. President. Zoning planning development this evening on a zone change petition for a portion of 1 46 and one 70 Main Street from rural residential to residency
to yield further residential opportunities from the subject properties submitted by all back associates on behalf of Alice Will, August 2nd. Officer Main and seconded further discussion. Counsel? Yes, this is gonna be first reading by title only on a zone change. Um, as submitted, the, the, there's a diagram on your share file indicating the property that is going to be changed. There was a question during the public hearing relative to building in a floodplain. And the applicant is will not be building anything in a floodplain as residential properties are not allowed in a
residential, residential development is not allowed in a floodplain. And there was also a question on the access from Main Street and then that has been also addressed in the proposed ordinance. Okay. Any further discussion? Okay. First reading by title only, we read the title please. Sure. In ordinance amending the code of ordinances, city of Westfield, appendix B zoning adopted September 3rd, 1987 relative to a zone map change in accordance with section one dash 40 in and three dash three the zoning map be amended at the southwest corner portion of 1 46 Main street map 11,
parcel six from residence B and rural residential to residency. Such portion described as the hatched area indicated in figure one. Thank you. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Counselor? Going on for second reading? Yes. Yes for second reading at the next meeting. At our next meeting. Thank you. Now on for second reading Item 28. Councilor Fannie Number 28 is a petition of the city council to amend the zoning ordinance to expand uses allowed in industrial a district, uh, zoning and planning development this evening
to amend the ordinance to allow, allow uses by right into industrial a Second motion made it seconded for the discussion council? Yes. So the, the uses that we would be adding to this would be section three dash three dash one 30.2 use is permitted by right. Add to item nine, including medical or dental clinics and add to item 12 or similar financial institutions and add the following. Number 26, conversion, expansion or reuse of an existing billing building or a portion thereof to retail sales
and services for a re a retail or custom store. Not to exceed 700 square feet or be a service oriented store such as barbershops or petition, but not including laundry or dry cleaning establishments. Any questions? Comments? Council B? Yeah, just, just a point of Of Process. So are we able to do this July seven for a second reading and final passage? Do we know, Is it a 10 day or 14 day? If we can get the, if we can get the publication in the paper. Yeah. Yes. Okay. Saying Yes. Thank you. So this is just the first reading. So This is first reading? Yes. Okay. Any further. Councilor me.
Um, is there anything as written to prevent the chemicals from a barbershop or a hair salon going into a septic system? Uh, not that I know of. This is my one question at the public hearing that Councilor Fannie, I would think that once it went through, if it has to go through the planning board, it would be a condition of the planning board to look at that or it has to go through conservation. If there's, um, water, it would be as the project progresses, whoever's the appointing authority. Yeah. Or if I may Go ahead Or we could add that later on.
I think we'll need to add it later. Alright. So this first reading by title Yes. In ordinance amending the code of ordinances, city of Westville, appendix B zoning adapted September 3rd, 1997 relative to expanded uses in the industrial aid district. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Councilor? Uh, motion for second reading and final passage at the next meeting. Second. Motion made it second at all. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Now on for second reading. Item 29, councilor Morgan Elli. Uh, the CPD met, uh, tonight and voted, uh, with a favorable recommendation three zero on
a petition to city council. 2, 1 2, 2, 1 in favor to amend the zoning ordinance relative to keeping of animals allowing backyard chickens by right Second. Motion made and seconded further discussion, counsel? Yeah, I'll defer the, uh, the chair because she, she's got all the notes from the, for the minutes chair of ZPD. Okay. So thank, thank you. Thank you. ZPD met tonight. Um, regarding the keeping of backyard chickens, we had a proposed ordinance at the last public hearing.
Amendments were made in the committee this evening relative to lot sizes and quantity of, um, chickens. The, the proposed, the referral that was favorably approved with a two one vote was seven 7,500 square feet is six hens, 20,000 square feet for nine hens and 40,000 square feet for 12 hens. And, And the setbacks were remained the same as proposed in the original proposal, which was 15 feet from any line
and 30 feet from any neighboring dwelling structure. Questions, comments, councilor Melli? Thank you Mr. President. One. One of the thing the things I brought up was that, you know, the acreage really is irrelevant in this case because the coop is only allowed in the backyard. And what's more important is the setback from the property line and from the existing structure on an, on an abutter. Um, so, uh, you know,
the, the, the setbacks I, I think are reasonable. But, uh, Some of, some of this body may, may, uh, feel that it's not enough. Um, 30 feet from the, uh, neighboring structure and 15 feet from the property line. Uh, if a Cooper's sitting in a backyard, do you want it 50 feet? Do you want it 75 feet from a neighboring structure? Do you want it 15 feet from the property line? 30 feet from the property line? Um, I, I just mentioned that at the meeting tonight that,
uh, I, I didn't amend it, I left it as it was. It, it, you know, Jay Vinky did a great job. He, uh, he took what we, what what the committee had done at the last meeting. And, um, and we, we amended, uh, amended it slightly to do the six, nine and 12 chickens based on increasing acreage, increasing square feet of a property. But really the, the, the, uh, the main part of this ordinance is how far do we want it from a property line
or from a neighboring structure. Thank you. Council Figgy. Thank you. I think the committee did a very good job of trying to accommodate the various concerns that was expressed by our fellow counselors. The one thing I see that's missing from this is no roosters. I think that needs to be added. It's, It is in the proposed ordinance. It Was in the proposed, but what's in front of us is not So can we add that? Oh, I don't think, I Think it omitted Well, it's probably just a clerical oversight.
Do you have the copy that says maximum quantity of hes permitted and no roosters in? No, um, that's not what's on the shared drive. Okay. This was amended late. Okay. Obviously today. So it probably wasn't on there. So, so that was my concern, uh, is that when I read this, there was that I like, I like the part where it says anybody can go for a special permit if they want more chickens or if there's less area. So that would then qualify, uh, with all the, the requirements of a special permit. So the, the big other big thing on this is
that the keeper has to register with animal control, which by filling out that application, gives animal control permission to go onto their property in order to do inspections. So, nice job. Thank you for all your hard work Councilor Hall. Um, thank you Mr. President. So just to answer the council's question on the, on the way, uh, under section, um, one I guess basically that, um, they're required to, uh, register and part of the registration and it can be included here as well, but it does say, you know, moose is, are prohibited in
that aspect of it. Okay. Just what's on the shared drive doesn't say that. Okay. Yeah, I'm just referring to the whatever. This is The Yeah, I would think, I think that's important. Yeah. Alright. So Councillor Harris, did you have something? Yeah, I was gonna say, uh, I was just notified that page 1 0 5, 1 of the agenda package has a new ordinance. Thank you Madam City clerk. Which page? 1 0 5. 1 1 0 5 1. So I think you have to refresh. Go to one zero.
Yes. Council Harris. Thank you. One zero. Okay. So I'm not a country girl, but I totally appreciate Mr. FI's passion for this, but I also truly understand the word one counselors opposition, and that's the right word, opposition. So during the last couple of meetings, we've had three ward counselors that have stated they are not for it or they're leaning not for it. We have two ward counselors who totally support it and we're missing ward five five's opinion.
So I'm trying to think what all the ward counselors would feel about their own wards. And, um, I'm hoping that some other at large counselors can weigh in on this. Also, I Have a problem with the Buy right use. That's, that's my biggest thing. Councilor Matthews king. Um, I'd like to answer the counselor Across the way. Um, first I wanna thank CPD. I know they've worked really hard on this and I appreciate the passion and generally I am pro chicken. My main concern with the way it's written now is
how incredibly small the lot can be for them. Six chickens. So I've actually spent a lot of time like kind of like looking around different sections of my ward and there are a lot of like, what I think of as really dense neighborhoods that have an acreage that's 0.717. And if everybody gets chickens, that will be way too many chickens. Even me, I am very pro chicken, so I, I would, I can't support it as is.
I, I I could make a motion to bump up the, the lowest. Um, so minimum lot size is 7,500 square feet, which is 0.17 of an acre. Um, I, I could make a motion to bump it up to a quarter of an acre, which is 10,890 square feet. If anyone wants to second it, I'll second for discussion. Yeah. Motion made it seconded for the discussion. Counsel. Thank you Mr. President. Um, for simplicity, the way it's written,
if you just made it 10,000, would you, would that be okay? Is that the way Jay wrote it? It's 10,000. I, um, it's, it's pretty close. I could accept that revision. Yes. I was going by acreage, but we can do it by feet. So I'd like to revise my motion for just 10,000. Yeah. 10,000 square feet. Alright. Can we vote on this motion to amend This is just the amendment. Yeah. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Opposed, opposed. Opposed. We gotta count. Let's see. Roll call so we know what we're doing here. Be trendy. No Burns. Where
Do we Voting on Voting On just my Amendment. Just my movement to make this Bigger minimum. Lot size to 10. Make it larger. To Make it bigger. Yes. Well for, I'm not gonna vote for this argument, so, but I'll for you. I'll vote yes. Fanon? No. Gie. Yes. Harris? No. Matthews. Kane? Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Ky Yes. Adams? No. Allie? Yeah. If it wasn't quite, it was like 0.2, I'd be but no. Bean? Yes. Seven. Yes. Five, no. Seven. Yes. Okay, so that's amended. So let's get back to the council burns so we can amend
This. Yeah. Thank you Mr. President. I, as you know, I award for city councilor and it's very rural where I live most of my ward, I am like my colleague next to me here. I'm not against chickens whatsoever, they're all around my home. But most of the people there have more than five acres and they, what does include roosters and, uh, even the well other foul. Um, but what bothers me the most about this and why I can't vote for this is by right. Um, and I guess it's been a long evening, so I'll leave it at that. Councilor Fanon.
Thank Mr. President. Um, I was the negative recommendation from the committee. Um, as I've said before, I as as ward one counselor, I had a very bad experience with a, um, with chickens and rats and a dog died. And I just feel that people who have a home in residential a or anything like that, they are not looking to have chickens in their backyard. And I don't think that there is a portion on here. If they wanted more chickens, they could go for a special permit.
I don't think it's fair to have neighbors having to you pit one 'em against the other. Um, you may like your neighbor but not like chickens and therefore you're not supporting your neighbor. And I just think that it would cause more trouble than it's worth. Um, I know that there were people who spoke in favor of it at the public hearings that spoke of food insecurities and that chickens would help food insecurities. I don't think backyard chickens are gonna solve a food insecurity problem. I agree that there is food insecurities in Westfield and I have put to list, I've put a list together of where there are food pantries
and, um, soup kitchens and counseling. Aging has programs for people who are suffering from food insecurities. The Boys and Girls Club is sponsoring lunches all summer long for children to get a free lunch at specific playgrounds and um, um, um, apartment complexes. And I'll submit this to the city clerk and if anybody's looking for that, she could distribute that. 'cause I never would wanna vote for anything that would hurt a food insecurity, but I just don't think that backyard chickens were gonna solve that. And also the, the acknowledgement form
of keeping the backyard chicken guide. There's specific things for the, um, chicken coop to be the size and that is costs a, a good amount of money, $300 around just to build your coop. And then you would have to be buying betting 'cause it has to be changed every day. So I just think there is an expense to this and perhaps the people may not have the funds to do this and then they would, things would be going astray. And I just think that it's, they're not, it's not a good fit
for residential areas. Alright, so we're gonna do a Councilor Elli. Yeah. Last word and then I'm gonna call for the question 'cause it's late. Um, so everybody's taxes are going up this year. Um, and and they can't do what, what, what's good for their property If they want chickens. We're giving, we're giving them guidelines to have chickens. The ones that are out there now, we have no way to police that, but this would give a way to police it. 95% of all Massachusetts municipalities allow chickens in some way
or form in every, every district in Massachusetts. But we're gonna say no call the question Mr. President. Let's just, let's just stop wasting time on this because enough has already been wasted. Okay. Thank you. This room was filled with people, filled with people that would like hens in their backyard. They have eggs. Alright, so thanks. Okay. So I'll move the question if you want. Let me, we're gonna do, we're gonna do a roll call on this. Okay. Beltran, No Burns. No Fanon. No gie? Yes. Harris? No.
Matthews. Kane? Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan. Ellie. Yes. Oniskey? No. Adams none. Allie? Yes. Bean. No. Five. Yes. Seven. No. Okay. Unfinished business Item 30. Counselor on, we'll try Again. Thank you Mr. President. Make a motion to remove item 30, which is, uh, table says city clerk Caitlin Bruce submitting the order for polling locations for the 2025 second locations.
Motion made it second. And why are Now that she now that To take off the table. Off the table. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Okay. Now off the table. Thank you. Uh, make a motion to suspend the rules to do first and second reading of this motion. Second Tonight. Take it a second. Second. Motion made and seconded. Suspending the rules. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Now under suspension. Thank you Mr. President. This is, uh, an event we do every year, which, uh, is an order that calls out the locations of the polling,
um, precincts. Any questions? This is first reading. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Make a motion for second reading and final passage. Now. Motion made and seconded. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Roll Call. Roll call for the second reading please. Bill. Andy? Yes. Burns? Yes. Fanon? Yes. Fiy? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Meow. Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Eski. Yeski. Oh, sorry. He's busy talking. Hear Eski. Yes. Sorry.
Allie? Yes. Bean. Yes. Working out the logistics. I'd like to read the order, please. Which is what I was discussing The title. Only an order by title. Only an order designate the voting places within and for the voting precincts in which they're located. Council? Yeah. I just wanna thank the person who thought to combine Ward three into one location. Instead of going to the Vogue and Franklin Avenue, we're just gonna go to Westfield River. I'm grateful for the people who raise the issue Fighting for years. You're welcome. Item 31, Councillor Fanon. Motion for a second reading and final passage of a zoning ordinance entitled
A Zoning Ordinance amending the code of Mor City of Westville Appendix B zoning adapted September 3rd, 1997 for a zone change at Zero Lock House Road from Industrial Aid to residency. Any questions? Motion made it seconded. Anything further? Call Bill Chandy. Yes. Burns? Yes. Tanya? Yes. Thanky? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Meow. Yep. Morgan Elli. Yes. Ky? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie Rock. Yes. What The bean? Yes. Uh, and I'm 32. Council.
Okay. Motion for second. Reading the final passage of a zoning ordinance protest an ordinance amending the code of ordinance to city of Westville appendix B zoning adapted. September 3rd, 1987. A portion of 66 Holyoke Road from residence B to to residence B From residence B to business. Ba second. Motion made it second. And anything further on? Second. No. Roll call. Madam State Court Belt. Yes. Burns? Yes. Ian? Yes. Fige? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Mellow? Yes. Morgan Alley. Yes. Oniskey? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean.
Yes. Adam? 33. Council Burns. Yeah. Thank you Mr. President. Second reading and final passage for ordinance entitled Chapter 16, section 16 dash 1 0 7. Temporary repairs on private ways. Second. Second. Motion made it second. Any discussion we'll call mad to court. Deran? Yes. Burns? Yes. Ion? Yes. Fige? Yes. Harris? Yes. Matthews. Kane. Yes. Meow. Yes. Morgan Alley? Yes. Ky? Yes. Adams? Yes. Allie? Yes. Bean? Yes. Motions, orders or resolutions? Item 34. Councilor Allie.
Thank you Mr. President. Um, item 34 is a motion by Councilor Ali that the Westfield Transfer station stickers are valid beginning April 1st and um, it says until June 30th, but, um, refer to the board of Health and, and mayor second Motion made it seconded. Further discussion. Um, yeah. Um, not everybody buys a transfer station sticker every year. Good for you. Um, but for a person that, like you get into the springtime and it's April, may or June and you look at it buying a sticker like a big wire
or whatever, and it's gonna last like five weeks, so you'll like, it's kind of a waste of money. So, but then you'll kind of like wait or push it off and because you've got a sticker that's if you're gonna buy, it's only gonna last a few weeks. And to me, I don't know why it's June 30th when it really should be like maybe April 1st and then you, and so this probably need a little bit of work, but, um, you could use it for the entire season, you know, in the springtime, the summer, and then the fall, whatnot. So it's kind of crazy that it ends June 30th. Um, I just don't see that as workable, you know, you know,
Probably because it's the end of new fiscal year, But it shouldn't be based on a fiscal year. It should be based on its usage. Councilor, uh, Thank you Mr. President. I know it's getting late, but motion to amend to add, only sell the permits at City Hall. The transfer station to be added to, uh, to be added to this motion. Second, Second, Second. Motion made and seconded for The, yeah, I mean we're, we're certainly talking fiscal financial problems and we can't enforce a big y employee to ask for an ID when they sell a permit. So we are selling permits to people from out of town
and we are paying for their trash. I can't believe since COVID, which thank you to the big Y for doing this, that we can't find somebody in this building to start selling permits again. It's embarrassing. Council me and then well I, if we could add also that first thing. Oh, I'm sorry. Alright. Thank you, Mr. President. Um, can we add online to that? It, it is ridiculous that we can't just like, click with the phone and like drive up to the transfer station, click a QR code and then pay your money. Like why are we pretending it's 1970?
Here? Here? Why can't we use credit cards To the counselor across the way? I think the point is we wanna check their IDs. Can we do that If it's online? Yeah, we, yeah, but you have to show your license when you pull into the station. Oh, you, no, all you have to all, you just need a sticker. I thought you did. Yeah. Council burns. I, I just, just to add To council. Well that's who they know. You Adams stay with the permit. I mean the stickers themselves, but they also, they also sell like, um, stickers to throw like couches away and, and you know, mattresses and electronics and stuff.
Those are also sold at the big Y and anybody purchase all, you know, I I, I actually went up there and asked, I said, you know, I asked for a sticker or whatever. I said, do I need a, you know, identification? Oh no, no, you're all set. Don't worry about it. So I could have been from ABO whatever, but I, I think Council Adams on the right line. We need to sell these things up here. We need and we need to do it now. And I agree with Councilor Ley also. Alright. Councilor Morgan Elli. Thank you Mr. President. None of this Is our job. It's the department's job. Go talk to the department.
I did that several months ago and gave them some ideas on this. Go talk to them. Give them your ideas, email them. This is not our job to be telling when they should sell a transfer sticker. Well, you're about to have an idea as to whether we're gonna do First we're gonna vote on Councilor Adams amendment. All in favor? A. Aye. Opposed? Opposed. One. Opposition. Two, two. It's not our job. Okay. Now back to the original to send to everybody.
If, if I may ask this. Yes. What date are you talking about now? April? I mean here it says April. Yeah, until June 30th. That's this June 30th Shouldn't be in there. I would just scrub that. Um, yeah. Got it. Thank you. Yeah. All. Any original motion? All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? Opposed. Aye. Two or three? Two. Two. Okay. Next item 35. Councilor Ney. Thank you Mr. Uh, president Motion to Council Sullivan to revisit ordinance number 1 7 7 3. Chapter 13. Article five, division two, wetland protection ordinances.
I'd like to put this motion to put it on the table to the next meeting. Motion made it second to table. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Item 36, councilor Fige. Thank you. Motion by Councilor Figgy to amend ordinance 1 7 6, 8 to include alternates of the zoning board of appeals and planning board to the list of boards and commission members that shall receive equal to twice the established rate and refer to government relations. Second. Motion made And second. And anything further? Counselor? What's that? Anything further or you good? Uh, yeah. Apparently when the, we did pass the, uh,
ordinance to increase the rate of pay, the alternates were cut in half by a clerical error. So we need to clarify and correct the clerical mistake that when it was published. So these guys are getting half of what they're supposed to get and uh, it was in government relations the last time. That's why he said Do you just, I'd like to amend that to go to finance because it involves money and it should have never been in government relations to get And I'm saying that Give Chairman Sullivan something relations. Yeah, and I'd like to He's not here.
No. Give chairman Salt something. Do you want amend it to send to finance as well? It should never have been It. I'll second her amendment all. So we got an amendment to send to finance as well. All in favor? Opposed? All now. The original. Original motion? Yes. Council Allen. Thank. Thank you Mr. President. I'd like to amend that to make this retroactive also. Do I have a second on that? Second. Motion made. And second. All in favor? Aye. Aye. Opposed? I Opposed. Okay. Councilor Misskey is opposed. It's getting late. Getting punchy here. Um, now on the original motion.
All in favor A. Aye. Opposed? Thank you. Any announcements? Good. Harris. When's lunch motions George? Adjourn Second. Motion made it second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Thank you everybody. Been a late night.