Quincy City Council: April 6, 2026

Thank you for watching!

All right, I'd like to call to order the April 6th Oversight Committee hearing. I'm gonna read the Open Meeting Law. Mass General Law, Chapter 30A, Section 20E. Pursuant to the Open Meeting Law, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made, whether perceived or unperceived, by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible.

Ash, DiBona, Hubley, Mahoney, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Councilor Yuan, Chair Jacobs. Present.

All right, tonight we're here to talk about 2026017. It's an order for approval of location and lease for solar energy implementation on the new Squantum. Hines, and I'd like to call up Mr. Hines just to give us a recap of where we are with this with this project.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Good evening, members of the Finance Council. So as was just represented, we're here to discuss the The declaration of availability of the rooftop of the new quantum school for solar PV system. As we all know, we set the goal of a zero net energy for that new facility, and we're on target to meet that. and I'm actually very proud to say and report here that Squamish School of Design just received FIAS certification. It's one of few schools in the country and the largest school in the country to date to receive that design certification. Now with proper commissioning and oversight of the construction, we will achieve that goal for the actual construction. And that's quite a remarkable feat for building of this size and this use. So I'm very proud of that. But again, part of that is this solar panel system.

As you know, we have a geotechnical, excuse me, geothermal field out under the park that will be combined with the on-site generation to help us to meet our goals. We currently have 13 schools that have solar PV on the rooftops as we speak. And the Department of Public Buildings in collaboration with the Quincy Public Schools, we host six solar fields down in southeastern Massachusetts, some closed landfills and a few other facilities like that, all of which the city benefits from lower purchase price for electricity and it is obviously clean electricity. So we're proud of that. So it's just part of our portfolio of clean initiatives and our energy efficiencies. And this PPA is another step in that direction.

So under the terms of the agreement, it is a 20-year term with a optional five-year renewal by mutual agreement of both parties at that period of time. And under it, our power purchase rate for 0.441 cents per kilowatt hour. By way of comparison, we, the Department of Public Buildings, went out to bid for all the municipal for all departments. And we did that a couple of years ago. We have signed that agreement. And the rate for that is $0.12 a kilowatt hour. and currently National Grid is over 19 cents a kilowatt hour. So our PPA rate was four cents per kilowatt hour and that's with the developer, Select Energy, upfronting all the capital costs of the design and construction and operation of this equipment in this system.

And I will address, there was a question raised to me outside of the meeting about the methods of procurement for select energy. So the Commonwealth saw obviously the wisdom of streamlining clean energy projects and it specifically passed a statute which exempts many clean energy and energy efficiency projects from the standard chapter 30b procurement process. It's chapter 164. Da-da, da-da. Section 137. And the way that's structured, a nonprofit can set up these entities. And so the Commonwealth, I believe it's the Department of Energy, partnered with the CEC, the Clean Energy Council, and Clean Energy went to bid. They did a public procurement, and they partnered with Power Options.

and Power Options to the solicitation for the individual solar providers. So we have fully complied with that statute and that process. So although we, the City of Quincy, did an individually go to bid and Puyol select energy for this. The statutory makeup through the exemptions of Chapter 30B did do the full vetting in the public solicitation. Quite frankly, there's a disagreement in the market on the extent of the exemption of Chapter 30B. Most people are like, walk away, you're done with 30B. I'm a little more conservative. there's the procurement aspects of Chapter 30B, but then there's also a specific vote declaring the asset available for disposition. I don't read Chapter 167 as being broad enough to exempt us from that. that step. So that is why we're here tonight.

My own being me, the attorney in me, and the abundance of caution, I believe it's still appropriate to get the vote available for disposition. so that's one of the steps we're here and then the other is to authorize the Mayor to sign the Power Purchase Agreement and the lease.

All right. At this time, we're going to open this up for debate amongst the councillors. I just ask any councillors hold any motions until all questions have been asked and concluded. Hopefully we can do that. Does anyone have any questions they want to ask Walter?

So thank you. You mentioned earlier there are 13 total solar panels installations on the roofs of schools. Did I get that right? Are they all of a similar lease structure or did we choose to take a different path on any of them in the past?

Those ones that are currently on the schools are about 14 years old at this point, 12 or 14 years old. And it was a different statutory scheme, different tax credit schemes. And so there were obviously signed agreements at the time. but they're really not applicable to today's standards on the SFRECs and the tax credits and the incentives. So they're really almost building to building they're not even applicable it's the design costs and the capital structure to install a system on one building is not the same as on another building. So your cost basis going into it is different. So your terms and your basics and your tax attributes are all similar, but your expenses and your costs and ultimately your PPA rate, they differ.

Right. And it does vary based upon whether it's a retrofit or not. And with a retrofit, you have to consider things like other systems that might need roof space and so forth.

One thing I forgot to mention was we're currently installing a system on the Parking Garage at the Public Safety Headquarters. And that was designed in conjunction with the design team of the building, obviously. So the vertical steel structure that will support them as part of the parking garage but they integrate with the panel support system that was part of the energy company. So that's being constructed as we speak. There's another one in the portfolio.

Where I work, it's in real estate development, construction for affordable housing, and we work with a firm that helps us negotiate all the different agreements. We have solar on almost everything, and we're doing some net zero stuff in Boston. Is there a firm that we've brought in that helps us work through and get the best deal and the best terms and stuff that makes sense for institutional construction?

Yes, we actually have that protection in two ways. So we do. We brought in Beacon Integrated Solutions, Beth Greenblatt. She's very knowledgeable on this. She blows me away many times in our conversations. but that is what she and her firm does. But in addition, the way these entities are set up, the select power answering to, power source answering to the CEC, any deal that we strike would select has to be reviewed by that state quasi-agency for its terms, for its fees and stuff. The profits of Select Energy is capped. under this program with the CEC and with Power Options. So we have that assurance, and that's under the terms of the contracts that they bid and they put into place. So those eyes are looking at it as well as ours. We've been doing this long enough that we're pretty versed in this ourselves as well.

Yeah, when we when we first met a couple of months ago, about, you know, just kind of get the lay of the land, I was surprised to learn how much we've really invested into solar energy. So it was pretty eye opening to learn about that. In terms of The timing of this request, you mentioned earlier, if I heard you correctly, that you're going through this process out of an abundance of caution in terms of complying with requirements through Mass General Law. Is this usually the point in time when we go through this process, or would it be sometimes earlier? Like, is this the same sort of timing of this project that we've done in other projects?

It ordinarily probably would have been done a bit sooner. but with the change of the council, the discussion with the mayor's office, we waited and opted for this council to have a look at it. One aspect of the timing that you mentioned is the calendar year, when it ticked to January of 2026, under the big beautiful bill, a lot of the benefits we could get under these programs have retired. Yeah, they're sunsetting. Our agreement is still signed in December of 2025. So you've hit those milestones. We hit those milestones. So Select Energy has already procured the panels and things, they have them in their warehouse. So that's all safe harbored, so we get the benefit. If we don't follow through with select, we do it ourselves, we do it with somebody else, we lose that benefit.

Yeah, I mean, I just deal with these things peripherally at work, but it was good to know they were able to hit those milestones. So where I work, I'm in the nonprofit space, and it sounds like, it was good to hear the similar terms for the municipal spaces since we're not necessarily trying to turn a profit.

Power Options actually went to the market for municipal and nonprofit. So there'll be similar benefits if you want to learn.

It sounded familiar, yeah. Yeah, I think that's all I have for now. Thank you.

We'll go to Susan.

Yeah, okay, Mr. Chairman. So some concerned residents have reached out to the City Council regarding this lease, and I'd like to raise a few of questions they brought up. So you already mentioned that there is open bidding in this process, right?

I'm sorry, I've got terrible hearing.

Oh, you mentioned MGL 30B and you mentioned there are open bidding process in this.

Yes, so the energy efficiency projects for which this solar system falls into the definition, is exempt from 30B, specifically by Chapter 167.

OK. Second question is, who drafted this lease, the city or the company? I ask because in the case of the Granite Lynx Golf Club, It was written by the company rather than the city. That's essentially like letting a talent write the lease instead of the landlord, and it likely contributed to the controversy around it.

The leases are largely set by power options and the CEC. The particular terms are obviously negotiated in each deal, which we certainly did. And there has to be uniqueness to them to fit the particular deal, the particular building, the size of the system. You've got limits with the national grid, how much you're allowed to put into the grid. before you're required to have battery storage. So there's all kinds of individual components of them. But yes, we had counsel on that. So myself, I've done a number of these. I am an attorney. I assure you I spend time on this. Beth Greenblatt, our consultant as well. She's reviewed it. We've had offline discussions, she and I, outside of the earshot of Select Energy. So these have been fully vetted. And they also went to Janet Petkin up in the law department. for review as to form of contract for the municipal requirements.

Okay, the third question is, has a qualified attorney with experience in similar least reviewed the terms to ensure the city's interests are fully protected?

I missed the first half of that, I'm sorry.

Has a qualified attorney with experience in similar leases reviewed the terms to ensure the city's interests are fully protected?

I think you're asking if it's been reviewed by outside counsel. Okay. Again, Beth Greenblatt is not an attorney, but she's versed in this. This is what her firm does. collaborate on it. We discussed it ad nauseum. And this is very similar to the one that we just did at the Public Safety Headquarters as well. But again, it is tailored to Squanam. I've been doing these for the city for a number of years, so I'm versed in it as well. but again, much of it is dictated by the power options and the CEC and they will be reviewing it. Their legal team will be reviewing them as well. So there's multiple eyes on these.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you. I'm sorry. I apologize for my hearing.

Riley. Councilor Riley. Thank you. Thank you. I know that there were a lot of questions when we first received this and, you know, it was about 40 pages of and other legalese, it obviously caused us a little bit of concern and pause. But I know that through our conversations, you've been able to answer a lot of the questions about how this came about. the funding for the building had happened months and months and months ago. So I assume that the leasing of solar panels was sort of already built into that. Is that true?

It was not into the funding of the school. but the decision to not own the system had been made. So Select Energy foots all the costs and operates it.

So it didn't need to be financed?

So it didn't need to be financed, correct. The cost of the system with design, engineering, and installation approach is almost a million dollars that we obviously would have to put up front, whether it be bonded or however, and we'd have the debt service on that over the term. as opposed to select putting it out of pocket. And we just don't make as much on the deal as we go forward. So it's not on our books, it's on theirs. And it's in operating costs to us going forward as opposed to a capital cost that we're carrying.

Is there any concerns as far as construction if there were problems with the roof and the solar panels are on there? How would you manage that if something were to come up after the fact?

This roof will probably be the best one we've ever bought. because of the stretch code and the fire certification and all the eyes looking at the installations. But that's not to say problems don't happen. We do have roofs that are leaking. and some of our old schools where there are panels. And we're working to address that and we have in the past. The squandum design, you know, I take great pride in the appearance of that building. It's beautiful. And I wasn't letting them run pipes up the side and across the roofs and everything. the select design team met with our architects and our mechanical design team So all those pipes, all those conduits are integral to the walls where they need to be. That's all in place, whether it's Select or anybody else. Those conduits are in place. So there will be no need for the system to penetrate our roofs. Most of the systems, the panels that are on the flat roofs actually sit on it and are ballasted. They're weighted down against the wind.

those that are on the sloped roofs, those roofs are intended to have them, and there's fastening points designed into the roof so as to support the solar and keep them down from the wind, but not penetrate the roofs. So it's all integral to the design of the building.

Thank you. I know obviously we're well under construction. We had the topping off ceremony this morning. We have a very aggressive construction schedule for hopefully a fall 2027 occupancy by the students. So when you're ready, Chairman, I would like to make the motion to approve, but only when everyone else has had their opportunity to chat.

Does anybody else have any questions? Yeah, Councilor DiBona.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just Commissioner Hines, thank you for all your hard work, your public buildings team, throughout this process. I know we discussed net zero measures environmental savings at length with the public. and hopefully QCAN, Quincy Climate Action Network would be pleased with our performance so far. Many of my former colleagues worked hard to ensure these new school had included these net zero measures. So I'd like to thank them too. It's a long process, obviously. Topping off tonight, today, this morning was really nice. but it's a lot of process to get to where we were this morning. And you've done a really good job with the green space and all those different measures that former Councilors that wanted to get these type of initiatives done. obviously the administration, the mayor had worked with the colleagues of the council.

Councilor Mahoney was on the council at the time too as well. Getting to this point has been a long, long little road. You know, my 13 years being a councilor, school committee, this is our third school we're really working on. just to elaborate a little bit on the solar, you said 13 schools. will you see the savings from the solar over the course of the year? Do you have a savings amount that you would get based on what we've had previously at the other schools and what you think the measures will be?

Yes. So each school, again, is unique. I do know off the top of my head that Snug Harbor produces 60% of its entire electric demand. We're looking to upgrade that system with part of a project we hope to bring to the council in the near term that would make it 100%. Again, we have online portfolios in portals that are visible. The percentage of Squamish School that will be solar versus the geothermal, I honestly don't know. The heat is electric. The geothermal will largely be heating the building, but when it's cold enough that the geothermal can't handle that alone, Electric Heat kicks in, which would be solar powered as well. So that's not to say there's never an opportunity that we'll be drawing electricity off the national grid. If you get a cold spell or a duration of snow, we likely would be. In fact, I'd say we would be.

But standard operating as it would not be. It would be self-sustained.

12 month process over the summer as well. So no time off, even though the kids aren't there.

It is, well, it's anticipated that's going on and will become a summer school location because of the conditioned air in it. Not air conditioning, but conditioned. I do know, I will say too, Brennazani School rolls the meter backwards in the summertime. So we do produce that much on our existing panels. And they're not the highest grade technology now, with being the age that they are.

I remember years ago when you put the switch on on some of the schools that we did and you started to see the savings. So I want to thank you for your team. I'm, you know, Councilor Riley, to entertain the motion, but I'm in full support of this, thank you. Appreciate it, thank you.

Councilor Ryan.

Mr. Heinz, thank you for coming here tonight. My pleasure. I did have one additional question on the cost of the electricity. You had stated that it's .04 cents. Okay, so is that for the whole 20-year term?

That is locked in for the full 20-year term, yes, no matter what happens to National Grid.

Okay, and what is the average for the other schools?

I don't know. Honest to God, I don't know. I can get you the information.

No, that's OK. I think you had mentioned $0.12 for.

$0.12 is what we're paying on the contract that all city electricity, the street lights, the buildings, everything we have, my department procured that electricity. It's not from National Grid. It's from British Petroleum, actually. So we pay $0.12 a kilowatt hour for that, as opposed to the $0.19 or plus for National Grid. There's one other aspect of it, too. the National Grid, you pay for your kilowatt, you also pay for your delivery charges. So in the four cents that we're paying for the electricity at Squanto School, we're not paying a delivery charge because it's generated right there. So it's even more significant than 4 cents versus 19 cents. It's more like 4 cents versus 27 cents.

Okay, thank you.

Any other questions from the councillors? I'm just gonna speak. I also wanna just thank you for all your hard work on this project. I'm a big fan of solar energy. I just got solar panels. on my house. I mean, nothing like geeking out when you're watching the thing go backwards, right? It's at 65 right now because we're coming out of the winter, you know, so I'm waiting for it to get back down to 99999. Yeah. But, you know, you guys have done a lot of work on this. It's great that you were able to get this done and then kind of, I don't know, shelve it because things have changed in the federal government. So that's great. And it's a great thing to hear. And I will be voting in the affirmative for this. I just have one question, though. It's more of an interesting question for myself. The inverters for the solar panels, are they microinverters for each one of the solar panels? Or is it like a string system where there's a group of them that are on one string?

They're grouped. These panels have the rapid shutdown. If there's a defect in one, it shuts the whole system down. And to my understanding, and I'm not an electrical engineer, that's the difference of the microinverter versus the grouped one. So these meet today's electrical code and we'll shut down panel by panel as they go when a problem is detected.

and if they shut down, like the people we have the lease with, they will repair it.

Yes, and that's the beauty of this. To be honest, we do own a small one on Quincy High School that the city owns. the panels were obsolete, the inverters were obsolete, the company's gone out of business that installed it, the company went out of business that manufactured the parts. We can't get them. That's one of the real beauties of doing the purchase agreement and it selects problem for the next 20 years.

So when the inverter does go down, which it inevitably will, I mean, before they come out and replace it or repair it, we would have to obviously get electricity from the grid. does the lease cover that or we just have to take the electricity from the grid? There's no protection from us if there's a failure?

Obviously, the quicker the failure is detected, the better. And that's one of the benefits of the online portal. It's also one of the benefits they have in the PPA because somebody at Select is watching that portal because their investors are not making the money they're supposed to be if they're not generating electricity. So they have a significant interest in keeping this online. There's also, there's guaranteed productions in these agreements. So let's say we have an extended period of cold or another might in St. Helens, we don't have a summer. And if we don't hit the targets in the PPA, and we have to buy from National Grid, Select writes us a check based upon figures that are already negotiated or in the deal. I can't imagine an inverter would go down long enough to trigger that scenario.

It's just amazing watching them coming into the spring. And just in the last month, my kilowatts have tripled just over the last couple of weeks. All right, so anyone else have any other questions about this? All right, Ward 6 Councilor Deborah Riley has a motion to approve 2026017, the order of approval. for location and lease for solar energy implementation on the Squanam Elementary School as presented. Make a vote.

Ash, DiBona, Hubley, Mahoney, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, Jacobs.

Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you so much.

I think there'd be a second vote to authorize the mayor to sign the documents. Is that a separate order? Is that within the same?

It's only one order.

Okay. That it's in the same. Yeah. Okay. Thank you.

Have a great evening. It's in the order.

All right, that closes the subcommittee meeting at 6.56 of the Oversight Committee on April 6, 2026.

I would like to call the Monday, April 6, 645 joint meeting of the Quincy City Council Public Works and Ordinance Committees to order.

Rash, DiBona, Hubley, Jacobs, Mahoney, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, Walker,

I will now read the open meeting law. Pursuant to the open meeting law, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made whether perceived or unperceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible. We have two matters before us in tonight's joint committee meeting, 2026-010, ordinance amending chapter 270, sewer and water. adding article four prohibited discharges and enforcement and 2026-011 ordinance amending chapter 300 stormwater management Section 14D and Enforcement Violations and Penalties. To present on the ordinances this evening, we have Commissioner of the Department of Public Works, Al Grazioso,

as well as Olivia Von Den Becken from Granite City Partners and Mr. Paul Costello from the Engineering Department as well. So Commissioner Grazioso, if you want to take it away, thank you for coming and look forward to your presentation.

Good evening. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, City Councilors. Tonight, the Mayor's Office and the Department of Public Works, with support of Inspectional Services and the Health Department, are here to introduce two requested ordinance changes. to strengthen the department's ability to address sewer and stormwater issues caused by prohibited discharges These discharges undermine the integrity and operations of the sewer and drain system and have a negative effect on our waterways. The audiences were prepared after significant coordination and effort between DPW, Inspectional Services, and the Health Department. With me this evening, again, the City Engineer, Paul Costello, Rose Devlin from my office, and Olivia Von Den Becken from Granite City Partners. they'll all be available for any questions after the presentation.

The two ordinances are chapter 270 water and sewer to add new article four prohibited discharges and enforcement. Purpose of this new article is to strengthen the language about preventing harmful, hazardous, or disruptive substances from being discharged to the public sewer system and to establish the use of enforcement mechanisms and penalties. and Chapter 300 Stormwater Management is to modify Section 300-14. The purpose of the modification is to make the fines for violations and enforcement orders more in alignment with costs of the violation. for example, a common $300 fine per occurrence does not compel proper behaviors, timely remedies, or compliance. I want to emphasize that the vast majority of our licensed food establishments operate clean, compliant, and well-run establishments.

The actions in these amendments would be applied after the notification in time to cure provisions of the code are applied. These amendments will strengthen the city's ability to address these few who do not comply or those who choose to neglect their duty to protect the city's infrastructure. Now I'd just like to move forward with the presentation. DPW systematically assesses and improves the horizontal infrastructure with an asset management approach now using our Enhanced Geographic Information System, GIS, tools for tracking and reporting. Citywide,

As most of you know, we have 1,035 roadways totaling 257 miles, 320 miles of sidewalks, 252 miles of water mains, 208 miles of sewers and 150 miles of drainage system with 187 outfalls, 11 pumping stations, two water tanks, and fixed assets, including 64 tide gates. This slide briefly describes our 200 plus miles of public sewers. We collect sewage from over 20,000 structures to the MWRA system. The city's sanitary sewer system carries wastewater from homes and businesses to the MWRA sewer system. And the primary sources you can see are bathrooms, sinks and showers, and washing machines.

We have 200 miles of sewer pipe, that's sewer mains, 8,482 sewer manholes, sewer laterals, those are the pipes connecting the property to the city's main, six pumping stations and force mains. I want to emphasize that Quincy sewer system is a separate sewer system. It does not combine with storm drains. You may see in the news that some cities and towns do like Boston. so they have a combined system and that's why you see so many sewer system overflows in the city of Boston during heavy rains. This slide briefly describes 150 miles of stormwater drainage. It's called the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System, or MS4. City Storm Water System collects rain and snow melt and discharges directly into our rivers, streams, and Quincy Bay.

And that consists of 150 miles of drain pipe, 3,178 drain manholes and 9,104 catch basins. We also have 187 outfalls, five drain pumping stations and force mains and 64 tide gates. So you can see in that brief description what happens. You have the wastewater that comes out of the house, goes to the MWRA, and then you have our drain system. This slide describes the work Quincy has performed to annually improve our sewer system. Some pipes are over 100 years old, some are under the high tide water line, and all are monitored for proper operations. as you can see from 2018 we've

improved over 70 miles of sewers in 600 plus roadways. We've investigated another 60% of all of our city sewers. and I have to give a shout out to City Engineer, Paul Costello, who's led this operation. We've been extremely aggressive on lining and repairing our sewer lines. We perform annual improvement to our stormwater drainage system. In more recent years, we have repaired four miles of drainage and rebuilt 14 outfalls. We sample all 187 outfalls in both wet and dry weather to confirm that only rainwater is flowing out. occasionally there's evidence of liquid other than rainwater and the department investigates what may be flowing from the upstream.

And you can see here's some examples of some outfalls we've actually rebuilt. This slide focuses on the heart of the two ordinances we wish to amend. A monitoring of the sewer system and sampling of the outfalls occasionally indicate the prohibited discharges that we encounter on rare occasions. what are they or what they do? Materials or liquids that may not be released in the city infrastructure, they damage our infrastructure, they may cause a blockage of flow, they interfere with the transport, Transport and Treatment Processes, they pose risks to worker safety or public health, and they violate state and federal environmental regulations and create expensive emergency response efforts.

and common prohibited discharges, hazardous and toxic substances like gasoline, oil, solvents and pesticides. and fats, oils and grease, what we call fog. Solids and obstructive materials and sometimes you'll get trashing construction debris. A roof or surface water into a sewer. In the last two years, a majority of the city's reportable SSOs were caused by prohibited discharges. Unfortunately, one of the prohibited discharges is called fats, oils, and greases, or FOG for short. The challenge of addressing FOG bridges across the Inspectional Services Department, plumbing inspectors, the Health Department, Sanitarians and Inspectors, and my department, Sewer and Drain Division. Why does it matter?

Infrastructure Protection, Environmental and Health Protection, and blockages result in overflows, stormwater quality, regulatory compliance, and needless expenses. What is DPW doing? We have education and outreach, monitoring and inspections, and we coordinate this with the inspectional services and the health department. Health Department also has additional research. It's an education information we give out to the businesses. and we also have additional resources on our website. And again, this is an example of something you might see from the DPW page.

As I said, we work in concert with other departments because sometimes the fog is caused by lack of appropriate plumbing equipment. Sometimes it's food preparation. and Disposal Choice overseen by the Health Department. Regardless, once FOG has left the building, DPW is in full response mode. So as you can see by this chart, Plumbing is involved, health department's involved, and we have the drain division to protect our water quality, and sewer division, which removes prohibited discharges. So the coordinated team is underway with our first 500 licensed food establishment assessments. We've worked together, we go out and we're trying to identify every single food establishment.

We're looking at their plumbing, we're looking at their grease traps, we're looking at their health logs, and we're mapping everything on our GIS system. As of today, we visited 426 out of the 512 licensed food establishments in the city. The next slide of a few photos of rare but unacceptable situations which required emergency DPW cleanup. We've observed grease being washed directly into catch basins unclean grease traps which push grease into the sewer system, causing a blockage, and friolated oil being dumped outside, eventually washing into our catch basins. You can see some of these are pretty nasty. Here's some more examples.

Fog buildup on our sewer pipe that resulted in a sewer system overflow. overflowing restaurant in grease traps. We've found diesel being dumped directly into the town brook, and we found overflowing grease containers. Coming path forward, our recommended next step, increase the DPW's ability to address noncompliance and negligent use of public infrastructure by amending the following codes, Chapter 270, Water and Sewer, and Chapter 300, Stormwater Management. We want to continue with the initial licensed food establishment assessments and then expand the program to all commercial establishments.

and at this time, we're open for questions. And again, tonight we're really talking about licensed food establishments.

Thank you, Commissioner Grazioso. At this time, I will entertain questions from my fellow colleagues. Chair recognizes Councilor Yuan.

Thank you, Chairman. So I agree enforcement of a prohibited discharger is important. It protects our infrastructure, the environment, and the public health, and it helps avoid a costly Repairs. My question is, besides the fines, are there preventive steps? For example, As one resident suggested, we could inform and help businesses work with grease and oil recycling services like Grand Natural. They provide containers, trim staff, and connect used cooking oil for recycling so it doesn't end up in the system or in landfills. The city could also consider requiring restaurants to use grease or oil recycling service. So is the city going to do that or city has any preventive steps?

Well, right now, part of the plan we're working on is really, we're going into the establishments, but it's really, our first step is educational. So we're giving... All of the food establishments, we give them literature. We explain what fog does to the system. It's in multiple languages. if we see a risk, we notify that establishment of the risk, then we go back again. We're set up as tier one and tier two establishments. Tier one, establishments with active fog risks. To date, we've found 34 of those. Tier two are establishments that aren't keeping proper logs, and they need more education. So the first thing we do is education.

And again, I want to emphasize that most of these establishments are doing things properly, but it's a few that we... you know, quite honestly, a $300 fine, which I have no, I can't find anyone right now. That's a plumbing violation. Health Department gives a $50 fine. So this is just, to be able to give us the teeth for those people who violate consistently, because right now a $300 fine doesn't mean anything to them, that we can stop it. for instance, if I'm in violation of the consent decree, if we have a sewer system overflow and we don't address it, the EPA can charge the city $750 a day for day one through 10

$1,500 a day for day 11 through 20 and $2,500 a day for 21st and beyond. So, we can be fined if we don't properly fix these problems. So we're just looking to be able to, you know, find someone that's in violation that doesn't... We also have the We're not trying to hurt anybody. And we give, if you look in the ordinance, we give people 30 days to rectify. I absolutely understand the struggles of a food establishment. I owned one for eight years, but I also know that you have to follow the rules. So that's what we're trying to do.

Yes, so I understand all those grease or used cooking oil has to have a place to store or go somewhere. So do you think the city will consider have like a mandatory requirement like for restaurants have to use grease and oil recycling service? Do you think the city will? do that? Like require restaurant have to use the grease and oil recycling service?

Yeah, the health department has those requirements.

So it's required. And I also have a more technical question. So how do you determine which business or residents is responsible when a blockage occurs? For example, in a condominium building, how do you identify which unit caused the discharge? And in areas where restaurants are close to each other, how do you determine which one is responsible?

Well, we usually there's a, we usually find out because there's a, we'll get a call for sewer backup. And that's when we go in and try to unblock it. We'll do our investigative work at that time. and our department can pretty much tell where that's coming from through our camera work. And then again, that's when we go in and we bring in health, we bring in plumbing and we look and we can tell if there's a grease trap, hasn't been properly maintained. The logs haven't been filled out properly. We look at overflows and again, we can generally tell who was at cause. and again we give those people time to rectify.

Okay, so. Finally, since there is no appeal process and the only option is to go to court, I'm concerned about fairness. Most people are unlikely to go to court over $1,000 to $5,000 fine, even though that amount can still be a serious burden if a mistake is made. and so Commissioner, could you explain what oversight exists within DPW when these fines are issued? and how the department ensures enforcement is fair and that mistakes can be identified and corrected.

Well, again, will go in there, again, with health, with the plumbing department and our own inspectors, we give them time to rectify. They have 30 days to rectify the situation. Again, if you look at, we've been a 34 establishment with active, Fogg Issues. We give them time. We go back again and inspect and make sure they've corrected the problem. We're not going to find them until they have not corrected the problem. We'll know if the problem persists, then they're gonna be fined.

I'm just concerned that if a mistake happens, it can really cause harm to the ED.

Again, we're not out to hurt anyone. We're just out to protect our... We had, just for instance, we've had... Last year alone, we had 800 calls for sewer backups throughout the city. So it's very busy and very taxing on my department. And then... we're investigating the whole city as we line our sewers and we've had multiple instances where we can see grease flowing through our systems. My men are out there on routine cleaning and cleaning. of our systems and we find grease and fog throughout the city. So it's a major problem for us.

So I would recommend the city shall provide an administrative review process for any fine issued in this section, allowing affected parties an opportunity to request a review in the correction prior to seeking relief in court. That's my recommendation.

This is what this is about, to make amendments to this. Yeah, I'm thinking, yeah. These are our recommendations, yeah.

So, I don't know if...

Did you want to submit?

I would like to suggest an amendment for this.

OK. And what section, Councilor?

Oh, OK. So just follow the last section. So last section is 270 25th, so I would like to add 220-26. It's called the City Responsibilities in the Fair Implementation. and so, yeah. So A is prevention and education. The city shall provide outreach and guidance to residents and the business on proper grease and oil disposal. and may establish requirements for food service establishments to use approved grease and oil recycling service or equivalent measures. and B, notice and opportunity to cure.

For a first violation, the city shall issue a written warning and allow a reasonable opportunity to correct the issue. unless there is an immediate threat to public health, safety, or infrastructure. C, administrative review. The city shall provide an administrative review process for any fine issued in this section, allowing affected parties an opportunity to request a review and correction prior to seeking relief in court.

That's my other amendment.

The first part of that we do through the Health Department. That's already part of the process, the education piece. Just looking at this.

So this is a whole section just because this ordinance is mainly talk about the business and the resident's responsibility to reporting incident to allow access to the property and the paying fines. So the last section, so I would like at a section, at the end just say city's responsibility and fair implementation. So A is prevention and education, B is notice and opportunity to queue, C is administrative review.

Is it okay, Councilor, if I pass this to colleagues just so everybody can read it?

Yeah, sure. I have several.

We should probably deal with the amendment first. So does anybody have questions on this amendment after they've been able to read it? Okay. Chair recognizes Councilor Hubley. I have questions on the amendment. I had questions otherwise. Does anybody have questions on the amendment? Councilor Riley.

On the item A, prevention and education, you're saying that's already covered by health department policy? Correct. So would we be conflicting or redundancy if we were to add this in? Would there be any harm in adding this language in there and making it sort of part of your Right, so it would put it in the code, but it wouldn't conflict with anything that the health department is doing.

Okay.

and then the first violation language here. Is that stated anywhere? I mean, I know you've talked about, I think you're very generous with people when there are issues, but this would make it required.

Here is the first instance, so we need to change it to written. So in the ordinance, the fines that you said are the first residential and the large residential mixed use first. Offense is $1,000. I would like to change this to read the first offense is written warning and then the second it remains the same amount of money, just the first one you give a written warning, because I feel education and prevention is probably more important than punishment.

you can make another amendment. I would like to, Councilor Yuan, I would like to, if we could just deal with the First Amendment, your First Amendment prior to that. So the amendment is for Section 270-26, titled Cities, Responsibilities. Has everybody had a chance to look at A, B, and C? Okay, Susan's making, Auditor O'Connor's making copies of that for everyone, so we'll just hang on a minute and wait for those. Yes, Councilor McKee.

Hold on one second.

Just to get a sense of the scope of this. These SSO sewer system overflows, we're talking about into the ocean, the catch basins, or are we talking about the actual sewer system in this?

you're talking about into our sewer system.

Okay, so if people are...

It could be both. Okay, oh.

where they put it. And you said last year you got 800 calls for these backups of all kinds?

Okay. Residences and restaurants.

is the city responsible for all of those or are residents responsible for their own backups?

It's not caused by anything. Mostly it is caused by people Unbeknownst to a lot of people, they may be putting things down their brain that causes a backup. Again, tonight we're talking about mostly prices for establishments. And obviously there's things they can do and they should do. and what they can do not only to cause Someone down the street, so...

it affects and Texas City. Now if it's a private residence, we could have a sewer backup due to roots in our system that we go out and clean. So it can be anything. But talking about licensed food establishments, it's primarily their problems.

Then I just had a separate question about how these new rules compare to other cities in the area, have you?

looked at other- We tried to do some research. I know the city of Lowell, their first fine is $5,000. Their first fine?

Oh, that's it for me.

Anything further, Councilor McKee? OK. Yeah. Chair recognizes Councilor Hubley. We are gonna have to adjourn and open up the proper full council meeting at 7.30, but we do have a couple minutes. So Councilor Hubley.

Thank you. So anybody who follows me on any social media knows I go out to eat way too much. I've improved recently, but then when this came up, it gave me an excuse to go back out there. So I've spoken to a number of restaurant owners that I know and started talking to them just to get that sort of lived experience of this situation. And many of them are longtime 20, 30 year restaurateurs. and they were surprised that our fees were where they were, or fines rather, were where they were. They were surprised they weren't much higher I definitely think they should be commensurate with the damage that they're causing and enough to be prohibitive of the actions. Their words to me was that this is a very simple thing if you've been in the industry, if you've been trained in the industry, this is something you know and do. In fact, some of the recycling, I think they refer to them as upcycling companies, actually pay you to take away their grease. So it's a profit-making thing for the restaurant.

So I'm a little bit hesitant to take away that. I imagine you would have discretion on when applying fines, right? Absolutely. Right. So I'm a little reticent on point B that might take away from that discretion. So I think there's already a built-in discretion once you investigate the claim or the suspicion. to go out and you find out maybe it's an education issue, maybe it was just one employee that didn't understand or something like that. So I'm a little reticent on point B, but the rest of it I'm fine with.

and that's what we're doing now. This is part of this plan we're going through now where we're visiting every single licensed food establishment. We're investigating but we're educating.

Yeah, and they even told me they said one of the things they suggested that is through inspectional services when restaurants are starting up is to have that be part of the checklist of like, do you have a mitigation plan for this and so forth, which I thought was a really good example, not in your Purview, but in Inspectional Services. So that's all I have. I'll be supporting this. But I'm reticent about point B.

At this point, we're going to adjourn the joint public works and ordinance committee meetings and open up the city council meeting and we'll come back. Thank you.

So we're going to call the City Council meeting Monday, April 6, 2026, 730 to order.

Madam Clerk, could you call the roll, please? Councilor Ash. Hubley, Jacobs, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, President Mahoney. Present. Nine members, you have a quorum.

All right. If we could all stand for a moment of silence. and if we could turn to pledge allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Madam Clerk, could you read the open meeting, please?

Pursuant to the open meeting law, any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium. Attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or transmissions are being made, whether perceived or unperceived by those present. is deemed acknowledged impermissible.

All right, and I'm going to turn this over to, we're going to have the recognition of Autism Awareness Month, so I was going to turn that over to Councilor DiBona.

Thank you, Madam President. Just want to, you know, over the years it's been really good that the City Council's made it, April is our Autism Acceptance Month, Autism Awareness Month, a time dedicated to fostering, understanding, and supporting for individuals on the autism spectrum. This month focuses on moving beyond awareness to promote true acceptance and improve opportunities. This past Thursday, April 2nd, marked World Autism Awareness Day. In honor of the occasion, many participated in the Light It Up Blue, Initiative by wearing blue to show their support. Like I said, the Quincy City Council has proudly recognized April as Autism Awareness Month for many years, and we continue to reaffirm our commitment to the community. So thank you, Madam President.

Does anybody else want to speak on it? I just want to thank Councilor Jacobs. He gave us all pins this evening. So thank you very much. And thank you very much, Councilor DiBona. So at this point, we're going to open it up to the Residence Open Forum for public comment. And then we will go back into the meeting we were just in. Is anybody here for open forum? If you could state, there's a sign-in sheet too, could you just sign in and state your name and address? and maybe they're not up there.

Oh, right here. Sorry. Hi. President, honorable councillors, this is an open letter to you all.

Could we just start with your name and address first?

Oh, I'm sorry. Deborah Nunziato, resident of 25 Beaux-Arts. We, the underside residents and advocates for Quincy's history, write to express our formal opposition to the proposed demolition of the Monroe Building at 1227-1259 Hancock Street. While we share the vision of a world-class Adams Museum and Performing Arts Center, we believe that destroying one world-class building to build another is a profound disservice to the identity of your city. The Monroe Building is not merely a commercial block. It is a monument commissioned by Henry Monroe Faxon in 1929. It was named specifically to honor his mother, Mary Burbank Monroe. It sits on the National Register of Historic Places and represents the genealogical fabric that allowed Quincy to even become a city of presidents

through the birth of our country on April 19th, 1775, when no fewer than 11 Monroe men were among the 77 Minutemen standing on Lexington Common at the onset of the Revolutionary War. Recently our city gathered to remember the ladies and celebrate the intellectual and moral legacy of Abigail Adams and it is a staggering contradiction to honor Abigail's memory by demolishing a landmark that is dedicated to another significant woman of Quincy's past. We believe Abigail Adams would be horrified to know that a museum in her name was built through the demolition of a historic building to Mary Burbank Monroe. To truly remember the ladies, we must protect the landmarks that already bear their names. Infrastructure for a performing arts center belongs where it can thrive without destroying our heritage. the current vacant party city site near the new garage at Hancock and McGrath Highway offers a non-historic, centrally located alternative

Utilizing the space would provide the necessary facilities and parking access without erasing a century-old testament to the Faxon-Monroe families. The Faxon family has given a measurable amount to the city from Faxon Park to Faxon Field. to the very ground some of our homes and community stands upon. Tearing down the Monroe Building is a failure of gratitude and a failure of historic preservation. we call upon the Mayor to one, rescind any plans for the demolition of the Monroe Building, two, reevaluate the Performing Arts Center location to utilize underused and three, commit to remembering the ladies, a philosophy that protects the existing female named landmarks in our downtown. respectfully, Deborah, Warden, Nunziato, as well as 223 other constituents who have signed this petition. Thank you. Thank you.

Do I have permission to deliver? Sure.

Okay.

Okay.

So you can just, we'll pass them out this way. I'm not supposed to really let people come back here, I didn't know that. All right. Yeah, not in a while. All right.

Hi, my name is Sal Balsamo. I'm at 27 Post Island Road in Quincy. I'd like to begin by recognizing all of you for the job that you've done on your first very complex assignment under extremely difficult circumstances. I also wholeheartedly agree with my wife's memey letter to the mayor, to Quincy's son, the Patriot Ledger, supporting your citizen's letter of accommodation. You've truly earned it. I would also like to cry to Mayor Koch for his article in the Quincy Sun in which he acknowledged your right to request an additional meeting, expressed his gratitude for your support and purchase of the gear, and address the vitriol and the misrepresentation circulating on social media that have had an adverse effect in our entire community.

Tonight I would like to address the proposed ordinance regarding the sale of kratom in smoke shops and gas stations throughout the community. When I first raised concerns about this issue publicly, my intent was simply to educate. I was told to mind my own business that I did not understand what I was talking about. Respectively, I disagree. I've spent my career as a mental health practitioner serving as a clinical director of an inpatient psychiatric unit, a licensed mental health Councillor, a licensed marriage and family therapist, and a case manager in both inpatient and substance abuse treatment programs. I believe that this experience qualifies me to speak of the issue of addiction and substance use. I want to be clear.

I understand that some individuals report using kratom effectively, the herbal form of kratom effectively, to manage opiate withdrawal, mood disorders, and anxiety. Individuals who have tried prescriptive drugs and for various reasons, including side effects, have not found them effective. I would not want to deny anybody access to something they believe is helping them. However, what's being sold today is not the natural or always the natural herbal product that people assume it to be. Many individuals begin with the herbal form of kratom but transition to a more concentrated product, including those containing a synthetic form often referred to as 7-OH.

this is a highly potent synthetic compound that acts directly on opiate receptors and can significantly that is significantly stronger than the natural plant and is being legally sold Health authorities have warned about this potential for dependence and abuse. In addition, research has showed that many products marked simply as kratom may actually contain these concentrated or altered forms. I just want to thank Councilor Hubley for sitting down with me and asking for a more detailed and asking for my experience in this. So I thank you a lot and hopefully, respectfully, I hope you address this issue.

Thank you. Thank you. Anybody else for open forum?

Hank Dondero, 65 Mananav, Quincy, Massachusetts. I want to first address, I haven't been around for a while, I will first address the issue regarding the firefighter's health. probably not mention which is a list litany of items diseases that they've been subjected to in a suffering under kidney cancer liver cancer thyroid cancer thyroid disease testicular cancer Mesothelioma, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, skin cancer, prostate cancer, brain cancer. Also studying ALS, Parkinson's, Alzheimer's. So yeah, you can nibble around the bits of it, but bottom line, there's a hell of a lot going on. Second thing, regarding the open forum on I was watching, by the way, 323.

There was one woman that came up and was addressing the, she was the wife of the firefighter. She was speaking and addressing the council and she was shut down. She was sat down by the President of the Council. She was directing comments directly to Councilors. That is a direct violation of Article 19 of the Mass Declaration of Rights. It's a violation of everyone's First Amendment. Everyone up there has an opportunity and have that right. This woman was shut down. Whether she pursues it or not, I don't know. That's up to her. If it were me, I would. Now we're getting raises. That seems to have died. Is anyone doing anything on it? Has anyone written a letter? Has anyone made a donation? What is going on? Are you going to win masks? when budget time comes up, stand up and hand in a letter turning that money back to the city?

Or are you gonna sit there and hope it quietly goes away? Well, guess what? It's not. Now, third thing regarding raises. Some comments were made about it when it was voted in. Specifically, it was a terrible disenfranchisement. The process was terrible. have to shed more light on the process. Does anyone recognize that? Anyone? I do, because it's captured on social media. It's there. So you can run, but you can't hide. I see my time is coming up. Regarding the city's credit rating. And I'm only mentioning this now because there are going to be more meetings, more open forums regarding finances. the budget.

And I just want to make a point that if you start screwing around with the budget, probably 90% of that budget is fixed. The other 10%, you could just start cutting positions or force positions to be cut.

Thank you.

Thanks.

Anybody else for open forum? if you could state your name and your address, please.

Hi, I'm Kai Lee from 42 Project Staff. Good afternoon. Good night, Madam President, fellow Councilors. I was here and spoke last time. I actually forgot to thank Councilor Ash for putting the kind of like a little contest together to help shovel out fire hydrants. I took part in that. My kids and I enjoyed it. and then I also saw that some of the other councilors put in the newsletters, so thank you for that. Over the past week, I had a chance to go with my youth group to one of the fire stations in Wollaston. We had a good visit. They cranked up the ladder, brought it up to the flag. They put on their uniforms and showed us what they would do in case of a fire. and the ladder truck, which was actually out of Hull's Neck, had to go out while we were there.

they all got geared up and went off and did their thing. So I want to thank you guys for delaying no more and making the bond a passing the bond and getting them their uniforms. Thank you. Have a good night. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else for open forum? All right. Anybody else for open forum? If you could just state your name and your address.

My name is Maya Campbell. I live in 133 Willow Street, and I would like to speak to the Council about road safety. There is an intersection near me. This is Hancock and Albion Road. In this intersection, two vulnerable road users were killed in recent years, and I haven't seen any attempts to make the road safer. There's even a plan by MassDOT, like a study that their proposal will possibly increase hazards to vulnerable road users. So I would like to tell the council about this. particularly dangerous intersection and urge you to do something about road safety.

Thank you. Thank you very much. All right. Name and address, please.

Sue Daugherty, 922 C Street. And I just really want to thank you guys for being talking about election places tonight. I know that's part of what you do, but one thing I'm concerned about is the climate right now in the country with and concerns about elections and disruption to elections and stuff. So as you're considering that, I just wanna encourage you to think about how that's something that we might think about in Quincy, because politically right now, is so, we even see it here in Quincy, is so divided and so it seems like an issue that, I mean it may be fine here, definitely, but I just want to bring that up and thank you guys. And also, again, thank you for your work on the firefighters. As a union member, most unions have been thrilled with the outcome of that. So anyway, thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else for open forum? Okay, I'm gonna ask one more time and then we're gonna close down open forum. Anybody else for open forum? All right, so open forum is now closed. We're going to turn this back over to Councilor Ash to continue. So we'll recess this meeting. We'll bring it back after that meeting concludes.

7.49 PM on Monday, April 6th, we will reopen the Joint Ordinance and Public Works Committee meeting scheduled for tonight for 6.45 p.m. Commissioner Grazioso gave his presentation on the floor We are currently deliberating over Councilor Yuan's amendments and additions, which I believe all of us have a copy of now and have been able to review. these additions or amendments to ordinance 2026-011 amending chapter 270 sewer and water begin with section 270-26 City Responsibilities and Fair Implementation. So if any of the fellow Councilors have questions on these particular amendments, A, B, or C, I'll entertain those now. And Councilor Hubley, we were in the middle of questions. So if you want to continue.

Yes, thank you. So what I was saying when we concluded the previous instance of this meeting was I don't want to take away from the discretion that the DPW already has by kind of forcing them through steps of having to give different notice and different remedies. So I'm just offering that if we could maybe not, I'm fine with A and C, but B kind of takes away their discretion. I would like to, I don't know if that's a friendly amendment or something like that. I'm already out of time.

Councilor Yuan.

I disagree because a written warning with the notice saying next. offense will be $2,500. That's severe enough to want people to be discrete, so I think even you speeding or something, you get caught, you give people the first chance to, and I think that's also, can help people. People will be appreciated for the city.

Could I comment on that? Through you, Mr. Chairman?

Yes, Commissioner.

So just a couple issues. we go back to education and the health department sends out a letter, gives a letter to every food establishment talking about pest control and other issues and they specifically say The grease trap logbook must show each invoice a report from the company that serviced it. Grease traps must be serviced every three months failure to do so may result in a hearing with a health commissioner, fines per violation or review of your application in front of the license board, kitchen hood vent cleaning, they must follow NFPA-96 requirements. Please note that per city ordinance 2015-102, any non-stormwater discharge into the MS4 system is subject to a fine. This is the Health Department grease log, so they're all aware of that.

This is the grease trap maintenance form that they get from the Health Department. So they're very well aware, and I just had an opportunity to look at this, in under Section B, it says, for first violation, the city shall issue a written warning and allow a reasonable opportunity to correct the issue unless there is an immediate threat to public health, safety, or infrastructure. I would argue that when you have one of these sewer system overflows and the way that it's looked at by DEP and EPA, it is a public health, it is a safety, and it is an infrastructure issue. it's damaging our infrastructure, it's putting people in an unhealthy situation. I would say in almost every situation, it is one of those, it is.

If we know that someone is deliberately doing those and they're not following what they're supposed to do, then we give them a warning, we go in and we find a situation like that. I just don't agree that a warning is, at that point, I believe that they should be fined. But that's my opinion.

Thank you, Commissioner. I'm gonna, Councilor DiBona and then Councilor Ryan.

One other thing, the MWRA, if we cause a sewer backup into their system, they can fine us as a city $10,000.

And if we can keep these questions solely to the amendment, just to keep everything organized. Thank you. Councilor DiBona.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Commissioner Gracios, you've gone over A, B, and C. Have you taken a look at those three? Okay. You know, I like how the ordinance is written. presented to us, to be very honest with you. We have to put rules in place. 800 calls, a lot of manpower being used. Just follow the rules. We had this about short-term rentals some years ago. We put the tools in the toolbox to allow the department heads to make these judgment decisions. They've already given you an opportunity with a violation, 30 days. I don't wanna be going backwards here. We wanna be going forward. And tonight, that's why they're presenting this in front of us. There's a lot of collaboration amongst departments to put these fines and these penalties in place. I like it how the ordinance is presented to us.

I don't know what you want to do with A, B, and C, if you want to do an amendment to each one and have a vote for A, and have a vote for B, and then have a vote for C, but I'm, I'm very happy with what is presented to us from this department and this administration. So if you want to vote on it separately, A, B, and C, we can do that. that's just my opinion.

It has been entered as one amendment. However, if Councilor Yuan is okay with separating out each section, I do think for the sake of, again, of keeping it clean and, It's three separate headings, right? So I would like to be able to vote on each if Councilor Yuan's okay with that. Okay, and I believe Councilor Ryan had questions on the amendment as well.

I do, thank you. Thank you for coming tonight, Commissioner Grazioso. Thank you, Councilor. So with regards to item B, as I recall, you give the establishments 30 days notice to clean up their act, correct? Okay, so all's we're doing is we're putting that down on paper that they have 30 days. and also too, they have to maintain a log of every time a vendor comes in to clean out the sewer system and get rid of the fats and oils, correct? Correct. anytime the health department goes in, they take a look at that log to make sure that they're doing what they're doing. Correct. Okay. All right. I just wanted to clarify that. That was one of the questions that I had and you actually answered it for me. So I thank you. Thank you.

Okay, I have some questions on the amendment. For, first for Councilor Yuan, for sake of, just for continuity and how the, Ordinance as it exists, are you okay with changing the city to the department? in your amendment. Because I believe the rest of the ordinance would be the department, so just for continuity's sake, the department.

I'm okay with that.

So Commissioner Grazioso, on first section B of this proposed amendment, is there an appetite in, in this city to keep maybe the first instance, you don't want to issue a written warning, you want to give the owner the benefit of the doubt, say we're gonna come back in 30 days, and if this isn't cleaned up, we're gonna put pen to paper and it will be public record. Is there some appetite there to maybe see if this is one one-off mistake that somebody really didn't know about and you don't want any negativity against their business or their reputation. Is that the idea of waiting those 30 days before issuing a citation or has that been contemplated at all?

Yeah, I mean, we give them 30 days to correct, but if we see somebody that, you know, what if we have an instance where someone in the past have had these situations. Again, we have those tier ones where we know they have some fog issues and we've gone in and we've already notified them of that. to clean it up when we go back and it's not correct, then we want to be able to issue that fine. if we see someone deliberately doing something, like if you look at some of those pictures we gave you, people deliberately poured grease down a catch basin. that's into our stormwater system. That's polluting our waterways and our brooks and streams. Or just dumping it out in the back. Those are violations that I really, again,

That's on purpose.

So. I think the operative clause for purposes of the amendment and B, notice and opportunity to cure. Councilor Yuan's amendment says for a first violation, the city shall issue a written warning. So my question is around what you have drafted and what you've submitted to us for deliberation tonight. It seems like the hang-up might be whether a written warning is the first step or whether it's a verbal warning and then we'll come back in 30 days. So I'm just wondering if that operation, if the written warning, if this is one business who made one mistake and the idea is not to have this part of a record if that is something that your department contemplated with giving a verbal warning the first time around before you come back.

Sure. I mean, it's what we do right now with the health department. Yeah, it says the department may issue a written order to enforce the provisions of this article of regulations there under which may include abatement, mitigation, compliance measures for violations. So the word may,

versus Hsiao. Yeah. OK. Do we have any other questions on this amendment, Councilor McKee?

I guess it relates to the amount of the fine. I think we're going to just stay on this.

With this amendment for now, yes. Yes, Councilor Mahoney, President Mahoney.

Thank you very much. How are you doing, Al? I think we're, when I look at your order, and it's before the fines page, sorry. 270-24, Enforcement Violation and Penalties. You have there a written order to enforce provisions in the article. And then the next section, part two, it says, within 30 days after completing all measures necessary to obey the violation. That's where you have your 30-day kind of written in there. Correct. I think what we're seeing over here, and correct me if I'm wrong, Councilor Yuan, when you get into the fines, it says residential and large... large residential mix use first offense $1,000. I think which is what they're looking for is just first offenses are written potentially written, and then you go on to the next level. Because it's being written 30 days above, but then the fines go right into first offense.

Do you see what I mean? Yep. I think that's it. Does that help clear it up? So if we could take first offense off and maybe put the written warning first, which would be B, right? Your notice of... and your prevention and education. I didn't see prevention of education in this. I know it goes from the Board of Health, but it doesn't hurt to have it in both places, I don't think.

So perhaps what may make sense for Councilor Yuan's amendment would be for us to vote on A, B, and C, and then we can revisit amendments to 27024A1 or the fine section of that portion. Okay, so I'm gonna separate out A, B, and C of amendment that's drafted as proposed section 270-26, city responsibilities and fair implementation. First, we'll take a vote on Section A, which will read, the department shall provide outreach and guidance to residents and businesses on proper grease and oil disposal, and may establish requirements for food service establishments to use approved grease and oil recycling services or equivalent measures.

Councilor DiBona? No. Councilor Hubley?

Yes.

Jacobs, Mahoney, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan.

Sorry. Okay, now for notice for section B, notice and opportunity to cure. This section as proposed will read for a first violation, the department shall issue a written warning and allow a reasonable opportunity to correct the issue unless there is an immediate threat to public health, safety, or infrastructure.

Councilor DiBona.

I'm sorry, I didn't realize. Councilor Riley has a question on Section B.

Yeah, just a couple of comments on it. I understand the spirit of it. I know that your department is very generous. They really do go out of their way, down the line when you're not here anymore doing this job, could somebody be enforcing this with a heavier hand? So I understand the balance of it, but the wording here of allowing reasonable opportunity is very, Subjective. It's not clear enough what would be considered reasonable. So I don't love the language of it. As it's written, I'm probably going to vote no, unless somebody wanted to suggest some other modification to it.

Jacobs.

Sorry, I just also want to talk about Bea. You know, my concern with Bea is, and I think this is what you were getting at, you know, what if you roll up on a scene and it's like a disaster, right? Like literally, it's like an environmental disaster. And we've kind of, I know it says public threat, health and safety, but again, those are kind of like broad terms. And I feel like those could be hard to kind of, Quantify? Maybe we could qualify it, but I don't know if we could be quantified, right? So, you know, because of that, I'd probably be opposed to B, just because, I mean, some of those pictures that you just showed us, like, I want you to ticket that person. And if it's their first offense and they're like, oh, you know, they're getting away with it and it's like, they shouldn't have gotten away with that. They knew what they were doing. If it's that bad, they know it's wrong.

We have to report those also to the EPA. Those get reported in the consent decree.

So we'll take a vote now on Section B as proposed of the proposed Section 270-26. I'm sorry, Councilor Mahoney.

I'm not trying to overcomplicate this, but in Section 270-24, Enforcement Violations and Penalties, Section 1 for the orders, it says the department may issue a written warning to enforce provisions of this article or regulation. Therefore, under which may include an abatement, mitigation, compliance measures, or violations of this article. Again, I think we're getting caught up in the language of what Councilor Yuen is putting in front of us. And then the second part was within 30 days of that written notice, you're going to be looking for action to be taken care of. And if we go into the next section, the fines, the first section says A, residential and large residential, mixed use, first offenses, 1,000. I think we just have to add A above that that says written notice and then could progressively go down, and we could probably omit Section B. You'd be okay with that, Susan?

Yeah. So we'll take a vote on it, and then if there's another amendment that stems off of the results, we can... I just wanted to make sure we're... Sure.

DiBona, Hubley, Jacobs, Mahoney, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, Chairman?

No.

Motion fails.

Okay, and now for Section C as proposed administrative review. This would read, the department shall provide an administrative review process for any fine issued under the Section allowing affected parties an opportunity to request review and correction prior to seeking relief in court. Any questions on this section of the amendment? Okay, we'll take a vote on that.

DiBona? No. Councilor Hubley? Yes. Councilor Jacobs?

Yes.

Councilor Mahoney? Yes. Councilor McKee? Yes. Councilor Riley? Yes. Councilor Ryan? No. Councilor Yuan? Jim, and Ash. Yes.

Okay, and now, given this amendment, I believe Councilor Mahoney might want to make an amendment, or Councilor Yuan might want to make an amendment to Section B, which is under 270-24.

Mayor, first offense written warning. I'm gonna follow up within 30 days to rectify and then go to B with residential. The next offense is 1,000, then 2,500, then 5,000. and same thing with non-residential down there. It should be written warning for non-residential and then 25, 5,000.

25,000?

Did I say 25,000?

I'm sorry. I'm going right for it. You showed me some nasty pictures, Al. You know I'm supportive of you.

Okay. do you want to submit that in the form of an amendment? So A and E would both contain for residential and large residential and residential mixed and also non-residential, the written warning language.

And we're gonna take out first offense out of the language and what's currently A will be B. It won't be safe first offense anymore. Okay.

will take a vote on that amendment unless anybody has questions on it. Councilor DiBona.

Commissioner Gracioso, does this change, does this amendment, take the tools out of your toolbox any more than what it is, what we're trying to accomplish here tonight?

just keep in mind that if it's not on private property, the city still has to go in and clean and fix the situation. So we're incurring that cost.

Okay, thank you.

Hubley?

Yeah, I know it's probably a difficult question to answer, but can you give us a sort of order of magnitude on what cleanup costs could incur? I know it's a bad question.

Every situation is unique. you know sometimes it I mean if it's the middle of the night or a weekend it's overtime so you're paying for that sometimes there's multiple crews depending on you know how bad the situation is, how much time it takes to investigate the situation. So it is hard to put a dollar figure on that.

Is there also...

But if there's damage, you know, if it's caused actual damage to our infrastructure where, you know, a broken pipe or something like that, it can get costly.

And is there also a bit of a ripple effect for some of this? So not only this isn't just a spillage issue or a contamination issue, I imagine that backup can affect neighbors and residents and up and down the street potentially, right?

We've had situations where, situations with fog have caused backups into private residences where there's been thousands of dollars worth of damage. So if anyone's had a sewer back up in their home, It's very disruptive.

I can speak firsthand. There was an issue on my street during construction and we had to throw it back up. It was terrible.

One in my home at one time, too, and it's horrendous. It's an awful thing.

And would you already have the discretion when dealing with instances of this case by case without any added language?

I'm sorry.

Would you already have, if it were passed as written, would you have the discretion on a case-by-case basis to deal with whether it's an education issue, whether it's a... Sure, I mean, if you look at the original, it says the department may

issue of the department. We may. It depends on the situation. But obviously, we're very lenient as far as trying to educate people. But again, it's just... In 99% of residences and businesses do the right thing. It's that those few that have deliberately caused some issues,

Yes, my concern is we're giving the restaurant owner or mixed-use owner and their lawyer something that they can dig into if we do end up finding someone. So I think because we already have the discretion, I think it's kind of built in. So I don't know if I'd support the amendment. That's all I have.

Yuan.

So, Commissioner, is the letter from the health department is also sent to the residential home or only sent to the business, the

Those are for business because those are rules for those establishments. They're talking about those are health conditions with grease traps and with rodent control. On our city web page and our mailings to the residents, we also have it here somewhere. Yeah, what we do from the Department of Public Works to all the residences in the city, we send this information out.

Okay, so looks like this ordinance mainly target the restaurant.

We're really not going after residences. It's in the ordinance, but we...

That's exactly what I want to ask. So for the resident, if they didn't get the letter from the health department for the education, and then the first time they made that mistake and then they immediately get fined probably they would like. I think the warning is a kind of education to them if they didn't get the letter from the health department.

Well, most of the times, if the resident is doing something they're not supposed to, they're the ones that are gonna get in trouble. The backup's gonna happen first, and they're most likely in their property, so they're gonna have to, you know, deal with that?

Yeah.

We'll take a vote on this, but before that, I appreciate, you know, Given the expertise and whether you want to give a written warning or not, or whether it's verbal, I'm thinking of the small business owner that just started out that is getting used to the city, or maybe there's a language barrier, and they're becoming acclimated to the to the ordinances. I would just defer that that that option whether it's written or verbal to the department. I do think that we should take a vote on this particular amendment so that way we can move on to the deliberations of the ordinance as a whole, so for now. Mahoney. Okay, so now we'll take a vote on this amendment to add language under, it looks like we're at 270-24.

Section B1, the proposed language would create A, first offense would be a written warning. And then also that would be for residential and large residential or residential mixed use. getting rid of the language first offense. Subsequently, if you follow that down, there would be another letter E, which would be first offense for non-residential. and getting rid of that first defense language and carrying that down. So we'll take a vote on this and then we'll move on to the ordinance as a whole.

DiBona? No. Councilor Hubley? No. Councilor Jacobs? Yes. Councilor Mahoney? Yes. Councilor McKee? Yes. Councilor Riley? No. Councilor Ryan? Yes. Yuan. Yes. Councilor Ash.

No. Okay, that amendment passes. Okay, so now we're going to move on to questions on the ordinance outside, notwithstanding Councilor Yuan's proposed amendment. Councilor McKee.

Yes, so just looking at this, the 2270-24 enforcement violations and penalties. So it says the department may issue a written order to enforce the provisions of this article which may include abatement mitigation and compliance measures for violations of this article. So that is kind of like the written warning, get your act together and then In the second part of that, I guess it's talking about if after 30 days nothing's been done, the city will tell the city the property owner, how much it would cost the city to fix these issues. And then the property owner would be responsible for those costs, which

Sounds like it would be different and in addition to any fines, is that correct? It would be just they have to pay for whatever damage, whatever mitigation has been done by the city. and then in addition to that they could have fines in the future I guess if this is their first offense and they would just have the written warning so in any case they're being they're being made to pay for any damages in our first defense anyway. Correct. So that makes me feel good about the amendment that we just did then. I know that you said that it wasn't possible to, Hubley really say what the costs would be, but I guess I'm going to go back and ask again what Councilor Hubley is trying to talk about.

Sure. It depends on the damage. Yeah. Again, every situation is unique. If it's a cleanup, just the time we would take to go out and do the investigative work to try to flush the lines, to camera the lines, to fix a broken line or something that was caused by that damage. we get in a situation, what if they cause the backup in a neighbor's house, and now we're trying to go into that neighbor's house to help that situation, the cost of that, and then you get into, legal situations because who caused that? Now you have neighbor versus business, neighbor versus neighbor. So you run into those situations.

We as a city, I think we go above board to go into, if someone has a sewer backup, we'll go into their house and we'll try to help them. We'll try to clean the line, camera it for them. I don't think there's another city of town that does that. I got a call from Councilor Riley last week on a situation. You know, we do that. to the best of our ability. Try to determine if, you know, could it be a city problem? Are there roots in the line? You know, we'll clean them. But we do that. We go over and above for people because it's an awful situation. but all those, it costs and it's time and it's money and if we have to bring in, if it's above, if we can't handle it, our department will have to bring in a company like you know, in situ form or someone to go in and try to shoot the lines.

If it's something we can't do, that's across the city, over and above.

I guess my concern is it sounds like the way this is written, the cost shall become an assessment against the property owner and shall constitute of Municipal Charges lien on the owner's property for the amount of said cost. So given the uncertainties around, you know, who exactly is it, if it goes into your neighbor's house, who exactly is responsible? Those shalls make me a little bit worried that it could, even though the city isn't intending to do that and tends to try to help people and do it themselves, that shall, I would like to make a friendly amendment to change those shells to May because it sounds like the way it's written now

You know, someone could get really, in theory, there could be some catastrophic cascade of issues that would be very, very expensive.

let you know this language we're trying to put in 270-23 is already in section 300. We're just copying that. It's been in that section since 2015, I believe, since that was last updated. So we're taking what was in the stormwater section and now putting it into the sewer section. But the language, it's the exact language, just so everyone knows that.

I guess I'd still like to make that amendment just to be on the safe side. OK.

So just to, sorry.

comment to Councilor McKee. Yeah, I totally agree with Councilor McKee's concern because Since I asked before the technical question, how do you determine which business or resident is responsible for blockage? especially in a condominium building, how do you identify which unit caused the discharge? So you have those technical questions exist. And then you... That means some mistake will happen during the identified process and then you give immediately shall become an assessment against the property owner. That's a severe consequence to for something can be mistaken. So I agree with Councilor McKee and change the share to May so we be more prudent in this process.

Commissioner Grazioso, do you think that changing shall to may on page three, section two, fourth lineup, does that change the spirit and what you're hoping to accomplish with this provision? I believe it just gives the department a little more discretion.

Again, where is that?

We're on page three, section two, the fourth line up. So this beginning of this sentence, let's see. if the amount due is not received by the expiration of the time in which to file a protest or within 30 days following a decision affirming or reducing the costs, or from a final decision of a court competent jurisdiction, the cost shall become an assessment against the property owner and shall constitute a municipal charges lien. So I believe we're talking about the second shall and changing that to may. So the cost shall become an assessment against the property owner and may constitute a municipal charges lien.

may become an assessment against the property owner and may constitute a municipal charges lien. Blah blah blah and then in the final sentence as well interest may begin to accrue on any unpaid costs just because because it does sound like already what you're doing is not trying to hit homeowners with the absolute maximum possible Charge, but just I think just putting those mays in I feel helps sort of legally describe what you're already doing.

I'm not an attorney. I might ask the attorney on board what that would mean as far as putting

It gives the department a little more discretion. I don't think it's binding. It may become an assessment against the property owner and may constitute a municipal charges lien on the owner's property. I know we have Assistant City Solicitor Petkin in the room. I don't want that to adversely affect any collections procedure that we have. changing shall to may could potentially open the municipality up to property owner. I don't know if Assistant Solicitor Petkin has an opinion on it or if we can table it.

If you want to. Without specifically addressing this as this issue was not raised in advance to the Solicitor's Office. I won't comment directly on this. I can just tell you that in general, Hsiao versus May One is obviously mandatory, the other gives discretion to the department. Whether you think that's good or bad is a personal choice because There are some people who will raise certain issues of, well, why did this person get the may and this one didn't? Whereas shall, it's like a minimum mandatory sentence. You do this and you get that. So that's the difference between shall and may. If there's something that's addressing a state law that says when interest shall accrue, this body cannot change a state law.

If there's more information that's needed, I would just ask that the question be presented formally to the Solicitor's Office so we could do more research on that. But that, in general, is your difference between shall and may.

Understood, and thank you for obliging the cold call. Assistant Solicitor Pitkin. So with respect to this particular change from shall to may in section two, does anybody have any further questions, Councilor Riley?

I do worry that the spirit of what you're trying to do here is getting weakened with every one of these amendments. I would consider supporting the first one as a shall and for some of the reasons Pankin said. I think that if they if we keep it discretionary on whether they may become an assessment against the property. If we choose to exercise that, then it shall constitute a municipal lead and shall have interest accrue if they choose to do it. I think that by changing all of the shells to maize, it weakens the whole order. of what we're trying to do here. I mean, we really haven't had a chance to talk. I do have some notes on things, more general comments that I want to make, but in the interest of trying to move this amendment forward, I would say I would support the first shall to a may and the others no.

Okay, any other questions on these change? Okay, I won't be supporting the amendment in that solely because I, for looking at every ordinance in the city. If every ordinance is shall, and now we're changing one to may, if inspectional services shall issue a fine, but the Department of Public Works may issue a fine, So that's my two cents on that. I do think May just gives more discretion to the department. I don't want that discretion to come back and be a negative. and negative when really we're trying to accomplish something positive. So on this particular amendment, I will take a vote.

Right. Councilor Ash.

No.

DiBona? No. Councilor Hubley? No. Councilor Jacobs? No. Councilor Mahoney? No. Councilor McKee? Yes. Councilor Riley? No. Councilor Ryan? No. Councilor Yuan?

Yes.

Fails.

Thank you. Okay, so now we're gonna, Councilor McKee, did you have any other questions? on the ordinance? Okay. Councilor Riley, would you like to begin your questions?

Yes, please. Thank you. I would like to say that the city, meaning the taxpayers, have invested millions of dollars in our Drain and Sewers. And so we have an obligation to protect those. And I think that's the spirit of what this order is that's before us, is that if the fines are not substantial enough to deter Thank you very much. You know, the reality is that the costs are borne by the taxpayers when these backups happen, right? And I do know that your department goes above and beyond, well within the boundaries of someone's property to try to resolve issues. whether or not that might change when Al Gracioso isn't doing this job anymore, I don't know, but we really need to protect the taxpayers and the infrastructure that we're invested in. The other thing I'd like to mention, and I know, Al, you've mentioned it, is

these are also tied into enforcement by MassDEP and the federal level with the EPA. So we have an obligation to, and some of this comes from an EPA fine, right? Some of this infrastructure work that's been done because otherwise we're gonna get fined and our taxpayers are gonna be paying for that. And then I've already said that the fines need to be high enough to deter this activity. So I think it's commendable to think that somebody may inadvertently do something that they don't know is gonna cause harm. But the vast majority of these I think you're trying to address are the ones that are chronic offenders, repeat offenders, and we need substantial fines and we need to be able to recover the costs when somebody causes harm to this infrastructure. It shouldn't be borne on the taxpayers. So that's my two cents.

Thank you. Anybody else on the motion? Yes, Councilor DiBona.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just, you know, the photos speak for themselves. You know, they were purposely putting oil and all these other and all the stuff into our infrastructure, I guess I could say. This is a public safety issue. And we're out here in front of you today. I'm glad it's in front of us. And we have to have the penalties in place. Okay, so I didn't support these amendments, but I'm going to support this measure in front of us from you guys. So that's my two cents. Thank you.

Okay, anybody else on the ordinance? And right now we are on still 2026-010. Anybody else, any questions? Okay, so Commissioner Grazioso, we had at least one that came to mind, but they were a repeat offender that I worked with your department on. It was like a... Saturday morning and subcontractors, and you had to chase, you had Clean Harbors out there, your department, and I recall coming up again six months later. And when we discussed, well, you know, what did they actually get hit with? a nominal amount of money to a commercial business owner, of course, who has these expenses as part of probably their overhead. We also just saw this issue with snow removal, right?

If you don't clear your sidewalk, the commercial property owner, the fine, when you think of a company, and the list was made public from some companies that got hit with those fines. That money may be a lot to me when they're talking about whether I hire a subcontractor to come plow that's going to cost me thousands of dollars, or whether I can let this linger and deal with the fine, obviously it's public safety to us. And that's unacceptable to make those decisions. So I don't want to conflate the two issues, but I look at this as very similar to the snow removal issue, and the fines need to be commensurate with with the outcome and the potential detriment to our infrastructure. I am interested in the, you did say, Commissioner, that 426 out of 512 businesses have

have been visited by the department and how long has that been going on?

We started this a few months ago. The problem is DPW, we can't find anyone right now. we could find the plumbing department could find that was a $300 fine only if it was a plumbing violation. And I think the health department was a $50 violation. We got all three departments together. We formed this group. We came up with this plan to go out, to educate, to... record everything in our GIS system and try to come up with a plan how we could work together to get this problem which we have out there. And that's where we've been at. we identified the 512 licensed food establishments. We said this was our plan, we're gonna go out there. and again we've hit over 400.

Some we're going back again but we're identifying and it's been mainly in education.

Are the establishments given advanced notice, or is it the department just shows up one day when they're open?

I believe we go in, but then we follow up, but... the health department can go in any time for an inspection.

Right. And when you mentioned, Commissioner, that there were the other commercial businesses that the next kind of undertaking would be all commercial properties, is that right?

Yeah.

Okay.

My substantive question was other municipalities of our size, what their fines look like. I believe you mentioned Lowell. Their first offense is 5,000.

Lowell is 5,000 a day.

Oh, okay. Okay, and with that, unless anybody has any quick final questions, I will entertain a motion to approve and take this out of ordinance. approve as amended and, I'm sorry?

We have to vote both of them.

2026-010, ordinance amending chapter 270, sewer and water, adding article four, prohibited discharges and enforcement. Do I have a motion to approve as amended? Chair recognizes Councilor Mahoney.

2026-010 with the amendments.

Okay, and then do any roll call? Okay, we'll do, all in favor? All opposed? Okay, and now we will move on on to 2026-011, Ordinance Amending Chapter 300, Stormwater Management Section 14D and Enforcement, Violations and Penalties. Do we have any questions on this ordinance? Councilor Yuan.

So in the chapter 300, so this you are amending section 14D. but on the 14C criminal penalty, the fine is no more than $1,000 and the 14D become $5,000, so what's the rationale for setting a higher fine for non-criminal disposition than for a criminal penalty?

What was the other ordinance that you were referring to?

So this is the code, City Code, Chapter 300, Stormwater Management. I print it out. So they want to amend the 14D from 300 to 5,000, but the 14C criminal penalty only find no more than 1,000. So I just want to ask what's the rationale for

I think I need to see what... Councilor Yuan, can I see that section?

The 14C item.

Yeah, as far as C, I can't enforce a criminal penalty.

I mean, section 14C is titled criminal penalty, but it reads more, nothing about it reads are all criminal to me. Any person who, so just basing off of what was just provided by Councilor Yuan. This is section C, criminal penalty. It's titled criminal penalty and reads any person who violates any provision of this article, regulation, order, permit issued thereunder shall be punished by a fine of not more than $1,000. Each day or part thereof that such violation occurs or continues shall constitute a separate offense.

That is the existing ordinance. That's nothing we're trying to change.

No, so the... Commissioner, so the revision that you have is for Section 14D. Councilor Yuan was asking about Section 14C. I don't know if you have...

I have it in front of me, but again, that is the existing ordinance. So under D, non-criminal disposition as an alternative to criminal prosecution and civil action, the city may elect to utilize the non-criminal disposition procedure set forth in Mass General Laws 4021D, in which case a commissioner and or other authorization of city shall be the enforcing person. The penalty for a violation shall be not more than $5,000 per violation. Each day. Currently, it was $300, and that's what we're asking for.

Understood. Is there a motion on this, Councilor Yuan, or was there a question?

It's a question. I ask a why.

Commissioner, if you have anything further, I mean, it reads criminal penalty. I can't, unless it's defined somewhere else, I would think that that's also a civil fine. Yes, Councilor Mahoney.

Is that just language that was picked up from the MS4 language? Excuse me. So it's standardized language that we have to put into into the stormwater management piece. So it's probably not going to, I'm not trying to say anything. It's just, it's language that you have to adopt when you're enforcing this. Every city and town has to adopt the MS4 language by a certain point. You can correct me if I'm wrong. because this is not my area of expertise, but I do know you have to adopt and you're required to have it done by a certain time. I think it's coming up pretty soon. It sounds like Quincy's already ahead of that, but a lot of towns are not. So this is language that towns and cities are having to adopt and put into place. And if you don't have it in place and you do not adopt it, you will be fined for it. So I think that language is just in there and what we're trying to do, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, that right now we have $300, which isn't really holding anybody's feet to the fire.

We want to put it up to $5,000 to make it a little bit more, give you a little more teeth.

Yeah, and again, this is related on the stormwater side.

Yeah, so that's a different, it's an MS4 regulation that we have to have in there. And he wouldn't be able to enforce 14C, but he would be able to enforce 14D.

Thanks. OK. If there's a motion or anything, Councilor Yuan, but I believe that that is the answer to, I believe, what your question was with respect to 14C. Any other questions on 2026-011, Ordinance Amending, Chapter 300, Stormwater Management, Section 14D? Motion to approve, made by Councilor DiBona. All in favor? All opposed? Thank you.

Thank you, Councilors.

Thank you, Commissioner. Okay, so it's 8.43 p.m. and we will be bringing these ordinances out of committee at the end of the meeting and voting on them as a whole. I will adjourn the April 6th, 2026 joint public works and ordinance committee meetings at 8 43 p.m. Thank you.

and we're coming back into, so we're gonna bring the city council, the regular city council meeting back into session and we're gonna move on to item number two, Adam Clerk.

2026053, Appropriation Community Preservation $325,000 for National Society of Colonial Dames of Massachusetts Quincy Homestead Exterior Painting and Repair 2026.

Okay, recognizing, is it going to go to the two? It says Mayor Koch. Are we going to you, Mr. Walker? All right. Okay. Councilor Riley. Thank you.

Yeah, we are reintroducing this. The Community Preservation Committee met last week, and we reviewed, and I do believe they provided some additional information. I know that Jacobs had asked for some information from the DCR and the committee reaffirmed their support for trying to get this funding a little bit earlier than the normal cycle. All of the recommendations from the CPC will come to this body in the June timeframe with the budget. But this particular one is, you know it's weather dependent and although the DCR technically is responsible for the exterior maintenance they do not have the money to do it anytime soon so the property will continue to deteriorate and the interior part that the the Colonial Dames is responsible for. There's no point in doing that work when the envelope of the building is not secure. So that is the reason that it's come back before here.

there's a lot of new people on the committee and we're working to try to close out a lot of old projects and bring some of that money back in so we have a really solid I don't have a sense of what monies might be available for appropriation in June, but I would ask my fellow Councilors to support this order here tonight, or this, whatever we call it. from the Mayor because it did have the full support of the committee the first time and it has been fully vetted and continues to be a priority for the committee. I'll have motion to approve it.

So we have a motion by Councilor Riley to approve. Do we have a second? Second. Second by Councilor DiBona. And on the motion, Councilor McKee.

So I just wanted to discuss some of the things. Councilor Jacobs had the great idea to go back and ask the state's Department of Conservation and Recreation, which is responsible for the outside of the home, some questions and to see if they could pay for any of this. I want to just kind of go over what we've learned from that and what I've learned from the city as well because we're all new and it might be helpful. So the DCR has spent $412,000 on the property in the last five years. Most of that is for kind of plans for an accessible ramp. and Quincy has spent $520,000 on the property in the last five years.

So 26% more than the DCR. and some of that has gone to restoring a chariot and a carriage house and some fence work and several other things that weren't specified. One thing that I noted was in the application for this, funding there was only one bid submitted so I asked the city Karen O'Toole who leads this program for the city about that and she said that It's a reimbursement program, so if someone, in this case the Colonial Dames, has the money to pay for it up front, they don't need to get three bids for the work. even though the city is then reimbursing them. If the city were to pay for it itself, then it would have to follow state procurement laws.

This is quite a large request and it upsets me that only one bid was put forward, seems to have been seems to have been sought for this project so apparently this is a state rule that you know it's not required but I would hope that in the future, for things of this size, there would be more than one bid sought. Would you like to answer that, Mr. Walker?

He just put his hand up because he wanted to make a comment.

Through you, Mrs. President, Madam President, Mrs. President, Madam President.

Whatever.

That's a good question, Councilor McGee, and I just want to highlight the fact that it's not necessarily because the city's not in charge of the payment. It's because it's not a city project. If it's a city project, the city has to then follow 30B and all the procurement laws that would normally follow because this is an outside entity. They're getting a grant from the city. Those requirements are a little bit different, but under most circumstances, and most of the CPC projects in the end are city projects, and they do require going through the 30-B process.

I think an example of that is the Church of the Presidents and the tower, the bell, right? Am I wrong about that?

I'd have to go back and look. But I know the tower and the bell, the clock, there's a relationship there. The bell, I believe, is the cities. The tower is the churches.

Yeah, but I think it was kind of a mix.

Yeah, I guess I'm just, I don't know, Councilor Riley, as the representative here, I'm just hoping that maybe in the future you can suggest when you have these meetings in the fall to sort of give an overview of the project, that especially for projects of this size, even though it's not a city project, ultimately the city taxpayers are being asked to pay for it. And so it just doesn't really sit well that there's one bid for a project of this size. for me. So, excuse me, another thing that I wanted to say is that so just because this is being pulled out early, I just wanted to get a sense of how much of the and the total funding for other projects this amounts to. So $325,000 is

about one-fifth of the currently available funds for the bucket of historic preservation. 1.7 million dollars that currently exists. So just a sense for the other people voting on this. This would amount to 20% of the money that we have to to pay for historic preservation projects this year. The other thing that I would like to make a friendly amendment, given that I mean, the DCR says that they could get to this, but not for probably five years, and so I understand this is being pulled forward so that

The least amount of damage can be done to the house, but I would like to make a friendly amendment that the amount be lowered to the estimate amount $289,250 because that's the actual amount in the estimate versus the 325,000 that was requested. I also saw, thanks to the city auditor, that the colonial dames have 7,000 some dollars of unused money from previous projects. So there appears to be some sort of cushion. So I'd like to make a friendly amendment that it be lowered to the estimate amount.

So we're going to look for clarification from the Clerk on that or to Chris Walker. So it sounds like the amount that you're being asked for 325, I'm hearing that the bid came in lower than that and you're looking to lower the from 325 to the actual bid number.

It was a positive recommendation out of the CPC.

So out of CPC. So I guess the question, I'm just going to pose the question to Councilor Riley. There's a question that you're asking for 325 that got approved from CP. See, and the question is that it's higher than what the assessed bid was.

So the process that this goes through is long and lengthy. And first of all, they've got to find people to bid these projects out. And they need to be people who can handle historical Thank you very much. and then it's a long time waiting. If you look at the bid, I think it says it expires in 30 days and we're well past that. So they work closely with some of these vendors that can do the work. that can wait to get paid, wait till this whole process happens. I don't know. If we're authorized to reduce that amount in the friendly amendment, I'd be okay with that, but I don't know if that's even proper.

How much are you looking to drop it to? How much? Yeah.

From $325,000 to $289,000, so $26,000. Could I just make one more comment?

So, Mr. Walker. Through you.

and President. You know, obviously the council's within its authority to reduce an appropriation. I will say my knowledge is that the difference between the estimate and the full appropriation amount is just traditional contingency for a project of this scope.

Is it 20% contingency?

I don't have a calculator.

So it's a typical thing where they'll put a contingency on it just in case it goes over so they don't have to come back and ask for more money. That's typically what happens with those types of things.

I thought so. I guess I'm just, I'm still feeling like for something of this size, plus they have the extra 7,000.

Councilor DiBona.

Thank you, Madam President. On the monies left over, if it was appropriated for a different project, it really can't legally be used for this project. that you kind of have to leave out. And the 289 estimate, there's a cost override here, there's gotta be some type of buffer in there, because they're not gonna be able to go back to the committee for the funding if it's the case. The reason why this came in last year is because they wanted a head start on the project because of the snow, because of the rain. And here we are tonight and weather's still got a break at some point. So we're back a month here on the project and that's why they came forward early. particularly because they usually the projects come in in June and they'll get the monies appropriated until July and that pushes the whole project out. That's why they're here early. and as for anybody else that was asking about this to be used for other projects, this has to be used for CPC.

These particular buckets have to be used for these items and the historical preservation. I know I got a lot of emails about this particular item being used for different things. This is CPC buckets, Community Preservation Committee buckets that go in those particular items. I know you want to do your cost savings, but this is presented to us. It's an 8-0 vote from the CPC. Our representative from our council, Deb Riley, approved it as well from the council. So that's why we have a representative that kind of represents us here. They vote on it as a group, they bring it to us, and that's what we go for.

Go to, before I do, I just want to mention one thing. If they don't use the whole $325,000, it stays in the CPC. So it's not like they're giving them $325,000, it will stay in the CPC. So it's just a, it's budgeting for the 289 if it goes over. if it comes in at 200, let's say, they'll keep 125. I think I'm correct on that. And Councilor Ash, then it's gonna go to Councilor Hubley and then we'll come back to Councilor Yuan. So Councilor Ash.

Yeah, that was my question, President Mahoney. I think it may be a good exercise to cover how CPC works. If we're cutting a check for 325 or if we are earmarking funds. And then it sounds like we're earmarking funds and waiting for invoices and paying those. And if it's the latter, of course, you know, this adding in the percentage for contingency. I would see why that would be necessary but if we can I think we can confirm that the latter is kind of the process that these organizations ask for the money the money is earmarked and then they still need to prove that it's being spent on what it's particularly earmarked for. Thank you.

Councilor Hubley. Thank you, Councilor Esch.

And so just for the folks at home who are here that might not be as familiar with the CPC process, I'm sure I can direct this question through you maybe to Mr. Walker. So community preservation, just for those who aren't familiar with it, you get a little bit of an added charge on your real estate bill. This was something that was put in place years ago, 2006, 2007-ish. you get a small surcharge on your real estate taxes that goes directly into funding these types of things but there's also a state match so when we're talking about spending Quincy taxpayer money we're actually talking about spending people from Lowell's money we're talking about statewide funding I want to say it's one for one if I'm not mistaken now somewhere a little less now okay but it's it see what I'm saying it's not all Quincy funding I guess is where I'm going so I just want to make sure I mentioned that

also I agree in terms of the contingency going into these projects especially on a historic project we don't they don't know what they're going to uncover the minute they start removing boards and testing things and getting into it. And I would hate to see us in a situation where we didn't have a contingency we've opened the building up and now we're trying to figure out how to secure the envelope without enough funding to continue with whatever we find under there. So I would definitely highly warn against that. I had a long conversation with Ms. Pierce, who is one of the applicants, and she kind of explained to me the methodology. The contractor that they're using is one that they've used for a number of other efforts in the previous work. Very specialized work. They know the property. They're very familiar with the grounds. So I'd be hesitant to encourage them to go shopping around for more bids.

When I saw that the state had already put in a substantial investment over time as has Quincy with CPA Which is in part funded by the state that made me feel a lot more comfortable with this. So I'm supporting it I wouldn't support an amendment

Yuen, thank you, Councilor Hubley, Councilor Yuen.

I want to be clear. I do care about the preserving the Quincy homestead. And I understand why this project matters. But we also have to be honest about where the city is financially. Quincy is already carrying a very large debt burden, and at some point we have to prioritize our own stability. There is a reason they tell you on the airplane, put on your own oxygen mask before helping others. That's just the common sense. This is a state-owned property under the DCR. I'm not against helping, but I don't think it's responsible for the city to take this on without any clear commitment from the state. Right now, it feels like the responsibility is being shifted entirely onto a city that is already financially stretched. We should also be asking basic questions.

Does CPC already have a significant debt service and would this require additional borrowing? are we insuring more bonds to cover this $325,000? Was there an open and competitive bidding process, and how was this cost determined? Before we move forward, I think we should explore alternatives. Work with the state, the city, and the nonprofit partners on a shared funding approach. consider a public or private donation effort to support the preservation. Ensure we are getting the most competitive price through an open bidding process. So for me, this is not a no to preservation. is a no to moving forward without a clear plan, shared responsibility and the full transparency. Councilor Ryan.

Excuse me. Thank you, Madam President. When this came up for approval back in the end of January, as I recall, I had brought up the fact that there was a discrepancy between the estimate and what they requested. And I had requested to see if they could add a supplement to the proposal, and I guess it didn't happen. And I just feel that the account that the CPC fund is in the red right now, $4 million, which is a lot of money for an account that is supplied by the residents of the city of Quincy and the state. Thank you.

I'm going to see Mr. Walker's hand up. I believe, did you want to talk?

Through you, Madam President, just that I would defer to the auditor of the Department of Municipal Finance, but I don't know where the CPC would be in the red.

Yeah.

That's not possible.

I don't have, I don't show that it would be in the red.

Yeah, that's a fun, and just to answer a couple of the other points that were made, The fund is specifically designed to pay for projects just like this through the work of the CPC, the committee. This money can't be spent for other things. There are certain categories that it can be spent on, but the general fund, the general operating expenses, any sort of spending priority that the city council or the mayor may have, It's sort of a separate bucket. As Councilor Hubley mentioned, this was a voter approved referendum in 2006. were the voters actively supported by a wide margin, I'll add, adding this surcharge to the property tax bills. that property surcharge tax bills goes for in only two projects that are meant for community preservation. And those categories are historic preservation,

Public Recreation, Affordable Housing, and Protecting of Open Space. The list of projects that have been accomplished over the last now 20 years is immense. There are projects that this body would all very well recognize, and a lot of them probably would not have been able to get done if not for the voters' willingness to support this fund and support the use of this fund in a way that protects our historic heritage, that funds open space and recreation, and provides some affordable housing money. as for the actual, the question, Councilor Ryan, I appreciate it relative to the deficit, but again, this is an account, as are all of our accounts every single year, that are balanced out every year. You can't spend, we're given a number, from the assessor's office through municipal finance. It's coordinated with the state because of that match.

The number is the number, and we do not overspend in that account, nor any other account that has anything to do with the basic operations of the city.

When we're talking about TPC, it is, you know, to taxpayers of the city of Quincy, get a surcharge on your tax bill. I don't know what it's up to at this point, but it's... It's what? 1%. and then it's matched. And I think what you're looking at, and I could be wrong, I'll ask the Madam Auditor about this, but I think we have borrowed money against the CPC, so there is some money. So there is debt that goes out against the borrowing for certain properties. that we'll be paying for until 2051. And I think that's where you might be confusing the red, but it's definitely something that you can do. So we can borrow against it because it's a set income. There's a set number that's coming in from the states. We know how we can balance that. But if you could, Madam Auditor, if you could actually add to that.

I would just like to do a little clarification for everybody. In the fall every year, there are two forms that have to be filled out by the city of Quincy. One form is filled out, I believe, in September of each year. the next form is filled out in October. Those forms, you fill it out based on the revenue that has been received. It then gets approved by the Department of Revenue. What you will notice next is a council order will come before the city council in December. and it will be what your estimated revenues are that has been approved by the Department of Revenue and that is the revenue that you're basing off these projects on. So if you were talking about the debt service, I believe there might be, and I'm just going off the top of my head, maybe five council orders in the past that the council has voted on to use community preservation funds.

to fund, all that is configured into your revenue budget when you vote on it in December. if anybody wants to come to my office and I'll do a private explanation to them. You just have to go through the whole cycle.

I do know what the CPA fund is. I see it on my real estate tax every year. So thank you.

So we have a motion on the table and we have a second. Jacobs.

Sorry about that. So I was in contact with the Colonial Dames. I spoke with Mrs. Megan Gillardy. Sorry if I didn't get her name correctly. She's the executive director for properties and collections. She was just recently hired there. They hadn't had a position for that. She's kind of the one who's leading this, even though Ms. Pierce's name is on the application. And she basically, just said to me that the Colonial DMs basically asked her to do this. They were in contact with the DCR. I did speak with... folks at the DCR, it was kind of hard to get a hold of them. But there were some of the questions they asked. One question was whether the scope of the work described in the application actually falls within the responsibility of the DCR? And they said yes. So they know that this falls on them.

However, they go on to say that exterior repair work of the Dorothy Quincy Homestead is a long-term work plan for the DCI's historic properties. The Office of Cultural Resources, which Ms. Galunis, I'm sorry, whoever this person, the woman, Priscilla, from the DCI, she's the head of that. Cultural Resources has a small annual budget. So they're saying, just like everyone else, they have a budget. They have over 100 national historic landmarks that they're charged with taking care of. and they need significant historical resources under our care. The work proposed for the Dorothy Quincy Homestead is not currently scheduled. There's no plan to do it at all. And even if they were to, do it, it would take them five years to get it done. So that's a long time. That is usually how you do it. I worked at the Adams houses for many years.

We'd paint one side of the house, then the next day we'd paint the other side of the house. That's the best way to do it. Right now the building is in, they say it's in pretty bad disrepair. I went there. There is some disrepair. There's some deferred maintenance. and so forth. So, you know, I do think it's an important resource for us to have. Her name was Priscilla Giygas. you know, so I will be supporting this. But I'm really disappointed in the DCI for kind of shirking their responsibilities. I feel bad for the taxpayers of Quincy. they've already paid their state taxes. Now they've been taxed again and they're paying taxes twice for the same, to complete the same task, so.

So we have a motion on the floor and we have a second.

Councilor.

may I propose a solution just to discuss? So given the city's current financial situation, I can't support using local CPC fund without a clear commitment from the state. Therefore, I propose that any appropriation of CPC funds for this project be conditioned upon a formal written agreement with DCR. to be exacted prior to the release of funds that includes the following. First, cost sharing or reimbursement. DCR agrees to reimburse the City of Quincy for the CPC-funded portion of the project within a defined period, up to five years, or provides an equivalent financial contribution. Second, binding agreement. This agreement must be legally binding and approved by the appropriate state authority to ensure enforceability.

Third, define the scope and accountability. The scope of work, total project cost, and the responsibility of each party must be clearly outlined. for funding safeguard. CPC funds should not be expended until such agreement is fully exacted. If these conditions can't be met, I would recommend postponing the appropriation and formally requesting that the DCR take the lead in funding and completing the repairs.

Is that in the form of a vote? Yeah, that's my proposal. Before we go on, there's a motion and there was a second on the motion. How's this connected? And there's a disconnection that's happening. So are you suggesting this to be a friendly amendment to the motion at the table? Yes. All right. So I think Councilor DiBona.

Thank you, Madam President. So when you appropriate the funds for CPC, you have three years to finish the project. If you do not complete it in three years, the money goes back to the CPC fund. So you're talking about five years. You can't do that. It's a three year appropriation once we approve it. so as soon as it goes to this particular item you get three years to finish that project and if it's not finished whatever funding goes back to the CPC fund that also pertains to projects that haven't got off the ground say they were appropriated or approved two years ago and they're on year three and they didn't complete the project, the money has to go back. So I know you want to be creative, but there's rules, there's laws, there's procedures in place already from the CPC. This is across the state of Massachusetts.

And there's been monies that have been put back that just haven't been, there's been a few projects that haven't been approved last year that are gonna get started this year just based on weather and all these different things. just keep that in mind.

So I think with the, I'm just gonna, I'd be happy to move that into a vote if you wanna have as a friendly amendment, we're gonna take that as a vote. but I want to explain one thing. You're asking the state who just came back after Councilor Jacobs explained that they don't have it in the budget for the next five years and we have a historic Is that correct? And we have a store building that has been approved from CPC and that is appropriate use for those monies. and what we're voting on tonight, it came out of a committee, is to approve this first $325,000 for this particular project. Now second to that, what I think's happening is we have a lot of new councilors that are here on the board and we haven't had a real introduction to CPCs and how this money is being used. And this is an opportunity, I believe, for the administration to bring forward maybe the director of the CPC and maybe do a presentation to the full board so we could answer many of these questions.

And the reason why many of these questions are coming up is maybe just because we haven't had the opportunity to have that deep dive. and if you would agree then what I'd ask is we have a motion on the floor and we have a second on the floor and we're going to take that roll call vote because I don't I'm asking because that motion's already gone through and We'll see if it passes. I don't think putting a determent for the state, if the state can come up with money, we will certainly collect that money if we can. Is that okay with the Councilor? So what I'm saying is Councilor Jacobs explained that he went to the DCR and the DCR does not have any money budgeted for this site for the next five years. Jacobs. So whether we put three years or five years on it, there'll be no money that we'll be able to recoup back potentially for that. Councilor Jacobs.

and even in my communication with them, they have a proposed plan for some work that basically says, yeah, we wanna do it, but they don't even, to finally put in this ramp after they've spent like $250,000, looking at it, and they're like, yeah, we can't afford to put this ramp in. So they don't even have money for that.

So the state doesn't have any money to put into it. So we're just trying to get ahead of the deterioration of a building at this very moment. That's what this is for. what I'm asking is if we could table your friendly motion because I don't we're just gonna we're gonna vote for there's a motion and a second on the table for the motion so we're gonna go ahead and have that vote okay okay roll call vote Councilor Ash

Hubley, Jacobs, Koch, Mahoney, Ryan, Walker, Ryan, Walker, Ryan, Walker,

Jacobs, Councilor McKee, Councilor Riley, Councilor Ryan, Councilor Yuan, President Mahoney, eight members.

Thank you. So what I'd ask is, I know that Councilor Riley is also new to this committee, but maybe we can have before it comes in in June, we can have a little bit more of a discussion so that in June we're more prepared, potentially.

Okay? I will bring all this feedback to the next CPC meeting so that they're aware that the Council is going to ask good questions and we need to be prepared to, I need to be prepared to answer them.

So moving on, Madam Clerk, we're on item number three.

20-26-054, an order of designation of polling places. Actually, we're on number two. Okay, and I have given you all a list of polling places that with no changes to last year's and I would be so happy. Thank you.

So we have a motion to approve order number 2026054, passage designation of polling places. Do we have a second? Ash on the motion. Anybody have any questions? And this is a vocal vote.

Ash, DiBona, Hubley, Jacobs, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, President Mahoney. Yes. Nine votes. Okay, moving on to number four. 2026055, order designation of early polling places for the primary election Saturday, August 22nd, 2026 through Friday, August 28th, 2026, and the election Saturday, October 17th, 2026 through October 30th, 2026, according to the codes of Mass General Law 950, CMR 47.

Motion to approve. Motion to approve from Councilor DiBona, seconded by Councilor Jacobs. On the motion. On the motion.

On the motion.

Thank you, Madam President. Just looking this over, and this is correct, I think, Madam Clerk, is there's 14 days of early voting before the Final Election?

That's correct.

And I see Sunday in here. Is that correct?

That is correct. Any city over 45,000 registered voters specifically has to have weekends of early voting as well.

Okay, so we have seven days. Is it one, two, three? Yeah, seven days for the preliminary, primary. and then we have 14 days consecutively for the final.

Correct, with one weekend at Central Middle School.

Okay. Is this dictated from the state?

It is.

Okay. Thank you. It gives an opportunity for the folks, I mean, the voters to go out and vote. I mean, it's all in person, is that correct?

Yes. Or vote by mail, of course. Okay. And on election day. Okay.

Thank you.

Anybody else on the motion? So I just have a quick question. So some of this always gets asked. And when you have a Quincy election, we do not send out a mailer to remind people that they need to ask for absentee ballots. mail-in ballots, but for the state they will send them out.

Yes, we got word that the first round will go out if you haven't already applied. the first week in July. And then again, if you didn't apply for one in September, they'll be going out the first week in October.

So people should just be paying attention to that. And then when we're in a city election, we'll remind people that they have to call because they don't get that mailer because that's an expense for the city. Thank you. So on the motion, we have a motion to second it, and we need a roll call vote. So could we move on to the roll call vote?

Ash, DiBona, Hubley, Jacobs, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, Oh, she stepped out. President Mahoney.

Yes. Eight members. Okay, moving on to item number five.

2026056, a resolve for Council on Aging Department Head Theft and Federal Charges.

Recognizing Councilor Riley. Thank you, President Mahoney. I would like to read this order into the record. Whereas the City of Quincy is entrusted with the responsible stewardship of taxpayer dollars and the efficient operation of municipal resources, and whereas the 2025 indictment of a former city official on charges of embezzling public funds highlights the needs for robust safeguards to prevent such breaches of trust in the future. and whereas the legal matter has since concluded in federal court with the director pleading guilty on March 10th, 2026 to all charges including embezzlement, mail and wire fraud and interstate transportation of stolen property. and whereas ensuring accountability and transparency in purchasing and accounting processes is critical to maintaining public confidence in city government,

and now therefore be it resolved that the Quincy City Council hereby calls for a comprehensive review of the city's purchasing, accounting, human resources, municipal finance and information technology processes to identify and address any vulnerability vulnerabilities or gaps that allowed for misuse of public funds. Be it further resolved that this review includes an evaluation of internal controls, approval processes, and financial oversight mechanisms to ensure the highest standards of accountability and efficiency. Be it further resolved that the City Council recommends the engagement of an independent consultant or auditor as appropriate to assist in this review and provide actionable recommendations to strengthen and enforce safeguards. be it further resolved that the findings and recommendations of this review be presented to the City Council within 30 days for consideration and implementation as necessary and be it further resolved that this

Quincy City Council reaffirms its commitment to safeguarding public resources and ensuring ethical governance on behalf of all Quincy residents. This order is actually slightly updated, but is pretty much taken from order 2025-009 that was introduced by then president, council president Ian Cain on January 21st, 2025. The meeting minutes indicate that for the most part, there would be limited discussion until the legal matter has resolved. And since this legal matter has been resolved by the by the accused pleading guilty, it is time now to bring this forward for public review. I'd like to make a motion that we... consider moving it to finance and oversight?

So we need to make a motion first to approve the resolve and then we move it into... Okay. We could do it all in one, so make a motion.

Okay, motion to approve the resolve and move it to Finance and Oversight Committees, but I'd like to open it up for any discussion from my fellow Councilors. So we have a motion first, we have a second on the motion.

Second by Councilor Ryan and I think Councilor Ash wanted to speak.

Yes, thank you. Madam President, I recall, you know, discussing this when President Cain introduced it last year. I know that at that point Mr. Walker had some updates on internal policies and whatnot. And based on the last, I believe it's probably been a year since that was introduced, is this something that we'd be looking to discuss in the subcommittee or is this something that maybe Mr. Walker can update us on now and then we can do the subcommittee meeting as well or that's more a question for him but I know when we discussed this a year ago Mr. Walker had alluded to some internal changes and really asking if there's been an update with the department head change and I know some of the staffing at the Council on Aging as well.

Are you open to that? Certainly. Okay. Mr. Walker.

Yes, through you, Madam President. Two components to it, Councilor Ash and Councilor Riley. First, I think, as we said when the original resolution came up, last year that I'm more than happy to provide the council with as much information as we possibly can as a very bad situation as it was. actually quite proud of how the internal team handled it. Within hours, we had a forensic auditor in to meet, and everything was frozen, everything was done correctly. that forensic audit subject to the federal investigation. I now understand the timing, the case has been concluded with a plea, but based upon approval, if this resolution is approved, still need to check with legal who does need to ask

the U.S. Attorney's Office as to what level documents can be shared, discussions can be had. The case is concluded in one component, but there are open ends to it, an open end to it. As far as I have known, aware relative to the solicitor's office, and I think that's sentencing, so I don't know if the federal government considers the case, it's a question we have to ask them, whether the case is concluded, at sentencing or whether the case is concluded upon the guilty plea and whether or not they're comfortable with us having the discussion, releasing the forensic audit, and getting to some of the nuts and bolts that are included in the resolution. As we've discussed before, a lot of that work has been done. We're happy to discuss in the future. Specific to Councilor Ash's question, I think I would reserve obviously at the Council's behest, talking about that within the structure of the committee as part of an answer to the resolution, but can say that

specifically that cash handling policies have been augmented with additional oversight. There have been a number of other mechanisms that have been put in place since this incident took place. But again, happy to discuss that at the appropriate time within the committee.

So we have a motion and a second by Councilor Ryan. So is that all in favor? It's a roll call vote. So it's going to go into finance and oversight, correct?

Ash, DiBona, Hubley, Jacobs, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, President Mahoney. Yes. Nine members. Okay. Moving on to item number six. 2026057, a resolve requesting comprehensive report on city property transactions. Okay, and I'm gonna recognize Councilor McKee.

So I wrote this resolution because the council will soon be considering a substantial property purchase out of the Eastern Nazarene College campus, which lies in Ward 5. To assess the potential risks and benefits of that purchase, I believe we must understand the kinds of land deals the city has made in recent years and their effect on the city's finances. So this resolution requests a comprehensive list of all property transactions made since 2010, their purchase, sale, and lease prices, their funding sources, any revenues and costs generated, and any outstanding debts. This information is especially crucial because of the current state of the city's finances. Quincy carries more debt when adjusted for tax revenue than any of the 50 largest cities and towns in Massachusetts. while it has the least amount of free cash by that same metric. So I move that order 2026-057 requesting a comprehensive report on city property transactions

be approved and that the resulting report be discussed at a future joint meeting of the Finance and Oversight Committees.

So we have a motion. Do we have a second? Seconded by Councilor Riley. And then on the motion. Anybody on the motion? Ryan.

Sorry. That's OK. I approve. I approve. You don't have anything.

You're just waving to me. All right, so nobody on the motion. We're going to move to a roll call vote. Oh wait, did we do it correctly? We did it correctly, so I just want to make sure we did it correctly. Okay, we're going to move to the roll call vote.

Councilor Ash? Yes. Councilor DiBona?

Yes.

Hubley, Jacobs, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, President Mahoney. Yes. Nine members. All right, moving on to item number seven. 20-26-058, a gift of $3,250 from various donors to DARE.

Motion to approve, seconded by Councilor DiBona, seconded by Jacobs. And a letter of thanks. And all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, the ayes have it. and then we have communications and approval of previous minutes from March 16th. Motion approved by Councilor DiBona.

We don't have a second. Councilor Yuen. Madame President. I request that this be included in the meeting minutes to accurately reflect a material aspect of the discussion. and to protect the city's interests in the event of any future dispute regarding and disclosed chemicals in the turnout gear. I understand that in the Robert's rule, minutes are not intended to be a verbatim record, but however, they may include key points necessary for clarity. accountability, and the protection of the city. This request is limited to documenting a material exchange directly related to the city's liability considerations. That said, I make a motion to amend the minute by adding the following paragraph. This is adding to the March 23rd, okay? meeting minutes.

So based on the international, so this is a paragraph I want to, So by adding the following paragraph, based on the International Association of Firefighters guidance, Councilor Yuan requested disclosure of any flame retardants or chemical treatments used to replace PFAS. The Minican representative declined, citing intellectual property concerns. Councilor Yuan also requested a protective language in the purchase agreement, such as compensation if disclosed toxic chemicals are later identified. This request was also declined. Yuan further raised a concern that PFAS-free turnout gear may increase the risk of physical burns due to reduced oil repellency. the Minican representative did not address this concern.

So I want to amend by adding this paragraph in the meeting minute.

I would like to have a vote. That's for March 23rd. Yeah. Could you pass it? Yes. Could you email it to Ritu tomorrow? Can you email it to Jen tomorrow? What?

Can you email it to Jen?

Yeah, I will.

Okay.

So we have a motion on the floor and a second for March 16th and March 23rd. So we're going to have March 16th, we'll go through and Why don't we just vote on March 16th first. All those in favor for March 16th? Aye. Aye. Any opposed? And then moving on to March 23rd with the Friendly Amendment. Do we have a motion for that? motion by Councilor Yuen, seconded by Councilor Ryan. All those in favor with the friendly amendment? Any opposed? Okay. Two nays. Two nays? All right. Motion passes. Communications and reports from the Mayor and other city officials and city boards.

I do have a couple of requests. Utility, Ward 5, grant a location National Grid Gas at 1550 Hancock Street. I also have a couple of traffic requests. Board 3, Councilor Hubley, add handicapped parking. to 62 Hobart Street, Ward 6, Councilor Riley at Handicap Parking at 258 Newberry Ave. All these to be referred to Ordinance Committee for Advertising and Public Works Committee for Scheduling and Advertising.

Thank you very much. Moving on to unfinished business and proceeding meetings. So moving on, I don't see any for that, so moving on to reports of committees. We have oversight coming up first, so oversight.

Yep, so on April 6th, 6.30 p.m. to 6.56 p.m., the oversight committee met here in the Great Hall and we talked about 20-26-017 in order to approve the location of the lease for solar energy implementation at the Squanam Elementary School and it came out a committee of positive 9-0 vote.

Is that a motion to approve? Yep. Do we have a second? Councilor McKee. Is this a roll call vote? Roll call vote, please.

Councilor Ash. Yes. Councilor DiBona. Yes. Councilor Hubley. Jacobs, Councilor McKee, Councilor Riley, Councilor Ryan, Councilor Yuan, President Mahoney, nine members. So now we're moving on to ordinance for Councilor McKee.

Yes, so this was a traffic request to add a no left turn on Coddington Street in Ward 1 at the Car Wash driveway, a positive recommendation made by the ordinance committee. So motion to approve 2026-052.

Motion to approve, seconded by Councilor DiBona. On the motion, all those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Okay, the ayes have it. Do we have another one? Is that it, Councilor? That's it. Okay, so we're moving on to Public Works. It was a joint meeting, and I'm moving this over to Councilor Ash.

We had a joint meeting between the Ordinance Committee and the Public Works Committee earlier this evening at 645. had presentations and deliberations on two ordinances, the first being 2026-010, Ordinance Amending Chapter 270, Sewer and Water, adding Article 4, prohibited dischargers and enforcement. public, I'm sorry, positive recommendation as amended. And we can take a vote on that one.

Okay, so we have a positive recommendation as amended for which order was it?

For 2026-010. 010.

Do we have a second? Councilor Ryan? And we need a roll call vote.

Councilor Ash? Yes. Councilor DiBona? Yes. Hubley, Jacobs, McKee, Riley, Ryan, Yuan, Mahoney.

and similarly, we heard from Commissioner Grazioso as well as the Engineering Department and Granite City Partners on 2026-010, Ordinance Amending Chapter 300, Stormwater Management, Section 14D, enforcement, violations and penalties, positive recommendation from committee.

So motion made by?

Motion made, motion to approve.

Motion approved by Councilor Ash, seconded by Councilor Ryan. On the motion, seeing none, roll call vote.

Councilor Ash. Yes. Councilor DiBona. Yes. Councilor Hubley. Yes. Jacobs, Councilor Jacobs, Councilor McKee, Councilor Riley, Councilor Ryan, Councilor Yuan, President Mahoney, nine members.

Moving on to presentations, presentations, petitions, memorials, and remonstrances. DiBona.

Thank you, Madam President. It's been a few weeks since we were able to have a full meeting here, so it's a heavy heart that James, Jim Rendell, passed away on March 16th. He was down in Boca Raton. did some golfing a couple days before he actually passed away. But he was a true, proud 1966 graduate of Quincy High School. He was a standout in football, basketball, and track. He then on went to UMass Amherst on a football scholarship. He married his high school sweetheart, Linda. Together they loved to travel, dine, watch sports. If you've known him a long time, Jim was a recreation director at Quincy YMCA before owning a successful seafood business. You know, his true calling really was education. He was an unbelievable coach. during his decades-long career coaching girls and boys volleyball and basketball.

Jim traveled to tournaments nationwide and won multiple Division I state championships and guided many players to representative athletic college scholarships across the country. he was a fierce competitive coach. I mean, he made it clear that he just had to contribute, you know, He also, on the back end of his career, he was the athletic director for Quincy Public Schools. I got to know Jim over the years just in general watching him, but I was on the school committee He put forward the Mights Under the Lights, which is the young players at second, third grade level playing at halftime for Quincy High School and North Quincy High School. Jim was allowed that to happen back in 15 years ago, which was great. Most of his life, Jim and Linda retired in Plymouth and Delray Beach, Florida.

they've built great relationships, many passions and true to his family, many, many children, grandchildren. They just had a celebration of life at Granite Lakes on March 30th. Please keep your thoughts and prayers with the Rendell family. Very instrumental in the city of Quincy. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilor Jacobs.

I just want to recognize Paula Gordon from Housenack, Rock Island Road, long Housenack family, married to Marty Gordon, just a great guy. She was involved in Scouts. They still are involved in Scouts. Great family. Both their grandkids are Eagle Scouts. But she was... She was always around. She was there. She was quiet a lot. But she also worked in Quincy Public Schools for many years teaching ESL to students. I know she worked at Athenow because I was there. I'm assuming she kind of worked at other schools too. She was just a great lady and she passed away after a pretty tough battle of three years. So just hope that we can keep her in our thoughts.

Thank you.

Councilor DiBona?

Thank you, Madam President. It's been a while since we've done these meetings. So I also want to recognize, unfortunately, he passed away, Frank McLaughlin. Frank of Squanam passed away on March 11th. his battle with cancer. He was a great guy. I saw him around the community quite a bit. You know, he grew up, moved to Squanam, but he had long-lasting relationships over at the posts, the Nickerson posts. And he was very influential in the community. He had a lot of great, great relationships with people in the community and he'll be really, really missed. So I just wanted to recognize the McLaughlin family. Keep them in your thoughts and flares. Bye, Frank.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Okay.

Moving on to motions, orders, and resolutions. Seeing none, moving on to upcoming meetings. Riley.

Yes, I'd like to schedule a Finance Committee meeting for next Monday, April 13th. I'll work with the administration and Council President to establish the agenda before Thursday. Wednesday. What time are you thinking? There's no others. I mean, I'd like to do 6, 6.30. It is a body of the whole, but... 630. That's fine. 630 is better. It sounds like it might be the only thing we're doing, the only business we're conducting unless someone else calls it.

Does anybody else have any committee meetings that they'd like to have that night? Okay, so 6.30 it is. So 6.30 it is. Any other meetings that are going to be called? Okay, so moving on to adjournment. Our next council meeting is until April 27th, so motion to adjourn. Made by Councilor Ryan, seconded by Councilor DiBona. Thank you very much, everybody. Have a great night.

Thank you for watching!

Thank you for watching.