Watertown City Council (Tuesday June 23, 2026)

I'd like to call this meeting to order.

This is a meeting of the City Council on Tuesday, June 23rd. It is a hybrid meeting. The Zoom information as well as email and telephone numbers are available on the city website. And it is being broadcast and recorded by Watertown Cable Access. I'm going to ask the clerk to please call the roll.

Bees. Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris, Watertown, Councilor

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 ever. Thank you. The next item on the agenda is public forum. If there's any member of the public here or at home that wishes to speak, please raise your hand. Seeing none, I close the public forum and move on to the next item which is the examination of minutes. Can I get a motion on the minutes of June 9th?

Mr. President, I make a motion that we adopt the minutes of June 9th as written.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. the next item on the agenda is president's report and I'm going to just say that it's listed under President's report, but because 6A is a public hearing and vote on a proposed ordinance amending the city manager's salary, which is a public hearing and people are allowed to speak. I'm going to take this opportunity to allow people to speak on the contract as well. And give me one second to pull up what we are going to be discussing tonight. The thing is, it's slow. Sorry, technology. I'm very, I apologize here. Just briefly, I will touch on a couple of things while it's being pulled up.

This is an extension of a contract, thank you. this is an extension of a contract that George entered it, Mr. Manager, Mr. Proakis entered into with us in August of 2022. and we have had some discussions, we've had some negotiations back and forth and we are, the city council is proposing this evening to be voted on that the extension goes for an additional four years and there's a clause in the in this contract that states that if negotiations or an agreement isn't reached by the end of this contract in 2031, that they will be an automatic year added to the contract. Some of the

some of the other items that we're discussing here in the contract are some changes to annual cow allowances, changes to the way vacation leave is appropriated the way sick leave is appropriated. Some a slight $500 increase for long-term disability insurance, an increase in the deferred compensation to $15,000, There are some professional development clauses here. A lot of what we're doing is actually lining up with union contracts for dates and the way things are implemented so that we're consistent throughout the city. and I think we've had some discussions about it in executive session. We've had gone back and forth.

I've gone back and forth with the city manager and we've come to this agreement and because it's also part of what's on the next discussion, which is a public hearing. I will also open up, I will formally open up the public hearing. I will go over the compensation portion of this, which is effective on August 15th. of this year, the salary is a 2.5% increase consistent with union contracts and a 2% merit bonus. I'm going to explain a little bit with the merit bonus. or performance moments. 93% of the city employees are on steps, so they get a cost of living adjustment and they get steps. So the manager doesn't have steps, so we have chosen to call it a performance or merit bonus.

So it's still consistent with the salary increases that have been going to most of our employees. and this was all implemented after we chose to implement the class and comp study which brought up a number of the salaries to keep them competitive to keep employees here and so these increases are in very similar or mirror the percentage-wise. And typically what we do is we have to evaluate the manager every year per the charter, but typically we then do a salary increase. We've chosen this year to add one more year to be consistent with all of the union contracts under the city's purview so they all expire at the same time.

So we're telling the manager we're doing the same thing effective in 2020 for fiscal year 28, that the salary is a 2.5% increase as a COLA and a 2% performance or merit adjustment. and then all of the union contracts will end. We will continue to do an evaluation every year per the Charter and then after that we will consider the economics, we'll consider comparable salary of managers at that time, we'll consider you know a number of different things which gives us the opportunity to have the manager start negotiating contracts with the unions and we don't want to set an example that we're going to do something we don't know what is going to happen in the future. So that kind of wraps up where we are and what we're talking about this evening. I will save it until we close the public hearing.

So at this point, I'll open the public hearing for questions from the public first. Thank you, Vinnie. Hold on. if there are any questions. So I'll officially say we're opening the public hearing and I'm looking at Linda Scott, you are allowed to speak. Please, go ahead.

Just hearing this brief introduction, I have a question about whether these increases also happen for non- non-union employees. Is this a precedent we're setting with the city manager that we don't have with the non-union employees and also is there any way for us in the future we didn't now get the form that is used to evaluate the city manager because it would be nice to know what criteria are used and how people are seeing his performance. That would be a very good educational thing for the public. Thank you.

thank you for your comments and I'm going to respond by saying that we've been working with the personnel subcommittee to try to get a consistent document throughout the city for not only the city manager, but the city auditor, the city council clerk, the council analyst, and all the city employees and so the chair of personnel has been working with the HR department to try to get a consistent document. We will put that document out and we will have a discussion at a subcommittee meeting about what the document looks like and I will get some guidance from the city attorney on how we release it. We typically release the information that the council does on our employees as a composite because they are personnel matters that sometimes we can't speak about and I've been advised and I will

definitely confer with the attorney to see if we can do that and we certainly will do that if it's allowed and I will make sure that through the process. And this is gonna happen a little bit later in the year for the manager. We're just about finished with the three other council employees evaluations. but yes going forward we're going to have a consistent document that will be available and we'll see how much of it can be released as it is a personnel document. Are there any other comments or questions? So I would like to close the public hearing and do two things. First, I'd like to have a motion to approve and execute, allow me to execute the contract of the city managers contract extension, which includes a four-year extension with a trigger for a fifth year if the city council at the time doesn't take up a discussion about

extending a contract or terminating a contract.

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. Now the next is the ordinance amending the city manager's salary. The... City Manager, as I said, is a 4.5% increase total. Piccirilli, if you could read the numbers for me, sorry.

So the ordinance will be effective August 15th, 2026. The salary of the manager shall be set at $255,668. Effective July 1st, 2027, the salary of the manager shall be set at $267,173. Thank you.

So I'd like to get a motion amending, proposing that that is what we are doing for a salary.

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Discussion? I want to take this opportunity first to say we had, if you saw our executive session postings, we had I believe three meetings on the manager. We had significant discussion about it. I provided the city council with help from the manager and his staff about comparables within the city, meaning fire department, police department, school department, and other employees. And then we did outside comparables, and this is, I'm going to say, of the comparables that we looked at, this is about an average or a little above and my comments at this time would be that and I stated this in executive session and I feel that our manager is an above average manager, not an average manager.

I think we occasionally have differences of opinion, but those opinions can be worked out and in speaking with Mr. Bernie Lynch, who I spoke to on a couple of matters. We talked about the climate of cities and towns that look for town administrators or city managers and they're few and far between and they don't stay. and I am truly appreciative that we have Mr. Prowakis here basically running our city with policy guidance from the city council. And I think our city council does a very, very good job, an above average job of providing that policy guidance. And occasionally we do have people that don't agree with us. but we get elected and we try to make the best decisions and I think this is a prudent decision based on the fact that there's a lot going on. in city management and town management, and it's difficult to find people like this.

It's difficult to find people to replace it's a population that's getting older and a former councilor used to always complain about how there's no Gannon's succession plan to bring in younger people into these positions. So I'm in full support and I'm asking for a roll call, please.

Councillor Feltner. Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Sideris.

Yes, thank you. Mr. Manager, congratulations.

Thank you Mr. President and members of the Council for your continued confidence in the work that I do and that this amazing team I work with gets to do every day working for this Council and this community. I very much appreciate it, so thank you.

7A is a resolution establishing the fiscal year 2027 expenditure limits for revolving funds. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. I am going to ask the city auditor. to provide some background on revolving funds and expenditure limits to you for the council's action on this item. Thank you.

Thank you. As you're aware, the annual expenditure limits for the 53 and a half revolving funds must be reauthorized by the city council via resolution. Attached you will find the proposed resolution for fiscal year 27 and additionally for your information and review I've also attached a spreadsheet outlining four years of revenue and and expenditure activity for the 853 and a half revolving funds, as well as the proposed fiscal 27 expenditure limits for each of those revolving funds. Therefore, I respectfully request your approval of the proposed resolution establishing the fiscal year 27 expenditure limits on the eight revolving funds. Thank you.

can I get a motion to approve the expenditure limits for 2027 revolving funds? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Councilor Gannon.

Yes, I'm just curious, tell me a little bit about the Animal Control Revolving Fund. Where do the funds come from that source?

Oops, sorry, one second. So for the animal control, the revenues come in from fees and receipts from the animal control program.

Any other questions?

All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Resolution authorizing the fiscal year 2027 retiree health insurance and related expenditures from the other post-employment benefits trust fund. Madam Auditor.

Thank you. One of the requirements of Mass General Law, Chapter 32B, Section 20, is that the health insurance premiums for the city's retirees must be paid from the OPEB trust fund. and it must be authorized by a two-thirds vote of the City Council. So attached, I have included a proposed resolution for the City Council's consideration, which has been updated from the resolution that the City Council adopted for fiscal year 2026. to reflect the retiree health insurance line item under the insurance and employee benefits section of the fiscal year 27 budget in the amount of $5,400,000.

Can I get a motion to approve the fiscal year 27 expenditures from the other post-employment benefits trust fund?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Roll call on this one, please.

Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Feltner, Gannon, Sideris.

7C is a resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $12,400 from fiscal year 2026, City Council Reserve. to the fiscal year 2026 city auditor accounting and auditing account, audit level one review of the Watertown contributory retirement system and OPEB plan. I know I'll recognize the manager who will recognize Madam Auditor.

Yes, and I do want the auditor to share the details on this item. But as you know, Mr. President, when our Our numbers from our actuary shifted in the pension funds this year, requiring us to put a substantial amount of funding into the pension to keep us fully funded. One of the things the auditor and I came back to you and the council with was that we wanted to seek out some funding to essentially double check the actuarial numbers. there is a CBiz, the group that does our external auditing, gave us some options here and Auditor Langan can share the details about the proposal in front of you and the transfer that will allow us to move that forward. Thank you.

thank you. As the city manager just stated, at the direction of the city council, I requested a proposal from CBiz, their retirement investment services branch to perform an independent audit of both the Watertown Contributory Retirement System and the Watertown OPEB plan. The goal of that audit is to provide independent assurance to the city council that the results in our most recent annual evaluations are sound, accurate, and reasonable. Within the attached proposal, you will find that they gave us two options, the first being a review method and the second being a full replication method. Under the review method, CBIS RIS will evaluate Mr. Sherman's methods and assumptions for reasonableness, internal consistency, and compliance. They will verify his credentials and review the final valuation reports in detail, including verifying completeness and reasonableness of liabilities, assets, contributions, assumptions, and projections.

while ensuring all required disclosures and recommendations are appropriate for Watertown. The second method, the full replication method, would involve completely independent recalculations of the actuarial results using raw data Planned Provisions, and Assumptions to Compare Total Liabilities Against Mr. Sherman's Figures. I am respectfully recommending that we proceed with the review method as this will provide the City Council with an independent verification of our actuarial methods, assumptions, and report completeness at a cost-effective price point of $12,360. while delivering a fast turnaround without the significantly higher cost required by the full replication method. The review method will offer a prudent balance of rigorous professional oversight and Fiscal Responsibility. So as such, I'm respectfully requesting your approval of the attached transfer to cover the cost of the review method option.

Thank you. Can I get a motion on the transfer of $12,400? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Discussion. I do feel that in conversations that I had with the city manager and the city auditor that this is an important step just to make sure because... of the little blip that we had this year. I think it's important that we have another set of eyes taking a look at it. In the conversations that the three of us had, we didn't feel given some explanations that were given to us by Dan Sherman. We feel that the complete review wasn't necessary, but this more simpler for a lack of a better word review was an important piece. So I'm strongly supporting this. Any other comments? Roll call, please.

Bates, Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Sideris, Watertown, Councilor

7D is a resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $246,000 from various fiscal year 2026 police salary accounts to the fiscal year 2026 police vehicle replacement account. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. I think that this particular request is a valuable example of the circumstances where we're all pulling together to address our climate plan and the strategies surrounding that particular plan. If you look at Chief Hanrahan's memo to me that's attached to this request, Essentially, the police chief has pointed out that the police department being unique among city departments and that many of its vehicles idle continuously operating 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, even when stationary, they're keeping their engines running to power computers, radios, emergency equipment, and other critical systems. As a result, if you transfer a police vehicle to electric power, it actually provides the greatest potential environmental benefit in reduction in fuel consumption

of just about any vehicle type that we have in our fleet and our goal as you know is to transfer vehicles to electric as much as is possible in circumstances where they are possible so we address every vehicle purchase and see and determine if there's a circumstance where, unless there's a circumstance where it can't be transitioned to electric, our move is to transition it to electric. Police Chief's been working really hard towards doing this. and we've been working on electric vehicle chargers and strategies on terms of shifts and everything we possibly can do here. But at our current pace, it would take over a decade to fully transition the fleet into electric vehicles. It has been a tradition to take excess police salary funds at the end of the year. and request purchasing a single police vehicle. Typically, this becomes replacing a detective unmarked vehicle. But for this reason, this year, what we're actually requesting is for the purchase of three electric vehicles, which will transition the traffic division fleet to electric operation.

They operate during two of the three shifts, so they can then use that third shift to charge the vehicles. which makes a lot of sense and works very well for us. And as anyone who has spent time driving an electric vehicle knows, if you're pulling out from a stop to stop someone at a traffic stop, you can move pretty quickly with an electric vehicle because that Startup Speed is pretty impressive. So the request before us to transfer $246,000 to the Police Vehicle Replacement Fund to purchase three electric vehicles. Thank you, Mr. President.

Can I get a motion on the transfer of $246,000 from the various police salary accounts to the police vehicle replacement account? So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion? Councilor Bayes.

Yeah, I'm just curious. So we're buying three with $240. How much does each vehicle cost? And what exactly is it?

So I assure you, if I can do the quick math, this buys three vehicles. So it's, you know, it's... about $71,000 or so. That purchases the vehicle, it prepares it as a police vehicle, it includes all of the radios, computers, emergency equipment that has to be put into that vehicle. The vehicles that we're purchasing now as electric police vehicles were ground up designed to be police vehicles. For a while we were folks purchasing electric vehicles were taking a kind of standard vehicle and converting it for police use. But in order to meet the police pursuit standards, you really need to build this to an electric standard. I do believe if the number they're asking for is 246, then the total's gonna be about that 71, 72, that's a third of that.

Any other comments? Councilor Feltner.

Thank you. It's very encouraging and feels like a creative approach here in transitioning to EVs. It sounds great. I'm wondering how this potentially impacts The unmarked vehicle, are we in need of that, or is that not needing replaced, or are we reducing the number of unmarked vehicles? Just in general, the trade-off here.

I think in general the total number of marked and unmarked vehicles here is remaining the same. It's just we're choosing at this point rather than to replace an unmarked vehicle, we're replacing three marked vehicles this year with this request.

Thank you.

Any other comments? Roll call, please.

Bayes, Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Sideris.

seven years of resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $445,000 from the fiscal year 2026 planned debt and fiscal year authorized unissued debt accounts to the fiscal year 2026, transfer to capital projects, public buildings account, photovoltaic array installation for the DPW roof. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. Moving along with our end of year transfer requests, this is for the DPW solar array installation, which will save us on electricity costs over the long run. The Honorable City Council voted to approve a loan order towards this in September of 2025. There's also a climate leadership grant that covers a portion of this. The challenge with the PVRAs is that they are eligible for certain federal payments back towards local government. Those payments tend to take a substantial amount of time to arrive back to us. not wanting to run a negative account balance and then wait for a payment, what we would like to do is transfer another $445,000 from planned and authorized unissued debt that we didn't use this year to the capital projects public buildings line to cover the additional costs of the solar array.

with the expectation that there will probably be some type of federal rebate similar to the one we talked about with the high school that will come at some future point and then be available back to the general fund as revenue for future purposes. And that's the request. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. Can I get a motion to transfer the $445,000? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

I just have a quick question. So what is the total cost of the PVRA?

Do you know that?

Denise Maroney, Director of Public Buildings. So right now we're looking at about $1.2 million for the cost of the roof array as well as solar canopies in the parking lot of the DPW. Okay.

Any other questions? Roll call please.

Bays, Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Sideris.

7F is a resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $70,000 from the fiscal year 2026 authorized unissued debt account to the fiscal year 2026 transfer to capital projects city account for the senior bus. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. Our goal with the Senior Center, as I understand it, is to reach the point where we have two reliable, mid-sized transportation vehicles available for our senior bus drivers to get seniors where they can go, one of which has been covered by grants. The other one, there was a item conceptual recommendation number 24 on the last capital improvement plan about proceeding with $160,000 loan order in fiscal year 27 for the other shuttle bus. DPW has actually received a quote for this bus at $141,563, so a little below that. Senior Center has $73,935 available. So we're looking for a transfer at $70,000. And with that transfer from this year's authorized unissued debt, we would not need to proceed with a borrowing item in fiscal year 27.

looking for that transfer to provide a little flexibility going forward in getting this bus to us sooner rather than later. Thank you, Mr. President.

Can I get a motion of the transfer of $70,000? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

I just want to, is this going to be, like, is this an EV bus or what is it?

I am not sure the answer to that question at this very moment. Is it an EV bus is a very good question. Mr. President, if I may, I mean, it's the same bus, but was that bus an EV? It's not electric. I don't want to promise something I'm not 100% sure on. So Mr. President, I believe this bus is an EV, but I certainly can provide a written answer to the council in the next day or so with an absolute answer to that question. But we certainly are following our path that we go with an EV if it's available, and I am pretty sure it is, but I will confirm.

Councilor Feltner.

Oh, thank you. Personally, I don't believe it is an EV, but I'm just wondering is the cost generally what we were expecting? I support a second shuttle bus for seniors, and I'm glad to see that we're moving ahead, but I'm just curious if this is what we expected.

Mr. President, the cost of the bus was about $18,500 below the estimates that we had put in the capital plan.

Thank you.

Are there any other comments? Can I get a roll call please?

Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Sideris.

7G is a resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $373,000 from the fiscal year 2026 on authorized unissued debt account to the fiscal year 2026 Transfer to Capital Projects Public Buildings Account Parker Renovations. Mr. Manager.

Thank you Mr. President. So just some background on the complexity of the Parker Building. The Parker Building has been a particularly complex renovation project mainly because as we dig deeper and deeper into the building as our Director of Public Buildings noted in her memo to me here. The building continues to surprise us. and a couple months ago what I asked the public buildings team to do is to kind of rather than giving me one surprise after another to try to do our best we could to identify the single total of where our existing challenges are financially to ensure that we have one further request to the council to address whatever it is that we need to address in these particular circumstances. The request before you today is a request for a transfer of $373,000.

That's so that we don't have to do any further borrowing on this. It's a request from Authorized Unissued Debt to capital projects, public buildings. It's essentially covering two areas. One is an increased cost for the original project scope of $288,000. and the second is you may remember we authorized some borrowing to address some environmental issues in the building, particularly some some issues with providing better insulation. And it looks like there's about an $85,000 supplemental funding needed to cover that particular issue. During the power shutdown at Parker last month, We discovered that there was more area that needed demolition, hazmat testing, and abatement in order to make everything come together.

in that second part, by the way, is to insulate the underside of the roof, which will save substantial funds from the costs of heating and cooling the building, but also ensures that our fire suppression system is in a situation where it doesn't freeze. So as we found that area where we were installing the system by the roof was uninsulated. So that is the request for $373,000. I'm happy to answer additional questions about the Parker building and those details if that is helpful. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. Can I get a motion on the transfer of $373,000? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Councilor Feltner. Feltner.

Oh, thank you, Mr. President. I was just curious, is the $85,000, is that perhaps what we're targeting for the cost just on the hazmat testing and removal of pipes or... that is additional for, what part is insulation versus, do we have a breakdown? I was just curious what abatement might be costing.

Yeah, sure. It's Denise Maroney, Director of Public Buildings again. It is for hazmat demolition and removal. Above the ceiling there are Above the acoustic ceiling tiles, there's other ceilings that were left there by the prior owner. So we have to demo and some of those ceilings have asbestos in them and especially up on the third floor from roofing materials that have fallen onto that area. We need to make sure that we're removing it through an environmental firm. so that $85,000 is an estimate of additional now that we know what's up there and we've done some testing to confirm that we have to do asbestos abatement up there.

That's great. That makes sense. I'm curious what firm we're using. Do we always use the same one?

We do. Universal Environmental is the company that we use for testing. and then we do get three bids for all of our asbestos abatement if it's over $10,000 but we typically use New England Surface Maintenance who is on state contract.

Thank you. You're welcome.

Councilor Gannon. Yeah, thanks, Mr. President. So a question about who scoped out the project. So I limited involvement in construction law. You hire a project, you hire a person whose responsibility is to encompass, do all the renovations and due diligence, come up with an estimate. and do the fine digging to find these issues that obviously the hazardous waste and such. and $700,000 seems like an extra amount to pay, a lot. So I wondered if...

There's not a request for $700,000. $370,000, not $700,000.

Okay, so it says an additional 288 is needed.

Sorry, it's 288 plus 85 for a total of 373. on a total project that's running in the range of about $8 million when all the work at Parker is added up in total.

So, I mean, still there's a lot of extra things that were found in the course of the project. So whose responsibility

So I think it's more a question of the unknown conditions. You are not going to be able to know what's underneath a solid floor in a bathroom and how it was installed prior to us is unknown so just the bathrooms alone are a change order of over $320,000 for unknown conditions and plumbing that was not to code that we've had to change and do it the right way.

So there wasn't a pre-engineering survey to find out?

Well, I mean, we did have an architect that did the design plans, and they did go through the buildings, same with Code Red for fire sprinklers, but still there are things that you uncover as you're... demoing that you would not have been able to uncover unless you ripped up an entire floor during your discovery.

Thank you for the insight.

You're welcome. I just I just want to say to Councilor Gannon some of this work happened at the Lowell School as well. We took walls down and we found things we couldn't see. And there was areas in this building where there was thought to be enough insulation for the fire suppression system when in fact there wasn't. As you dug deeper there was things I toured the building with the manager and Chris Nixon and these are the types of things that happen when you're doing a renovation of a very old building. And Councilor Piccirilli was with me when we found this at the Lowell School, so I believe that Denise and the staff has done the best they could but a lot of unforeseen conditions and when that addition was built on that building I feel that the previous owner

took the cheap way out and did things and tried to hide things.

No, I'm well aware of unforeseen conditions. Certainly, I've dealt with playgrounds where a ledge was found where it's supposed to be the... the surveyor said or the engineer said it was clean land but in that case the town went after the bond of the engineer in that case for these extra Someone should have found them and put it into a bid package earlier.

Caused a little fake?

So total project is about $8 million, which kind of sounds pretty astounding to me, if I'm being honest. But what is the total cost over and?

So if I may, the $8 million number covers everything we've touched in Parker, and it's not in one individual contract because we've done a complete electrical upgrade, a complete fire system upgrade, the work renovating the entire second floor, some smaller upgrades that we did at an earlier point in time, the replacement of boiler unit five, I'm trying to remember if there are

You see all six rooftop units will be replaced as well in that $8 million number.

So that includes all the rooftop work. We purchased this building for 14 million. It is not particularly surprising that a 40-year-old building that we wanted to repurpose for our needs ended up having a lot of activity that needed to be done. I remind people that if we had built a ground up office building. It probably would have still cost us three times as much as where we are on this particular project. but we built a healthy contingency into this. We are over budget beyond the contingency by this $373,000. I don't like being over budget. The high school project at 220 million, we've been able to hold on budget. This one, we haven't been. but this building has just presented to us a lot more surprises than we've had before.

I'm not sure I answered the councilor's question the best I could but that includes a whole lot of steps in the building with a whole lot of contractors and at the end of the day where we've come up short is essentially the issues around surprises with hidden materials and surprises with hidden spaces that didn't have materials. That's kind of the best way I could describe it, right? It was like we found stuff under floors we didn't expect and we opened up spaces and found things weren't there that we had expected. I am... I'm perfectly happy to have a conversation with legal counsel about whether or not there is recovery from an architect or a contractor on any particular element related to this. I'm not sure there is, but we certainly can have the conversation. With that said, we still have to fill the gap and finish the project at this point in time. And if there's ever an opportunity for cost recovery, share more on that. Thank you.

So my understanding is the cost overreach is $373,000. Over the contingency, that is correct.

There was a 15% contingency in the beginning on a $5.2 million project.

but I guess you know looking forward like you know with every construction project especially when you're going over budget what you want to understand is like you know what you've learned from that you know because I'm pretty sure there's going to be more more of these projects being done around here. So like what can you tell us about what has been learned to make sure that looking forward in the next project we're not I'm not saying that you don't have a crystal ball to be able to do, but I just want to understand what went wrong and what we can learn from that.

I mean, my reaction at this point to where we are, we've done three elementary schools, the historic building gave us some surprises, the new construction buildings did not give us surprises. We've done New Construction High School. That was 10% over budget when we went to the last the last cost estimate that was kind of the post-COVID construction cost impact but once we got through that cost estimate we've been able to hold that price all the way through through construction, through bidding, through getting the contractor mobilized, through getting the building constructed right through today with us being 90 plus percent finished. and to the extent that there were challenges in the high school, they were owned by others, not by the city in terms of the costs of fixing those particular issues.

When it comes to this particular building, the one thing I can say is that this building is a boatload of surprises beyond what we've seen certainly with new construction. If there's a lesson to be learned, a 15% contingency is very robust on a building renovation project. I would only say that we don't seem to have these challenges on our parks projects. I would say in general if I went into another 90-year-old building to try to start to muck around with a significant amount of stuff. The only place I can think of we might do that right now is North Branch Library. Maybe we need a contingency a little bit more than 15%. but 15 was pretty healthy and this building just continued to surprise us.

And I agree with the manager. I think from what I've learned and talking with Megan too today, we would do a 20% contingency on a building like this that you're going to do a renovation of instead of being conservative and going with 15.

Yeah, I totally understand that. I'm just trying to like, you know, you know, I mean, given my own experience with construction at a much smaller scale, just trying to understand, for example, how many contractors did we look at? there's this contractual low ball or like, you know, what I, you know, I just want to

I mean, I don't know, the bids, this contractor's bid was not way below others from what I recall. The bids that came in were pretty well clustered around the same set of numbers which leads me to believe that we didn't get the guy who was playing games with us and trying to chase change orders. What we got, I think, is when we opened up things, there were just things there that were not anticipated in the plans. points where the architect made an assumption, maybe a reasonable assumption, maybe an unreasonable assumption that floors in different rooms that were being combined were at the same elevation and then when you pull it out you find that they're not. or bathroom floors didn't have all of the bricks from the old building thrown in as trash between the floor joists and you dig the floor up and suddenly you find a pile of junk in the middle of it that takes hours to clean out.

there was just one surprise after another in that building and like the public buildings director said, the solution is probably a higher contingency percentage when we're working with buildings of an older nature.

Attorney Rich.

Thank you, Mr. President. Just with respect to projects of this type, I think it's important to remember that public building construction under the relevant procurement statutes require a number of additional points. There's prevailing wage application. There's bonding. There's also subcontracting and sub-trades. We can't analogize it to small or even large private projects. We're subject, especially in Massachusetts, extensive litany of statutory requirements that make these projects by their nature more expensive. And then every time you find something that's outside of what was originally in the contract, there's growth.

Here we're talking about, I think this is what about 5% above, so we're hitting at about that 20%, which would have been a reasonable, in my experience, a reasonable contingency for a renovation of an existing building. Existing building renovation and I think the city council knew in buying this your you're buying something that has, as the manager talked about, lots of secrets and lots of surprises. And as they unfold, they have to be addressed and again addressed through a statutory process and when they unfold, unfortunately, they become more expensive after the fact than at the beginning. Whether there's any coverage under errors and omissions policy for the owner's project manager or the designer. Those are complex matters unto themselves that we could certainly discuss. But I think it's important just to remember that there are a lot of statutory hurdles that have to be overcome

every time you approach a project, especially when you're dealing with an older building where subsurface and latent conditions are simply not always visible and not always anticipated.

Gannon. Yes, thank you, Mr. President. So to wrap it up from my end, I would appreciate the consultation that a city manager consult with the city attorney with regard to whether there was any cost recovery. I'm sure the city attorney has seen a number, as have I, of contractors who will bid a project knowing that there are underlying issues so they can charge a different rate than the contract rate for change orders and that's where a lot of them make their money. I'm not saying anything happened here. but it's something we've had a great success and credit to everyone on the city involved in school projects and city projects but Things happen. I appreciate what got us here. We're going to have a wonderful building when this is all done, but I would just like to assurance that

that cost recovery will be reviewed, but that's it from my end.

Are there any other comments? Roll call, please.

Bayes, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris, Watertown, Councilor

Yes, thank you. Thank you. Thank you. 7H is a first reading on our proposed loan order that the sum of $750,000 is appropriated to pay costs of purchasing a fire engine for the fire department as more fully described in the city's fiscal year 27 through 31 capital improvement program. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. Conceptual recommendation 21A of the Capital Improvement Program identifies the need for a loan order of $1,250,000 for a fire engine to replace engine 3, which is a 2013 engine. The request before you combined with the request that follows is designed to lower the amount in that borrowing by using some additional funding that's available in the fire department salaries line, which I can explain at the next item. So the loan order item before you is intended to be for only $750,000. This item is a first reading, so we will cover a public hearing on this item. at our next meeting. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. 7i is a resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $500,000 from the fiscal year 2026 FIRE full-time salaries account to the fiscal year transfer to Capital Projects Fire Department account, Fire Engine. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. So in an effort to reduce the amount of borrowing we need to do for the fire engine discussed in item 21A in the capital improvement plan, we're requesting transfer of $500,000 of unspent salary. salary account items from this funds from this year to be moved to the capital account for the ability to be to fund that fire engine. Now, just to provide a detail on why there's $500,000 unspent in the salary account, the fire department, as you know, we have been working very hard to get a second ambulance up and running and hiring paramedics. We funded the cost of the entire paramedic team for the entire fiscal year. four power mix, four firefighters added to the department. We are just bringing those folks on board at this point. So with those folks funded now for the entire year,

there was extra funding in the salaries account to be able to do this and then it allows us to continue to move forward with the two ambulance plan going forward from here. Thank you, Mr. President. Fire chiefs here can certainly answer any questions if you have any further ones.

Can I get a motion on the transfer of $500,000 from the fiscal year 26 full-time salaries account as presented?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? I appreciate that you're thinking about less borrowing and I'm looking forward. The question I have is when is the expected delivery of a vehicle like this? You're here, you might as well do something, right?

Thank you. I have to ask you a question. I appreciate it. So they're expecting it to be delivered. We ordered this in October of 23. and because our vendor allows us to place the order early and lock in a price, which is very helpful. And the expected delivery is November of this fall.

Thank you. And do you have any idea how much we saved by locking in the price in 2023? I know there was a recent article about manufacturers are like kind of

Yeah, I don't have the exact number now, but I know, so we got it under a million for the truck alone. The additional money is to equip it, but they're well over a million dollars now for an engine.

Appreciate that.

Yep.

Roll call, please. Councilor Gannon, sorry.

Thank you. Well, this relates to a notice that KP Law, the city's firm, had sent to us about, or sent to communities about a big collusion lawsuit involving fire department vehicles. and among the very few vendors. And of course, you don't just buy a fire vehicle off the shelf. The suspension is built in one part of the one part of the country that breaks and all everything else and the components are eventually assembled. So what maybe I should talk to the city attorney about what assurance do we have that this purchase was not subject to that big collusion lawsuit that you guys are working with.

Attorney Rich.

Thank you, Mr. President. As the Councilor is alluding to, there's currently a national effort to address what is considered price fixing amongst the major developer, major contractors who supply fire engines, fire vehicles. We're also going to be looking at ambulances as well. The prices of these vehicles and the wait times have skyrocketed. it started during the COVID period and has advanced since then and a number of municipalities throughout the country and a number of them in Massachusetts in particular have signed on to this litigation challenging price fixing. I would certainly have a further discussion with the city manager because this is something that affects most of the vehicles that are going out these days. each municipality serves as an individual plaintiff in these cases. It's a multi-district litigation, not a class action, slight difference.

But it's something that I could certainly discuss further with the city manager because it affects a lot of vehicles, but we'd have to determine the applicability in this case.

Yeah, so if I may just add to that, the fire chief and I have reviewed that effort, considered that effort. I think that In this particular case, in this particular circumstance, we lock in the best price that's available to us with a dealer vendor that has a relationship and some State pricing situation in order. So we feel that relative to what options are available to us for getting the best price, the bigger question in that lawsuit is whether the whole of us as local governments throughout the country are being impacted by price fixing by the manufacturers. And I think that to the extent that there's a discussion about whether or not we should be participating in that.

It's something that certainly the fire chief and I have had a conversation about and maybe best for an executive session conversation if we have a conversation with the council about it.

To that end, Mr. President, having presented this, I think it is something that we don't want to go too far into discussion. We never discuss the active litigation. It's a tool to be discussed.

and just to add, the manager and I have been working on this and I've been talking with other fire chiefs in the area and also our dealer. knows a great deal about those two. We have a great relationship with the dealer we use. I would hate to get involved and harm that relationship. the conversation is continuing with the manager. Thank you.

So we are going to have executive sessions?

No, we're not saying that.

Not tonight?

No, we're not saying that we're going to do that right now. It's still in discussion if you listened.

Got it.

Okay. Any other comments? Roll call, please.

Councilor Feltner. Yes. Councilor Gannon. Yes. Councilor Gardner.

Yes. Yes.

Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Sideris.

First reading on a proposed order establishing water and sewer rates and charges for fiscal year 27. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. Before you is a pretty substantial sized packet here with the information about setting water and sewer rates for fiscal year 27. This item is a first reading. It will be up for a public hearing before the council at the July meeting. But since this large packet is here and going to remain here in front of you for the course of the next three weeks. And folks may ask you about it. The one thing I did want to share is that we are looking at a fiscal year 27 projection of an increase that eventually comes, you know, there's some systems of how it's set up that talks about increases in the four, four and a half percent sort of range. It's essentially increasing water and sewer rates at four and a half percent.

is where our recommendation is at this time based upon where the studies are going. the circumstance that becomes complicated to us, and this is a very perplexing challenge to have as a local government, is that our water and sewer usage has been decreasing even as we put the new meters in that are designed to capture and catch all of the mist water coming into our community, It appears that our conservation efforts may be quite successful in that we're using less and less water. As we do that, water and sewer rates are based upon a combination of variable costs, the per gallon number we pass along to the MWRA, and fixed costs, the cost to run our water department and manage our infrastructure and do our upgrades and do our capital work.

and essentially with usage trending the way usage is trending and with projects trending the way projects are trending, we end up in a situation where we can be at a 4.5% increase next year but if you look and dig deeper and deeper into this document what you will see is we have to get some pretty substantial increases in fiscal years 28, 29, 30, and 31 to keep these accounts from dropping deeply into a deficit. I don't think that those type of increases are an acceptable solution. I don't think dropping deep into a deficit is an acceptable solution. So I do think that while at the next meeting we'll do a public hearing and talk about a 4.5% increase in fiscal year 27. I think we also have to have some sort of

further discussion as a council or council committee about some of our capital costs on water and sewer and what to do to make sure those numbers don't start escaping a lot higher in the future years beyond fiscal year 27. So this is a first reading, Mr. President. I will leave it at that. But if you see the report, I look forward to further conversation with that in the near future. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you. 7K is a consideration and approval of exemptions of interest of existing city employees in contracts with the city, including summer, winter, holiday, and after school program employment positions. in response to disclosures filed with the city clerk. by prospective employees and certification by the recreation director, that no employee of that department is available to perform those services as part of their regular duties in accordance with General Law Chapter 268A, Section 20B. Mr. Manager.

Thank you Mr. President. As you know 268 requires us to get council approval when we have individuals who are working more than one job in the municipal government. Typically this is folks who are in other departments who are then turning around and working as recreation department staff. in this case I have a recreation department part-time employee who wants to work as a summer laborer also in the public works department and therefore needs a vote under this provision. Thank you Mr. President.

can I get a motion to approve the exemptions of interest of existing city employees?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. 7L is a resolution approving the acceptance and expenditure of gifts to the Watertown Food Pantry. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. In front of you is a request in accordance with Chapter 44, Section 53A. about expenditure of gifted funds. In this circumstance, we have funding for the food pantry totaling $31,967.38 from a variety fund. of different places, including $9,000 that came through donations to the Watertown Community Foundation. and a whole bunch of organizations and individuals. With thanks and appreciation for all of them, I request the council accept these donations for the food pantry. Thank you, Mr. President.

Can I get a motion on approving the acceptance and expenditure of the gifts to the Watertown Food Pantry? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. 7M is the first reading on a proposed noise ordinance. We heard our report from the Rules and Ordinance Committee last week. after many meetings this term and other terms we finally have something to present to the City Council and this is a first reading and it will be placed on the next agenda for a public hearing and vote. Palomba. Committee reports. In eight days, a Committee on Climate and Energy report regarding its meeting on March 23rd. Councilor Palomba.

Thank you. Thank you very much. I'm going to read portions of this, not the full committee report. I do want to just recommend that people do have the opportunity to read it. I think you'll find it very interesting, the members of the committee. members of Watertown Faces Climate Change, and particularly the members of the sustainability team did a wonderful job of going through each of our five planned elements of the larger plan. So if you do have a chance to look at it, I would suggest that that you do. So the committee convened on Monday, March 23rd of 2026 at 545 and Richard E. Mistrangelo Chamber, the meeting was also on Zoom. Present were myself as the Chair, Councilor Bays as Vice-Chair, Councilor Offei as the Secretary.

also present in the chamber was Councilor Piccirilli, Councilor Feltner, and Councilor Gardner. Staff present were Maya Aquino, Kenna, who's a sustainability planner, Silas Feiler, who is the assistant director of energy management. Kate Swan, who's our environmental planner and also our conservation agent, and Shul, who's our energy advocate. Residents attending the meeting included Deborah Peterson, Nancy Hammett, Anestra Kaczkiewicz, Susan Falkoff, Jolly Taggart, and David Atcherson. President Brian Heidbison was on Zoom. The purpose of the meeting was to review and discuss the energy and climate plan three-year metric report. The report is attached. I'm now going to move to the last page and just briefly read the summary of the meeting.

Watertown is trending toward most trackable goals. Real wins include solar growth. composting enrollment, stretch energy code adoption, and EV charging infrastructure. Several goals have already been exceeded, notably installed solar capacity and open space Per Capita. But this is largely the result of understated baselines. and methodology changes, not solely new progress. Targets in these areas must be revised upward before the five-year review. The specialized stretch code is an important policy tool but contains a fossil fuel pathway. It does not require all electric construction.

Progress claims on gas slash oil heated properties must reflect this nuance. The Assessor's Database is not being reliably updated and should not be used as a primary data source for heating system type until its accuracy is verified. Total Citywide Green Gas Gas Greenhouse gas emissions are not currently tracked. There was broad agreement that this must be added as a metric before the five-year review. Sustainability Commute Metric is trending in the wrong direction and the methodology including work from home as a sustainable mode requires reassessment. definitions of open space, quote unquote, green space, quote unquote, are not established

are not established in the plant, artificial turf fields need to be excluded from natural open space calculations. Approximately 30% of resident waste, multifamily and commercial with private haulers, is not captured in the current diversion and generation metrics. We have some next steps. The sustainability team will review suggestions from Watertown Faces Climate Change and the counselors. and incorporate revisions as appropriate in preparation for the five-year plan review. The five-year comprehensive review of the Climate and Energy Plan is anticipated for 2027. Lolo Schwab returns from parental leave in approximately three weeks and will lead that process.

Several data sources and baseline figures require revision before the five-year review, including at minimum solar capacity data, open space calculation methodology, and gas slash oil heated property definitions. A follow-up committee meeting may be needed to continue discussion on unresolved items. staff will work with WFCC directly to address open methodology questions including the home dash from dash work from home commute classification and Road Stress Data. Staff will consult with Transportation Planner Zeke Murmur on a timeline for updating the road stress analysis. Staff will follow up on accuracy of the assessor's database as a heating system data source.

Feasibility of tracking waste for the 30% of residents not on city contracted collection and also on historical solar capacity figures if PPS1 stated dates can be obtained. there were no requests for action by the City Council and I appreciate Councilor Offei's for preparation of the minutes. And again, I would recommend that if you have a second to take a look at both the full council minutes as well as the plan itself. Thank you.

Can I get a motion to accept the report?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Councilor Gardner.

Thank you, Mr. President. This is just a very minor correction, which is the sustainability planner's last name is Kania, K-A-N-I-A, not Kenna, K-E-N-N-A. So if that could be corrected before... I make a motion to make that correction before we vote on the minutes.

However you do it, yeah. Thank you. All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. Committee on Public Works report regarding this meeting on June 11th, Councilor Piccirilli.

Thank you, Mr. President. The committee met on June 11th, consisting of myself as chair, Councilor Feltner as the vice chair, Councilor Palomba as the secretary. The purpose was to do interviews for the stormwater committee and solid waste recycling committee. The appointment, so the first person we interviewed was Christopher Conner to the stormwater committee to fill the unexpired term of Lillian Muscala. Mr. Conner and his family have lived in Watertown since 2015. He has extensive experience as an environmental scientist and consultant. He has served in this capacity for the last 15 years. He decided to apply to serve on the stormwater committee after receiving an invitation to do so from the city. He believes he can contribute to the Stormwater Committee's mission because of his professional experience. In addition, he feels he can assist the committee's public education efforts, given his ability to translate technical information into language that residents will understand.

While he has not had direct experience working or volunteering with municipalities, he is very interested in learning about the scientific goals of the committee and helping to achieve those goals. He is also interested in the efforts of the committee's chair to revitalize the committee and increase its interaction with Watertown residents and believes he can make a valuable contribution to these important efforts. The next person we interviewed was Russ Arrico for reappointment to the Solid Waste and Recycling Committee. Mr. Arrico is proud of what the Solid Waste and Recycling Committee has done and continues to do. He feels above all that recycling has the most positive impact on our environment. He's particularly pleased with the swap shop program, which has taken place four times to date. He has participated in three of the programs. He believes it's a great opportunity

a great community event in addition to being a valuable recycling activity as residents are genuinely appreciative of being able to bring items to the swap shop and at the same time leave with something they need. He has great respect for Matt Bacon, our recycling and sustainability coordinator, who staffs the committee. He personally does not have specific suggestions on what new initiatives the committee might pursue. However, he believes it's important that whatever the committee agrees to do in the future they must create goals that can be reached for accomplishing specific goals is the key to the committee's future growth, collaboration, and effectiveness. the committee voted on both of those candidates to recommend the City Council appoint them and those both passed unanimously and the minutes were prepared by Council Palomba. Thank you very much.

Can I get a motion to accept the report?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. Can I get a motion to approve the appointment of Christopher Conner to the Stormwater Advisory Committee for a term to expire on July 15, 2027? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed? The ayes have it. Can I get a motion to approve the reappointment of Russell Rico to the Solid Waste and Recycling Committee for a term to expire May 15, 2029?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. 8C is a Committee on Human Services report regarding its meeting from June 15, Council of Palomba.

Thank you. The committee convened on Monday, June 15, 2026 at 5.30 in the City Council Chamber. Present were myself, the Chair, Council Bays, Vice Chair, and Councilor Ed Emery, Izzo, our Secretary. Also present were Council President Mark Sideris, Councilor Vinnie Piccirilli, Councilor Nicole Gardner, and Councilor John Gannon. City staff present include Gideon Schreiber, the Director of Planning and Zoning, and Will Downey, Senior Planner for Housing. Representatives from the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, the MAPC, included Adam Pultz, Emma Ludovic, and Evelyn St. Louis. Also present were Cliff Cook, our Chair of the Affordable Housing Trust, Barney Heath, Executive Director of Metro West Collaborative Development,

Jackie Van Leeuwen, Jamie Gordon, and Daniel Pritchard from Housing for All Watertown, and resident Dawn Slavin. Miss St. Louis, Mr. Pritchard, and Miss Slavin were present via Zoom. The purpose of the meeting was to receive a presentation and discuss the Watertown affordable housing incentives study prepared by MAPC. Please see the study attached. Mr. Downey explained that the study originated from the Watertown Square planning and zoning process. As part of that effort, the City adopted several affordable housing incentives with the understanding that a broader evaluation would be undertaken to examine additional strategies for encouraging both market rate developers and affordable housing developers to produce more affordable housing.

The study was intended to evaluate potential incentives, identify barriers to housing production, and provide recommendations for future policy consideration. MAPC staff presented the study's findings and recommendations. The study examined incentives that could encourage Market Rate developers to provide affordable housing beyond the requirements of Watertown's inclusionary zoning ordinance, as well as strategies to support the development of affordable housing projects. the study concluded that incentives that reduce development costs, increase predictability, and shorten permitting timelines are generally the most effective tools for improving project feasibility, and encouraging additional affordable housing production.

The presentation highlighted a number of recommendations for market rate development, including density bonuses, height and dimensional relief, reductions in parking requirements, expedited permitting, waiver of certain ground floor commercial requirements, and fee reductions. MAPC noted that many of these incentives can improve project feasibility by reducing construction costs or increasing the number of units that can be developed on a site. The study also emphasized that reducing uncertainty in the permitting process can provide significant value to developers and may encourage greater housing production.

The committee also received information regarding recommendations designed to support affordable housing developers, MAPC, explained that affordable housing projects face significant funding challenges because affordable rents generate less revenue than market rate developments. As a result, affordable housing projects often rely on multiple subsidy sources and face funding gaps. that can delay or prevent development. Recommendations included reducing land acquisition costs through the use of publicly owned land, reducing parking requirements, wavering commercial space requirements where appropriate, reducing fees, and exploring targeted financial assistance programs to support deep affordability.

excuse me, the presentation further discussed a potential quote buy down and quote program through which the city could provide financial assistance to support affordability levels below those currently required by inclusionary zoning. MAPC explained that deeper affordability generally requires substantial public investment because of the gap between affordable rents and market rate rents. The study emphasized that significant subsidies would be necessary to convert market rate units into affordable units or to deepen affordability levels within projects that already contain affordable housing. Committee members discussed the relationship between zoning reform and incentive-based approaches.

Questions were raised regarding whether broader streamlining of zoning and permitting processes could be more effective than project specific incentives. MAPC responded that the two approaches are not mutually exclusive. and that streamlining development review can itself function as an incentive by reducing project delays, carrying costs and uncertainty. The committee also discussed the importance of clear development standards and expectations so that applicants better understand what is required before entering the permitting process. Discussion also focused on practical implementation of the study's recommendations. It was noted that the recommendations are complex and may interact with one another in different ways.

Questions were raised regarding potential unintended consequences and the need to evaluate how various incentives would function within Watertown's existing zoning framework. It was emphasized that this study should serve as a beginning of a broader policy discussion involving the City Council, Administration, Watertown Affordable Housing Trust, City Housing Advocates, and Development Community. Public comment highlighted the continuing regional housing shortage and the challenges affordable housing developers face in competing for land and securing finance. Commentators expressed support for further explanation of the study's recommendations and emphasized the importance of identifying practical ways to increase affordable housing production in Watertown.

concerns are also raised regarding staff capacity and the resources that may be necessary to implement future housing initiatives. The study presented a number of potential policy options and provides a useful framework for future discussion. I emphasize the need to actualize the study's recommendation in a timely fashion and to further investigate issues identified in the study, such as parking requirements, and additional methods of increasing density, the elimination of permit fees and tax exempt options. I made the following motion. the Committee on Human Services recommends that the City Council direct the administration to further analyze the Watertown affordable housing incentives

study and develop options for implementing specific programs and policies based on the study's recommendations. Bayes seconded that motion and was passed three to zero. The meeting adjourned at 7.07 and the report was prepared by Councilor Emily Izzo, and my appreciation to the Councilor who turned these minutes around within two days. Thank you.

Can I get a motion to accept the report?

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it and I get a motion that the City Council request the administration to further analyze the Watertown affordable housing incentive study and develop options for implementing specific programs and policies based on the study's recommendations. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? You guys have it. Communications from the city manager in 9A is a request for confirmation of reappointments to the Watertown Affordable Housing Trust. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. Before you, our three reappointments to the Watertown Affordable Housing Trust. I want to note here that with the support of the Residence Advisory Committee, we're bringing back before you a reappointment of Cliff Cook, Helen Oliver, Zoe Weinrobe, I get the opportunity to serve on the trust with these individuals and the talent pool in the trust is quite amazing. Cliff Cook works in local government as a senior planning information manager. Helen Oliver manages a $1.5 billion portfolio of low-income housing tax credits, and Zoe Weinreb works for a nonprofit developer who's built over 530 units of affordable housing. There is a lot of talent on this board and I'm happy to have the three of them being willing to continue to serve with us for terms expiring June 30th of 2029. Thank you, Mr. President.

This goes to the Committee on Human Services. 9B is a request for confirmation of appointments to the Conservation Commission. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. We've had two members of the Conservation Commission that have recently had to leave us, and the Residence Advisory Committee has done interviews and recommended that I bring forth to you Ian Edwards Clancy, for a term expiring February 15, 2027, and Rachel Slater for a term expiring February 15, 2028. Mr. Clancy has a background in horticulture and an interest in... in a number of issues around data science, analysis, and science and soil science. and Miss Slater works for FEMA as an environmental protection specialist and is familiar with floodplain regulations. I think both of them have some great skills to add to the Conservation Commission and look forward to have you meet them and make those recommendations for you. Thank you, Mr. President.

This goes to the Committee on Parks and Rec. Mr. Manager.

Mr. President, as you know, June is Pride Month, supporting our LGBTQIA plus residents. I'm thrilled to be able to have the Watertown Pride event and parade on June 6, 2026. I just want to say thank you to the folks who put that together. The second half of our local celebrations on Pride Month is the Tipsy Tea Party that's hosted by the Commander's Mansion. This is a 21-plus ticketed event, but for folks who are interested, check out commandersmansion.com. That event is on Sunday, June 28th. 1130 a.m. to 2 p.m. and has been a very popular event in the community over recent years. We also have the farmer's market ongoing every Wednesday, 2.30 to 6.30 here at Salton Stall Park. followed by the summer concert series that's running 6.30 to 8 o'clock on Wednesday nights on our beautiful new stage that we're still waiting for the roof of, but the rest of the stage is there.

It's a great improvement even as it is, even as the construction project is still finishing up. So appreciate the chance to have folks join us for the summer concert series. On July 1st, Wednesday, we're doing a Watertown Pops patriotic light show and evening of fun. that includes DJ, food trucks, and a whole bunch of things beginning at 8.45 right after the concert series, that is right after the farmer's market, all right here. in Salt and Stall Park. So definitely encourage folks to join those events if they can. and I just wanted to note that being that we are celebrating our country's independence on July 3rd, Friday, City Hall, Parker Building, Senior Center Library, DPW are all closed in celebration of Independence Day. for that weekend. That is all I have today, Mr. President.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Requests for information. Any requests for information? Seeing none. Announcements? Any announcements? Councilor Gardner.

Thank you Mr. President. I just want to invite the community to join me in congratulating Eileen Ryan who will be awarded the Commonwealth Heroines Award tomorrow. at a ceremony in downtown Boston. She's been nominated by Senator Brownsburger for her outstanding contributions to our community.

Any other announcements? I have two. Beginning tomorrow, the council chamber will be getting some significant upgrades to ADA requirements, to LED lighting. The council office will also be included. So our meetings in July and August are going to be at the new conference room at the Parker Annex. are at the community room at the Parker Annex. So please be advised, and in speaking with the director of public buildings, we were talking about taking a tour, and if we don't have an executive session, will probably try to schedule a tour for an hour or an hour and a half before the meeting so people can see what we've done there and what's going on there. So that's an important note that our meetings in July and August. We'll get this up on the website. They will be at the Parker Annex and Attorney Rich. We're going to have to learn how to go there.

Yeah.

The last announcement I have is I want to take this opportunity to thank our first and so far only city council analyst for his service to our community. He's moving on from us and I want to congratulate him on becoming a town administrator in the town of Sheffield. I'm proud of that. We're proud of the efforts that he's put in for our city. it was a job that was added by the last charter review he was our first and he's done a fine job for us and he's done a lot of analyzing and all kinds of things for us. He's been the liaison to the Human Rights Commission and all I can say is on behalf of the City Council, Doug, we appreciate your efforts and

we wish you the best of luck in your future endeavors and we don't have any swag but I stopped by the recreation department and got you some swag so you can remember us by and on an occasion you can wear it when you go to work. Doug, thank you. Public Forum, any member of the public wish to be heard?

My name is David Cain. I've been living on Pleasant Street almost 40 years. When I was here a month ago, I talked about the inability of a parking garage behind CVS to have much effect on the city economy. because the population of this state is decreasing thanks to the policies, tax laws and other laws, other regulations that have been in place. It is a mistake for any city, any state to raise taxes and make it difficult for small businesses to grow into large businesses. without some consequences. People do vote with their feet.

A 2013 news story in the New York Times said that they combined state tax and federal tax for millionaires who live in California. was 51.9%. That's a good reason for many of them to move out. And during that decade, many of them did move out. as documented by the US Census Bureau. From 2010 to 2020, so many people moved out of California they had to give up one house, one seat in the US House of Representatives. People moved out of California, out of New York, out of Connecticut, out of Michigan, out of Illinois, and two so-called purple states. people just didn't want to live there anymore, a lot of people.

They moved to red states, Texas, Florida, and other states because they had a more welcoming community for business.

Your time is up. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any other member of the public wish to be heard? and I get a motion to adjourn.

So moved.

Is there a second? Second. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed?

The ayes have it.