Watertown City Council (Tuesday July 14, 2026)

City Council on July 14th. We are in a temporary location at the Parker Building Meeting Room 2E. This meeting is being broadcast and recorded by Watertown Cable Access. It is a Zoom meeting It's a hybrid where all the information, emails, telephone numbers are available on the city website. I'd like to please have the clerk call the roll.

Councilor Bays?

President.

Councilor Gardner?

Present.

Isow, Ofei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris.

Please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag, of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands

The next item is public forum. If any member of the public here or at home wishes to speak, please raise your hand. Walk right up to the podium where Brendan is standing. Oh, great. Under our council rules you're allowed

Hi, my name is Mary Canavan. I've lived in town for at least 13 years. So I think you were taking into advisement the noise ordinance for town? and I highly support that you eliminate the gas-powered whatever they are because they're not doing any good for the air, for the land, for wildlife, for people who live nearby or anybody at all. So yeah, they are useless nuisances and a lot of towns around have banned them already and it would be great if we did too. Also, I'd like to ask if somebody can tell me are we really preserving the wildlife here in... Do I have my two minutes up? No. About the wildlife around the river.

Tribal.

Yeah, I'd like to say that the wildlife around the river is worth protecting. And I know you're going to put in a water hopper. You can have a nice little boat here. The prices will go way up. Everybody will get rich and famous and happy. The wild animals who live on the river choose that place to live because it's the best place for them to live. It's an honor that they live here, and I know it's protected probably by the state but it runs through Watertown. And I hope you'll take very seriously the land, the water and the air that human beings and animals and birds and geese and ducks and swans all of them need to live. So that's why I'm here, so thank you very much.

We do have a public hearing on the noise ordinance if you want to make a comment again later

Thank you, Mr. President. My name is John Portz. I live at Robbins Road. I just have a brief statement. I'm here representing First Parish of Watertown. Earlier today, I sent an email to the council and the city manager that included a letter with initial comments from First Parish on the proposed Watertown Square demonstration project. I'm sure there will be many more discussions on this but we want to be proactive in engaging with the city in this important effort to revitalize Watertown Square. First Parish is the oldest congregation in Watertown, and as you know a direct abutter to two of the main structures in the project, the parking garage and the mixed-use residential development. In the letter we describe a number of concerns and some recommendations for consideration.

As this project moves forward, we hope to work with you and join the community dialogue that will help shape this project for the future development of Watertown. Thank you.

Thank you. Is there any other member of the public either here or on the dishes to speak? Seeing none, I close the public forum and move onto the next item on the agenda.

Council Minutes from June 23rd. Mr. President, I make a motion that we adopt the minutes of June 23 as written. Is there a second?

Second. Discussion?

Roll call please. Piccirilli, Bays, Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo.

I'm going to delay this because two state representatives will be here a little bit later. So when they come in, we will bring them on time. The next item is public hearings and the first one is 7A which is a public hearing in both for the informational presentation and the hazard mitigation plan. I'll recognize the city manager, and welcome the folks from the MAPC.

Sure, thank you. Happy to have the team from MAPC here to talk to you this evening. A hazard mitigation plan is something that we work very carefully to make sure we have set up here in Watertown it was time to set this up and do an update. There is a process of community input the MAPC team will be sharing tonight, the draft as it currently stands, and the process by which the community can provide input to the plan This draft will then be packed up and sent to the federal and state officials that do a review of it. probably be back in front of the council in the fall for a request for an approval vote. I do believe also our fire chief who serves as our emergency management director is also remote this evening, but available to answer questions in the event that you have any for him as well. So I'll turn it over. Yeah, probably stand at the podium introduce yourselves and share with the council where things are. Thank you Leeds.

Thank you Council President and members of the council for having us here tonight to present on this plan. My name is Martin Pillsbury, I'm Senior Environmental Advisor at the Metropolitan Area Planning Council which is your regional... Let my colleague introduce herself.

Thanks, Martin. Hi all I am Jennifer Wallach. I'm an emergency preparedness specialist at the agency. Happy to be here.

So Jennifer did the lion's share of putting this plan together and I helped to manage the process a little bit too. So we'll step through this kind of as quickly as we can because I know you have a lot on your agenda tonight, but I do want to give a brief overview of what this plan is for those who may not have heard of Hazard Mitigation Plans before. not exactly a household name that rolls off the tongue the way Master Plan, Open Space Plan might. This is a kind of plan that comes under a FEMA national program so you have towns and cities and counties across the entire country that are doing this very same kind of plan under the same guidelines. It was set up way back in the year 2000, that sounds like a long time ago now, under a new act at the time, the Disaster Mitigation Act which charged FEMA which setting up programs that not only respond to disasters after they happen, but think about what kind of planning can be done before a disaster happens to make communities more resilient and reduce the amount of damage those natural events cause.

The program is designed to have these plans being renewed every five years or so because all the conditions and the data around hazards, and the best practices in management tools have changed and evolved over time. So we want to always make sure a current plan for the community and I should say this is not one of those unfunded mandates. You don't have to have one of these plans, you're not going to get fined if you don't but there's an incentive to have the FEMA puts out there, if a community has an approved plan they're eligible for a very large program of grants that could fund on-the-ground projects for mitigation like drainage including generators, that sort of thing. So it makes having an approved plan a prerequisite for being able to apply for those kind of grants. So basically, I'll move on to the next part here and just talk about what is this kind of a plan all about. It's about natural hazards

and there's about every type of natural hazard that might be affecting this community depending on our geography in this area. You can see a list here, flooding is the most common one not only in Watertown but all surrounding areas, but we also get all of these other events you see here and they can cause damage with high wind events whether it's thunderstorms or hurricanes. Winter storms and blizzards were no stranger to that around here although this time of year we're not thinking about geologic hazards, earthquakes. Very low probability events not very likely to happen at a very high level but FEMA wants every kind of hazard to at least be considered in the plan and then wildfires, which is something we have seen more of with the droughts around here. That could just be brush fires in a more urban and suburban area not just the big wildfires we have out west. and extreme temperatures and drought. That is one that's very much on our mind as our state is now in a drought. I'm now actually going to turn this over to my colleague who's going to actually talk to you a little bit more about the particulars of what's in the plan for Watertown.

Thank you, Martin. So in terms of the process to create this plan we worked from folks from the emergency management team which is your fire chief, folks from public health department, community development and planning other members of the fire department, folks from the police department and from the public works department as well. So we had a really great robust group who would meet with us in our four meetings to answer any questions we have and help guide the plan and give it that local perspective so they were able to help with the project goals, provide the data and that local expertise that Martin and I wouldn't know from not working in Watertown every day. And then helping as well to finalize the mitigation actions that you all want to put forth for the years to come to work on. So just to go back a little bit about the planning process, you will see where we are. We are here where The Star is, the second public meeting so a few months back we had a first public meeting where we got some feedback

from folks, which was great that we worked into the plan. and now we are here to get any last kind of thoughts, questions, additions. Before as was said earlier by the city manager, we send that plan over to MEMA to give us their input so Mass Emergency Management Agency take any feedback they have and then we'll send it over to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, to get what they need before it comes back here for this. So just an example of some of the pieces that go in the plan. We focused on flooding, as Martin said. That's a big issue and a lot of places we see across the Commonwealth. So there was a couple areas that you can see highlighted here, that we touched upon and ensured were mentioned in the plan and then also mapped in the Plan as well so this lives there

and then for instance we also included a couple areas where there were brush fires that we were able to get information on from the fire department to include in the plan as well. So really the meat and potatoes of the plan are these mitigation measures. So what pieces do we want to bring forth? What are these priorities? What should the city really work on over the next five years until you need a new plan? So there's, of course flooding as we mentioned. There is a plethora of things you all can do there. There are some for winter hazard mitigation, brush fire as we said earthquake mitigation might sound a little strange because we know we don't see a lot of earthquakes here, but these are kind of those boxes that we also need to check for the federal review. So we need to make sure that we're covering all of our bases all of our potential hazards, even if they're a little less likely.

Of course there's some for extreme temperature as we've seen that become a greater hazard over the years and then of course drought, dam, wind mitigation. And we added some invasive information as well since that was something that came up as interest to the planning group as well as the public at the last meeting. I know that that was a very quick kind of rundown of what mitigation measures we decided to put forth. However, the whole plan can be downloaded. We have the link here. We've sent it to the city so we ask that folks Take a look at that plan. Let us know if you have any questions, thoughts, additions by July 31st. You can email us right at the email there and we will be sure to take those into account before we wrap up the plan and send it on its way. So thank you so much, happy to answer any questions as well.

Public Safety, Sub-Community several months ago. It's been quite a while and this was the next step and we appreciate it. We appreciate the feedback from staff and everybody that worked to put this together From what I've seen here, it looks like a good plan and we will be able to comment further up until the end of the month. Great. Thank you.

Can I ask a question?

No, I'm sorry. That's only for the City Council.

Ah, okay.

Okay. Thank you very much. Thank You.

Thank-you.

Now we'll go back to public hearings and 7a is a public hearing in vote. on a petition from NSTAR doing business as Eversource for a grant of location in Main Street North-westerly, hence northeasterly for manhole MH 11279 approximately 90 feet east of White's Ave to install approximately 92 feet of conduit. This work is to provide electrical service to a newly installed pedestrian actuated flashing crosswalk sign as part of the city's Project 2026-12 Main Street at White's Ave bus stop improvements.

Welcome. Thank you, good evening. It's just as you said, I'm here representing Eversource and we are seeking a grant location to install approximately 92 feet of conduit into Main Street. And that is to support the traffic control box at that area. Thank you

Thank you. This is a public hearing, if there's any member of the public here or at home that wishes to be heard please raise your hand.

Thank you, Mr. President. I did get one email from Roger and Martha Gallagher live on Main Street across from Solstice.

All is to public hearing and now open it up for a motion from the City Council.

Mr. President, I'll make a motion that we approve the petition for the granted location Gannon,

Yes, thank you. And a question for the utility and my question is whether the pedestrian activated flashing crosswalk sign would be a flashing yellow or that'd be a red green-yellow type of light?

That is up to the town, whoever's installing the light. We're just providing a power to it.

Got it. Any folks from town?

I'm sorry about that. That's a flashing yellow, right? So that is the same type of flashing yellow crosswalk actuated button that we have existing now over by City Hall in front of the library. You push the button. really bright yellow lights flash at the drivers warning them that someone is there and that allows you the ability to alert cars before crossing the street. It's basically the same

Wonderful, thank you so much.

Sure. Any other questions or comments?

Can I get a roll call please? Councilor Bays? Yes. Councilor Feltner? Yes Councilor Gannon?

Yes

Yes.

Councilor Izzo? Yes. Councillor Offei? Yes, Councilor Palomba? Yes Councilor Piccirilli? Yes President Sideris? Yes Thank you.

7B is a public hearing and vote. Our petition commands Star Electric doing business as ever to us are granted location in Chapman Street, easterly side approximately 80 feet south of Cary Avenue to relocate Utility Pole 199-20 to approximate the 8 feet north of its current location. The work is to accommodate a fully permanent driveway and provide new overhead wired electrical service for 128 Carey Avenue.

That is correct. We are seeking a grand location to relocate the pole that's currently there on Chapman Street, and it is to provide service to the remodeled home at 128 Cary Avenue.

Thank you. This is also a public hearing. If there's any member of the public wishes to be heard, please raise your hand. Seeing none, I close the public hearing and ask for a motion from the City Council.

Mr. President, I make a motion have we approved the petition for relocating the pole on Chapman Street? Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

Roll call please. Councillor Feltner? Yes. Councillor Gannon? Yes Councillor Gardner? Issa, Ofei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, and Sideris.

7C is a public hearing and vote on proposed loan order that the sum of $750,000 is appropriated to pay costs in purchasing a fire engine for the fire department as more fully described in the city's fiscal year 2027 to a 2031 capital improvement plan. Mr. Manager?

Thank you, Mr. President. As you are aware, The capital improvement plan calls for $1.25 million under recommendation 21A to purchase replacement for Engine 3, the 2013 engine The Auditor's Office identified $500,000 in transfers to be able to cover a portion of this. So the request is a loan order for $750,000 Our auditor is here to answer questions, our fire chief is available online to answer question and that is the situation as I have it. Thank you Mr. President.

Thank You This is also a public hearing if there's any member of the public wishes to be heard on this issue Please raise your hand. Seeing none, I close the public hearing and ask for a motion from City Council.

Mr. President, I make motion that we approve the loan order for $750,000 for the new fire engine. Is there a second?

Second.

Discussion?

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

Next is a public hearing and vote on proposed order establishing water and sewer rates in charges for fiscal year 2027. Mr. Manager.

Thank you Mr. President, we have come to the annual tradition of setting water and sewer rates so what we have before you the information I previewed a little bit last time in our first reading that the We've been doing some projections, and I have our team from Public Works and the consultants that work with them here who can provide some additional information. The administration's recommendation is that Watertown increase its water rates, sewer rates and service charges by 4.5% for fiscal year 27 that is pretty consistent with where our projections were for fiscal year 27. They were, I think at 4%, so we're at four and a half but I do have a concern that fiscal year 28 and beyond are starting to look at deficits in our long-term plan. And then we do need to take a very close look at our capital costs, and our water source strategy in fiscal year Request this evening, as always, is just to set the rates for 27.

But I want Council to be aware that there's some collaborative work we probably have to do keeping an eye on 28 and beyond. At this point, I'd like to turn it over to the Public Works team and their consultants who can share a little bit more information, and then we go through the public hearing can also answer questions. Thank you, Mr. President.

few Mr. President, members of the council Tom Brady director public works I think the manager summed it up quite effectively the rates for a four and half percent in 2027 as we were looking at them in working with our consultant team from Weston & Sampson. We have Mike DePalma, and we have Matt Abrams who worked on the numbers. And with me tonight I want to take a moment to introduce Sean Harrington who is our relatively new Assistant Director of Public Utilities. became apparent that there was a fairly good-sized divergence between where the revenue is going versus our costs, and that definitely caught our attention because it was markedly different from last year at this time. So in looking at the closer numbers, we asked Mr. De Palma from West End Samson and Matt Ebbington team to go back and take another look and they identified and the rest of the state.

not in line with what we had anticipated. So, what we'd like to do is set up a working group however the council deems appropriate and get that rolling very soon probably in August and really take a much closer look at where we're looking for expenditures versus revenues moving forward. It's an opportune time with our brand new assistant director on board and we can then be in a much better position moving forward to have an informed discussion with the council regarding the matter. Thank you.

This is a public hearing, so I'd like to open it up to the public for any questions or comments. Seeing none, I close the public hearing and ask for a motion from the City Council.

Mr. President, I make a motion that we approve the order establishing words to erase fiscal year 2027 at 4%.

took me a couple of years to get my head around the fact that if you use less water, you still pay more. And I think that's been a traditional problem for many residents. Traditionally, if you don't do as much then shouldn't pay as much. Can you give me a sense, maybe you would or wouldn't know

I'm hesitating because I don't want to speak on behalf of our friends at the NWRA. I think we will ask, there's a few factors in play here. Buying water and discharging our Flint to NWA is certainly a factor but also an important factor is our infrastructure. Those pipes and conveyance structures that are under the ground. We're digging up an awful lot of the city right now, replacing and doing upkeep for regular maintenance, and that has expense. And as with everything, our costs go up. But you're exactly... And those costs don't change. I always say it's kind of neat to live in the early part of the country. It's kind challenging to live Our infrastructure is very old, so we need to maintain it. And those costs you're exactly right continue to climb. Thank you.

Councilor Pichot? Thank you Mr. President. So several years ago five, seven, six or seven years ago were facing greater than and we came up with some recommendations including creating a fourth tier, which sort of mitigated the cost for the average homeowner in terms of water and sewer costs. And that gave us some relief for a number of years When COVID struck, we actually used ARPA funds for some capital funding for sewer projects. That also gave us three years of relief on the sewer rates but now here we are again and I think we need to look at not so much maybe the MWRA cost which is a fixed cost that was beyond our control,

the capital costs and sort of how we're doing some of those types of things. if we can come up with some recommendations to keep future year increases below this four and a half percent. Ideally, no more than 4%. Thank you.

Thank you. So if I understand what was in the memo, the modeling is just pure wrong math? They just used a wrong rate. Is that where this big mistake came from?

or ask our consultant Matt Abrams to step up and speak for that matter so it's accurate.

So the issue that's being mentioned was with last year's study, when we realized that the numbers were showing a little bit higher in this year's study than what we expected because of what was in last year's studies, we took a look at that. And in last years' study we realized there was one an incorrect rate was applied to the revenue numbers that we were projecting and therefore, the revenue number were overstated in last year's study. Not this years' study, it was fixed in this year's

Correct. So if I follow up, so literally just put the wrong number in? Just have the wrong information for the modeling? Then check the math of what our actual rates were versus study and the projections out.

There was an incorrect number used, but it was not that far off from what the actual number was. Yes?

It's not that off, but these deficits are large, much larger than we expected. we're just gonna trust that we all know the correct rates now and this won't happen again. It was like a blip or does this, does this happen often where different rates used based on false sense and projections? I'm just trying to understand. Is it just a straight math issue transcribed at the wrong rate, sounds like?

Yeah, there was a mistake made with Array last year. Yes.

OK. And my other question if I may is, I was wondering you all ideally who do you think would be part of this working group to get us on track? because I know one of the things with the tiers that we did overlook that we brought up before and we never did get the addresses of how this is affecting particularly the renters who, because of their single connection and being charged paying more than single two, three families. But I wonder if you could shed light on who do you think would be good not just on modeling and the rates but if there's anything else that we should be considering in terms of the tiers?

On our side of the house, I would anticipate it being my assistant director, Mr. Harrington, myself, probably John Zuccardi from the city side, the city auditor as well. so and I would probably foresee perhaps deputy city manager Emily Monet involved in that as well. So, and then whoever the council deems appropriate

Just to continue on Councilor Feltner's question, I'm just wondering if there are any financial remedy or accountability for the error.

I think, Councilor, the 4.5% is an adjustment for sure but a modest adjustment from what we projected before and our goal with this working group is to really take a deep dive into our expenses and how they tie directly back to the rates that are set moving forward, to make sure that they align properly. It's in very, very detailed at the same time. Almost forensic in nature to take a look.

I just want to note this error has not created a crisis in this fiscal year it creates a problem in the out years of the model that if we don't you know essentially what I'm saying is we ended up from four to four and a half percent this year we have to be over 8% next year. We still have a window of opportunity to fix the problem that was created by the error, and that window has closed smaller than it would've been if we had seen that projection last year but I think the key right now is to understanding the impact of that. There's a whole bunch of things that go into the circumstances surrounding how these work. Beyond just that, that error is the interesting challenge I don't want to discourage people from conserving water.

But one of the odd things about the water sewer rate structure is approximately big picture. Half of it is the variable cost that gets passed on to MWRA for every gallon we use and that's if you use a gallon, MWA charges us, we charge you. That's half of where this is coming from. The other half is a fixed cost that we're spreading across the usage over the year. Our usage, even with the new meters and much to our surprise has been going down a little bit and what that means is that fixed cost has to be handled on a lower usage of water. I think it's wonderful that people are conserving, and I want them to continue to do so. And I don't wanna discourage them by raising rates because they're conserving but at the same time we have to either slow our Structuring, New Enterprise Funds. That's what we need to dig deeper into and we still have a window of opportunity to do that before we hit crisis mode here.

Every time we talk about increasing costs, for me personally the kind of people that I think about is not everyone can afford it. So I'm just wondering if there are any potential discounts for low income and seniors?

and so on.

I think really the tiered structure is intended to address a piece of that and it's based as you use more water, the price you pay per unit goes up. So if your using less volume, your rate will stay a bit lower. It's intended to do that and we do have if people have concerns we do you have an appeal process and I have had those hearings they can do that as well

My last question is in regards to this comp table over here. And as I look at it, it looks like specifically and it's also the highest first-year rate of online comparison. Communities except Mine, Worst Trots.

Our turn to the team from Western and Samson, if they want to speak to that in terms of how that factors into what we're finding out there.

So the question is, why Watertown? Yeah.

We're like, you know, and if we look at a tier one,

State in the first tier? Yeah. Okay, so I can't really speak for Waltham. I don't know but I do want to mention that every community is different and what they invest You have a water budget, you have a sewer budget. It's based on the needs of this particular community their budget is based on their needs which might be completely different. You also don't know how they're investing in capital, maybe they don't invest in capital at all and your community does invest in capitol therefore those costs need to be recovered So I wouldn't necessarily say why can't we be like them. There's a bigger picture because you don't quite know what they're doing versus what you're doing, right? So there's that and then in terms of the tier rate itself I don't really have a good answer for that. At some point, the rate was set the way it was and then typically each year we look at what the rate increase should be, and then it's just increased by that rate. So it just happens to be what it is based on that process.

I will say those tiers we will look at. Those tiers we will look at as part of this review that we start in August and September.

and then Councilor Gautner.

Yeah, I mean, I just wanted to do a follow up question on what Councilor Feltner was talking about. We would have had an extra year knowing about this problem if the right thing's been and which is significant, more lead time. My question is are we making sure that something like this does not happen again? Do we know exactly how it happens? Are you going to ensure that this never happens again

Yes, Councilor, we are. This is one of the reasons for the working group to really drill down and take a close look and do everything we can to make sure that inadvertent Gardner. Mistakes like this aren't made for, but I would echo what the city manager said and that I'm very glad we caught it now and we have time to take a close look at it. Councilor Gardner?

Thank you, Mr. President. Yeah, I'm a little bit on the same line and it's really more with an observation which is I think this is the second time and so on. So I just want to note that, and it may make sense for the city administration some process by which we pressure test significant modeling that's being done by consultants on a regular basis. Perhaps that already happens, but if it doesn't I think that might be worth consideration so i'll just offer that idea thank you

Palomba. Thank you, I'm not sure this is the best place to do this because I don't know that the process for this committee working that City Manager Kariokas talked about. Do you think it might be helpful to have some residents on this committee?

I'm intending on sending this to Budget and Fiscal Oversight. I was going to announce that when everything was done, where it went the last time to come up with some problems. This is a very important issue that I think it's not going to involve.

It's just out of curiosity. Are we paying the full price for the fiscal year 2027 study?

Yes, sir. We have a contract that I might pay for this study

Any other comments? I'm going to close by saying what some of my colleagues have already said. and I say it every year, it's sad that we ask people to use less water but they pay more for the same water. It's sad and they use less The most phone calls that I get, and I think others will agree, when we do water and sewer rates and they go in Watertown News tomorrow morning, we start getting phone calls. And then when they get their first bill with the new rates, we get more phone calls We get more than we get with tax bills and so this is going to be on the agenda next week for referral to budget in fiscal oversight. And I also feel, and the manager and you and others have pointed out we need to be less aggressive with our capital improvements in order to give the residents some sense that, you know, we're not doing everything 100 miles an hour.

We're gonna slow down a little bit because that's the only way we're gonna be able to provide some relief. And 8% increases are unacceptable, so I think working with the budget and fiscal oversight team who does all of our capital improvement stuff. We're going to drill down very deeply and somehow find a way to mitigate this problem for a few years. So we have a motion in a second, roll call please.

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

Yes.

President Sideris? Yes, thank you.

I'm going to go back to the president's report and I'm Representative Owens, Steve Owens and Representative John Maughan who are here tonight to present the city at a very appropriate time in the 250th of the Declaration of Independence. Announce and thank both of our state representatives who last week got our home rule petition passed unanimously by the House of Representatives. it's already in the hands of the Senate and they're working diligently to get it done so before I open

both of them have been instrumental in getting this through the House, through all of the challenges that other cities and towns are facing. So we really appreciate it. I know you're not here for that tonight but I wanted to publicly- Well he stole our thunder

You have the floor. All right, well thank you so much Mr. President, members of the council. We are here today to present this copy of the Declaration of Independence and what's special about this, so this is a printing of a version of the Ezekiel Russell Declaration of Independence that would have gone to all well Now there's 351. Then there was much fewer, but it was printed by Ezekiel Russell in Salem and distributed to all the cities and towns in Massachusetts 250 years ago. it was printed, this particular version as a gift from Revolution 250 they printed them all on period appropriate printing press. They cranked out 351 of these on a period-appropriate printing press in the Haverhill Museum of Printing, I think is where it was printed. And this is...

It's printed on the same style paper, the linen paper. We would have sprung for a frame, but we want you to feel the indentations and feel the paper before the city decided what to do with it. and so we would like to present this to the city as every city in town in Massachusetts is getting presented with some version of this. the 250th anniversary of the Declaration.

Yeah, just as you know I also represent Waltham and Newton so this is my third one tonight. Steve did a very good job explaining this better than any other city. But yeah it's an honor to present this to the City Council Rep. Goberly from Arlington spearheaded this throughout the state, so every city and town has been presented with this. So it is a nice way to honor our history. and then back to the very important tax thing. It's in the hands of Senator Brownsberger, which we know he is gonna work out that it's a very big deal for the city. That's a unusual tax issue The State has not really dealt with before, but it's really a testament to the Council. who've done incredible work of working with our developers over the last 15, 20 years. We're seeing a really

incredible thing happened here in town where our commercial rates has gone above our residential. It's a very unusual thing at the State House because not many cities and towns have ever had this predicament, it's a good one and a lot of people are very jealous of it so it's a testament to this council, the previous councils who have invested in work to have responsible development towns. it's a great thing for the city to get this passed permanently and we've got a couple more steps that should happen pretty soon.

Thank you very much, thank you for the

We'll pass it around. You guys are here, and I feel like you should have the ability. I know there's some that are remote, and we want to make sure they feel jealous. Remote counselors? Yes, do it. All right.

our agenda, which is 7E, which a public hearing and vote on proposed noise ordinance. We had a very detailed report about this at our last meeting We have gotten a review from KP Law and I sent along a couple of amendments that I wanted to present this evening that were attached to the agenda. 95 and I will just quickly touch on them 9502i is we're adding publicly accessible any location whether publicly or privately owned that is physically open, accessible and inviting to the general public for gathering Recreation, Civic Engagement or Commercial Transactions without requiring individual prior permission check-in or payment for entry. And then further down we just in 9503C and C

We changed number one, we deleted Highway and Additive Way. And in 9504A, we added just a couple of words after all devices employed in construction and demolition, which are plainly audible at the property line. And we continued. And then the same thing in 9505A we added at a property line Those were the amendments that were made. I didn't feel that they were significant enough that they would have to go back to the subcommittee, and I want to really take this opportunity This subcommittee and previous subcommittees on rules and ordinances who have spent many, many meetings getting this to this point. And I really appreciate all the efforts. So at this point I will open it up to the public for comments or questions.

Seeing none, I close the public hearing and ask for a motion from the City Council to approve the noise ordinance as amended. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Discussion? Councilor Bates?

I was wondering if I could just make a friendly amendment.

Yes.

Under 9505, domestic and commercial maintenance I wanted all devices employed in domestic lawn, garden or grounds maintenance which are plainly audible will be permitted for use during the hours of 8 a.m to 8 p.m on Monday through Friday I just wanted to change the 7 AM to 8 AM. That's it.

Is there a second for that?

that those hours appear, there's a 7am also in B so are you only talking about A?

I'm only talking abut A. I actually considered amending that too but

I just wanted to make sure the council knew what we were specifically doing. I decided just to go for this.

Thank you. Discussion on the amendment? Councilor Butler.

Thank you. I'll just comment that we discussed quite a bit the hours and going back forth, including in conjunction with staff and feasibility of enforcement and there was concern about having later times for more peace, if you will. But we do want it to be enforceable and in the end made them the same time because for the public and for staff, police in general, and other communities, 7 is often kind of a start time. So that's why we landed with that just to give you give you that reference. We did discuss different hours because it's ideal, quiet if you will, but we were trying to be realistic in enforcement.

I was there for a lot of the conversations, so I understand why this was done. But I also feel like, and I've checked this with a lot of different residents that if residents just had in their pocket that it was 8 AM instead of 7 AM they would have something to talk to their neighbors and say, listen you're not allowed to have your lawn service come. The noise ordinance says 8 a.m. I just feel like I understand enforcement, but some of the enforcement is just being able to talk to your neighbors and say it's not allowed until 8 AM. And 7 AM is really early for a lot of people. By the way, I went and talked Yes, I would prefer 8 AM. But I've also talked to a number of people and they all wanted 8 AM It's very popular The 7am is really early for a lot of people. Even if they're awake, it's just really hard. A lot of them have open windows. We all live very close together.

It's really hard to have that noise 20, 30 minutes every one two three four mornings a week. Councilor Gardner?

Thank you, Mr. President. I had a hard time hearing Councilor Bay's remark. Is she asking that commercial landscapers are required to start no earlier than 8 a.m.? on weekdays. Is that the friendly amendment?

Yes.

Yeah, I would just say, I think Councilor Feltner may have said this but I'm going to reiterate this when we did discuss this one of the concerns raised by the public health director is that with the kind of weather we're having, that will be having into foreseeable future and probably increasingly so. The folks who do this work for their work that, you know it's brutally hot for them. And then the early hour is important from a public health perspective for those people so I understand because I'm woken up every Monday at 7am by somebody across school street and I'm on Windsor So I'm very empathetic to what you're saying and to what folks have said to you, Councilor Bays. But I personally would not support that for the public health reason that was described by the Public Health Director.

Are there any other comments on the amendment?

Thank you, Ms. Feltner. So we're talking about 95.05 A for domestic. This seems like a minor change. but it actually is a major change because in the business world, everybody works pretty much from 7 to 3.30 and all of that's just sort of normal hours and I think if we want to make a change like that. And for those who remember, the first referral to update the noise ordinance eight years ago was really to make that one change. And it turned into a 5 and 1 half year journey, which ultimately failed. But I just think

if this council wants to do that, that needs to be a bigger broader discussion and I think lots of interested parties comfortable with just changing it sort of on the fly without any advance notice to all the local businesses who are doing commercial plants gate use. So I really would encourage people to consider the major impact that this would have if we were to go down this road. Gannon.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. So I agree with my colleagues that we spent literally two and a half to three years on this whole process, and to add a last minute change like that. And not seek public input for those really affected which would be the the landscapers themselves, a number of whom reside in Watertown. I think the 11th hour is the wrong time to make such a large change like that and to Council Gardner's perspective and reiterating what the Director of Public Health did inform us that the climate change and the hot weather make this a difficult time to change from one hour to a later hour. But I really do think regarding the larger process, this is too late of an issue we've had three years almost to discuss these issues and that is a major last moment change. Thank you.

Feltner.

Thank you, Mr. President. I'll just remind us quickly too we are going to have further discussion when it comes to lawn maintenance equipment on gas electric partly because of noise concerns as well as environmental so This isn't necessarily the end of discussion when it comes to this particular topic of noise equipment.

Councilor Mayes?

I just wanted to say, I knew this was my desperate attempt to make my house livable again along with some other people who've also come to me and complained about it. I will say I never see anybody any professionals out at at 6, 7, 8 PM. And so where I do see them out and it doesn't matter that they can start at 7 AM, they are still up there at 12, 1, 2 during the heat of the day. So I don't see that 7 AM yesers and then could come later. Anyway, I'm just saying that I don't think it's a huge one hour extra of sleep for people. I don' feel is as huge as people are saying.

Councilor Ortega?

Yeah, I also wanted to echo what Councilor Piccirilli was saying because taking that extra hour away from them is probably has some significant economic impact.

So I have a motion and a second on this amendment. Can I get a roll call, please?

Councilor Izzo? No. Councilor Offei? No Councilor Palomba? No Gannon.

No.

Councillor Gardner?

No.

Kristen Sideris? No, the motion fails.

Are there any other comments? I have a question on 9505B, we go into commercial lawn garden and ground maintenance. The manager and I and the planning director were at a The celebration at the Mount Auburn Cemetery, recently they got an award for being the first all-green cemetery in the country. the reason they got that award because everything they use for lawn equipment is battery powered or electric, or rechargeable. And I'm wondering does this prohibit them from cutting the grass at 7 o'clock on a Saturday morning instead of 8? Because it's just plainly audible and I'm just

that noise would be plainly audible, which is any sound that is detectable and distinguishable from ambient or background noise in a specified location such as the sounds The sound source or character can be reasonably identified under reasonable conditions. A determination of plainly audible shall be made by direct observation. So the issue is whether an electric Implement would have noise that has a sort Standard, it would be within that.

The reason I ask is to use Mount Auburn as an example because we also have the country club and most of these people's staff, again if I'll use the cemetery they start at 7 a.m. And now on Saturday if they had to do that they couldn't do it but they did take the step of going all electric and that's our goal here and I'm wondering if there's incentive to say that if you're using battery operated, you can still do it at seven o'clock on Saturday morning. I don't know if the council would talk about that, but I think that's a little bit of a way to move them in that direction.

Councilor Piccirilli? I believe the way this is written... for example, Mount Auburn Cemetery is somewhere in the order of 70 or 80 acres. And if they're in the property and nobody could hear it from us. it was

I think that's the plain language of the ordinance.

If I may, Mr. President, that is the intent that we're not talking about and maybe it should also be added in the amendments that were made earlier, in 9505A the council is considering the amendment with at the property line. That was not carried over to be probably by oversight, so I would suggest that might be a name to consider. but the intent of that and the intent our original economy, look at the definition measured from a particular location. So the concern we had originally to address the council's point was, Were you measuring it when you were right next to where they were? So, you could be 100 feet into their property and measuring it or were you measuring in where the public would note it from the property line. hence that recommendation.

So there was a clearly defined location as intended in the definition, and that would allow a situation where especially with a battery powered or low noise could no longer be clearly audible or plainly audible. So I think that's where the intent of that change and the intent to that provision is to avoid a situation where someone could be doing something way out their own property simply clipping shrubs and that would not be auditable to the public standing of the property line.

Okay, so we should also change B to have

I think that could be understood because we already have the ordinance as amended and this would be included in that package of similar amendments. Councilor Gannon?

Yeah, thank you, Mr. President. I just didn't hear the proposed suggestion you had made.

Again, 9905-B like in A where we added at the property line. After audible, we're doing the same thing in B after audible at the Gannon.

Yes, and before we vote I wanted to thank the efforts of Doug Newton, for his yeoman efforts over the last two years I've been involved with this project. His real-time research and continued updating was very invaluable to the process I also want to thank Director of Health Abby Myers for her consistent and top-notch work in getting this, in helping us get through the committee. Thank you.

Any noise that is judged by a listener, I kind of feel a little uncomfortable with that. specifically you know with something that hums or buys like we have heat pumps and those heat pumps can be considered, you know, can be jacked by a lesson to me. and especially I think given the city's push to electrification, I think something like that could hinder

I think tonal noise, that's a term of art. And when you look further into the prohibition language within the ordinance in section 95.03 specifically when it's total noise as defined, as we just discussed above has admitted the creation or production of noise measured at five decibels above ambient noise in any of the following locations shall be deemed a violation. So it's not just that the definition of the type of noise but the mere fact that it hums, it has to breach that standard before it's deemed a violation.

it would be measured by, the city personnel who enforced this ordinance would have to come and measure it at the locations. What is a specific metric? Is there like a number that... Well, it's basically five decibels above ambient noise level. and so there's a determination of the ambient noise level basically, and that's the sound level associated with a given environment being composite and then it goes on to talk about sounds. So you would determine a background level, and then you'd determine above that background level the five decimals above that. So there are specific standards You have a background, and then you have noise above the background. Does that noise that exceeds the background exceed the limit which

I also recognize the manager for a second, please.

Operationally our health department often has to figure out how to establish backgrounds if you have If the person who's being accused of the violation is cooperative in the process, you can often ask them to turn off whatever's making the noise. Read it with a noise meter, turn it back on Read it again, look at that difference and determine if that five decibels is right there being caused by that item. Otherwise, it'd be a little more creative to go further away from that item, build the background, come back, build a difference and sort of understand it but the key you're looking for that decibel difference. And that is what the health department's gotten pretty good at figuring out how to do. This will specify specifics of how it works and sort

that judged by a listener were kind of creating you know potential conflict between neighbors and I'm not so sure like judged by a studio official, not necessarily by any listener.

If I may, Mr. President, the intent of that is the city officials will not or the city staff would not necessarily know all the noise throughout the city The listener is someone who brings the complaint Bay, it's Councilor Bay is complaining about her neighbor making too much noise. And then that comes to the city official to adjudge whether The intent is then to be able to judge whether that listener's complaint was correct. This is true in almost every ordinance in every regulation, there's the ability for someone to bring a complaint and then it has to be judged. So the listener is not the judge. The listener is essentially the person bringing the complaint. And I certainly understand it creates that situation where Bates is complaining about her own neighbors, to use a poor example.

but again, someone has to actually bring the complaint because I think as a city manager would indicate we can't have an army of staff throughout the city, listening to noises throughout. We depend for many, enforcement actions, many regulations, a Board of Health regulation, zoning regulations on observations that come back to us by residents who observe things that city personnel may not be able to see or hear. I understand the concern, but it's kind of the nature of the regulatory process that someone has to bring the complaint.

There are no further comments? Can I get a roll call please? As amended.

The noise ordinance as amended. Thank you, sir. Councillor Izzo?

Yes.

Councillor Offei? Yes Councillor Palomba? Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Sideris, Watertown, Councilor

Item number 8 is Motions, Orders and Resolutions. And 8a is a clerical correction to the Administrative Code Licensing Board Appointment Date. Mr. Manning?

the provisions of the Charter, the First Amendment to the Administrative Code since the administrative code passed which involves adding the numeral five after the number one resetting the License Board 15th. I truly believe this was a clerical error and I'm requesting the council approve this change so we can change that back from February 1st to February 15th thank you Mr. President

approved the corrective change to the administrative code. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Roll call, please.

Councilor Offei. Yes. Bates, Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Sideris.

in the amount of $360,000 for various fiscal year 2026 departmental expenditure accounts. This is a Fiscal Year 2026 PESCO Capital Project Stabilization Fund. I don't want it.

Thank you, Mr. President. As you are aware the city utilizes the ESCO stabilization fund to pay the debt service on the energy efficiency projects incurred under the ESCo agreement As such, annually we perform a sweep of surplus electricity and gas funds to the ESCO Stabilization Fund each year end. So this year we are requesting approval of a transfer in the amount of $360,000.

Thank you. Can I get a motion to approve the transfer as presented? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? You tell us how much longer .

So there are two different ESCO debt service payments. The first one, we still currently owe $2.7 million on it and we have payments that will go through fiscal year 33 The second, we owe $281,700 and that last payment will be made in fiscal year 29. Thank you.

Are there any other questions?

We'll call peace.

Councilor Palomba. Yes. Gardner.

Yes.

Councilor Izzo?

Yes.

Councillor Offei? Yes, President Sideris? Yes thank you.

She is a resolution authorizing transfer of funds in the amount from the fiscal year 2026 City Health Insurance and Fiscal Year 2026 School Health Insurance accounts to the fiscal-year 2026 Transfer to OPEB Trust Fund. Madam Auditor.

Thank you, Mr. President. So the OPEB trust fund was established to enable the city to achieve long-term financial stability and to meet the city's obligations to its employees and retirees. While the city is on target to fully fund OPEC by fiscal year 31, We're committed to continuing to look for opportunities to make transfers to this fund in an effort to achieve a fully funded status. As such, similar to what we have done in the previous few fiscal years, we're requesting a transfer from various insurance and employee benefits accounts to the OPEB Trust Fund this year for Fiscal 26 in the amount of $850,000.

Thank you. Can I get a motion on the transfer as presented? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Council Palomba.

Thank you, just a quick one. I know our health insurance went up Gannon.

Yes, thank you, Mr. President. So my question concerns whether this infusion of a significant number of funds will perhaps get us to a point earlier than fiscal year 2031 to pay off our OPEB debt. Just a question.

Yes, ideally by doing transfers such as this and what we've been doing the past few fiscal years is with the goal to get ahead of the Fiscal 31 but we are still on track to meet Fiscal for other debt service payments or the pension.

Very good, thank you.

Any other questions?

Roll call please. Councilor Piccirilli Yes Councilor Bayes Yes Council Feltner Yes Council Gannon Yes Council Gardner

Yes.

Councilor Izzo? Yes. Councillor Offei? Yes Councillor Palomba? Yes President Sideris?

Yes, thank you The next item is 8D which is a resolution authorizing the transfer of funds in the amount of $18,800 from the fiscal year 2026 manager salary adjustment account to various fiscal year, 2026 personnel accounts. Mr. Manager?

Thank you, Mr. President. We have very, very rare instances where one of two things happens around vacation leave. One of them is that we have an individual who can't who accrued more vacation than they can carry over and we make a determination to make a payment out for that vacation time rather than letting them fully actually carry over. This usually occurs We try to be very limited with this because our rules generally say that our expectation is that we don't carry over more than five days at the end of December. And I tried to impart upon everybody the importance using their vacation leave and getting down that number. Every now and then, I have a person who through whether there's circumstances in that given year or particularly extenuating situations, they can't do that. They ask for a vacation buyout at the end of the year. We had two instances this year where that occurred where the department actually didn't

was fully staffed the entire year. Oftentimes when we do that, it's often because also there is a vacancy somewhere so it covers it. We had two instances where it was fully-staffed so we need to make transfers small transfers in order to balance out the accounts for the end of the year. I have a third incident where I had an individual who parted ways with the city at the end fiscal year, were required to pay off their vacation at that point and left a deficit in that department's vacation account so I'm looking to rectify those three deficits with this particular transfer. Happy to answer any questions, thank you Mr. President.

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

to the amount of $1,250,200 for various fiscal year 2026 departmental personnel accounts and various fiscal-year 2026 capital improvement accounts. Mr. Manager?

Thank you, Mr. President. So here we reach an opportunity where we have a number of the where we can put them towards addressing certain things in the capital improvement plan, thereby lowering our need to borrow in the following year and making some steady progress. What is proposed here are a couple of different things. $250,000 for the ADA upgrades per the KMA audit which was recommendation 18D on the capital improvement plan would be covered with a transfer instead of borrowing 170,200 for the police department's mobile data terminal unit replacement recommendation number 22. will be covered by a transfer instead of borrowing. And $70,000 for DPW garage MAU replacement design recommendation 23C being done without the need for borrowings. We're also proposing contingent funding

was remaining in the salaries account on apartment and public buildings, putting $60,000 to the purchase of an additional electric van to support the team. They recently had staff that was housed under the school department that shifted over from our Trades Group, and we could use the additional fleet vehicle. This would be to purchase and wrap another one of the white electric vans like we have here. The remaining $700,000 is allocated to the rink flooring replacement project. This is one where we just missed the number on the estimate that we have in the capital plan. Council approved 1.25 at the close of fiscal year 25 The preliminary design contracts are estimating the total cost of this project is actually $1.885, so that's $700,000 that's additionally needed to pursue this project. Our preliminary estimates weren't there now that we have design work in order, we're coming up with a more realistic number.

Utilizing these monies helps us to remain in that 7 1⁄2% to 8% of operating budget to maintain infrastructure. Both the auditor and I are happy to answer any questions about this particular item. Thank you Mr. President.

Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion? Councilor Feltner.

Thank you, Mr. President. I have a question on the DPW garage MAU replacement design. Am I correct that's not the actual overhead doors but it's HVAC system that pulls in fresh air needed. Thank you.

Yeah, thank you Mr. President. Just a quick question about the expenses that the funds in FY26 would be utilized for and these would be FY27 expenditures or are these encumbrances from FY26 for contracted services, or do we have agreements in place for the various purposes for which we want to utilize the FY26 funds.

I have the auditor answer that question, thank you. Thank you. We don't have any agreements in place for these projects yet. These would be projects that we'd be moving forward with earlier than what was projected in the CIP, so all of these items with the exception of the vehicle for public buildings and the additional funding for the rink flooring which is still only in the design phase were in the CIP listed for fiscal year 27.

but maybe direct a question to the city attorney as to whether we can encumber FY26 funds to pay for future year expenditures that haven't been contractually obligated.

were not encumbering them right now. We would be transferring them to capital project funds, but they would just be available balances within those funds because it's not with an operating budget.

I'm going to ask the attorney if I have this right, and auditor has this right. But my understanding is by transferring this into a transfer-to-capital projects account rather than an annual expenditures were pulling it out of that annual budget expense process where we have to encumber and spend in the same year, and placing it into a capital account that is intended to be used the carryover beyond the fiscal years. That's my understanding of strategy here. And I believe that you'll be coming forward with specific appropriations and projects.

Yes, for the specific projects.

But we... And can I ask? I'm sorry. Question whether this is a capital account that can be carried over from year to year?

Yes, it would be a multi-year capital account.

Okay. All right. Thank you.

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

and the amount of $200,000 from various fiscal year 2026 departmental expenditure accounts to the fiscal year 26 transfer to capital projects public buildings account.

allows us to take $200,000 of unspent funds in various accounts that were established on the non-salary side that were not spent this year, and move 200,000 to transfer to Capital Projects Public Buildings account. And the intent of this is 100,000 for the Phillips Building Recommendation 18C and 100,00 for the addition of EV stations recommendation 23B of the capital improvement plan. Again, we're shifting these into a transfer to capital projects account for the purpose of allowing those two capital

So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

Roll call, please. Councillor Gannon?

Yes.

Councillor Gardner? Yes Councillor Izzo? Yes

City. Thank you, Mr. President.

This is a very interesting place for us to end up at the end of the year. We have a $690,000 surplus in our lease disposal accounts despite having a very bumpy beginning to fiscal year 26, and having some very carefully managed accounting on behalf of the late disposal team at Public Works. we dipped into these accounts to fund other contractors when Republic wasn't available. We held a really hard line with Republic on paying what we paid back, when we ended up establishing the post-strike costs We were able to use some accrued funds to pay the portions we did have to pay. There were a lot of things we got discounts on that we didn't have to because services they didn't provide us, at the end of the year, much to my surprise because this was the last account I would have told you on July 1st, 26th that we thought would've had a surplus. We have a surplus of $690,000.

We got a series of vehicles and public works that we were gonna borrow for next year Vehicle, recommendation 25A. $95,000 for Fleet Pickup Truck C5, recommendation $25B. $130,000 For Cemetery Dump Truck 70, recommendation 20E. $ 95,000 Cemetery Utility Vehicle C7, recommendation 170 for park and forestry 4x4 landscape dump truck number 78 recommendation 25G 100,000 for adaptive traffic management recommendation 26C we can do all of those without borrowing through a transfer that would go to the capital project city account of $690,000. And that is the recommendation I have before you. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank You. Can I get a motion on the transfer as presented?

So moved.

Second. Any discussion? I just want to say thank you to you and your team, Mr. Manager. This is great news that we're buying all these vehicles with money that we didn't have to spend on waste disposal so we didn�t throw it up in the rubbish.

Gardner, Issa, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Feltner, Gannon.

Yes.

President Sideris. Yes, thank you.

8H is a resolution authorizing a transfer of funds in the amount of $22,000 from the fiscal year 2-27 City Council Reserve to various fiscal City Manager, Personnel Accounts. Mr. Manager? The auditor will take this one.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. Through you, As you are aware, on June 23rd the City of Watertown through the Honorable City Council entered into a new contract with city manager Prolegas. This contract goes into effect on August 15th, 2026. So as such we are respectfully requesting a transfer in the amount of $22,000 from the fiscal year 27 City Council Reserve to various fiscal 27 city manager personnel line items to fund the updated contract obligations for the remainder of fiscal year 27. Thank you, I apologize for that.

Can I get a motion

Yes.

President Sideris. Yes, thank you.

8i is a resolution authorizing the transfer of funds in the amount of $1,700,000 from various fiscal year 26 debt service accounts and the Fiscal Year 26 City Council Reserve to various fiscal year 26

undertake this as well. Thank you, Mr. President. Madam Auditor.

Thank You, Mr President. So we are respectfully requesting the transfer of funds totaling 1.7 million dollars from various debt service accounts and City Council reserved into three specific stabilization funds. First, we're requesting a transfer of $550,000 to the Watertown Square Stabilization Fund As you may recall, the Honorable City Council established this fund in October of 2023 to support the implementation of Watertown Square Plan. This transfer allows us to maximize cash on hand for the project and reduce our overall need for future borrowing. Second, we are seeking $550,000 to formally establish a new stabilization fund for the senior center project This directly aligns with the council's explicit guidance that directed city administration to develop a sound budgetary plan for our five major capital items, which includes a dedicated senior center. and finally we're requesting $600,000 for the ESCO stabilization fund.

As we discussed earlier this one relies on departmental energy savings to cover our ESCO related debt service Without future transfers into this fund, we most likely will not be able to continue to cover the annual debt service payments for ESCO. So while we continue to perform the ESCO sweep each year there is concern that the departmental energy savings will naturally begin to shrink So this transfer will offset the expected decreased savings to ensure our upcoming debt service expenses for the next two years will remain fully covered.

Thank you, can I get a motion on the transfer?

Thank you, Mr. President. Just to note that we've taken it off before but in the memo that accompanies the transfers that it's just senior center not senior center slash recreation center.

and now two schools, soon to be the high school which was our biggest energy user building in the whole city. which is fine. When we did the ESCO program, who would have known back in 2010 and 2011? It was not even possible at that time with the technology that was available to even build a net zero energy building. So we've come a long way, so... The other thing is I just you know before we go on We do this every year. When we close out the budget, and we look at where we have leftover money from various operating accounts, and there's been four different

that we had identified and were itemized in the capital improvement program. And I do want to say, we spent a lot of time going through the capital improvements program trying to figure out how we're gonna pay for things, you know bonds and fitting them into timeline but there's a lot of smaller things It is very satisfying to me to hear the manager and the auditor say, we're going to pay for this recommendation from the council, this recommendation with the council. And paying for it with leftover money we have in the operating account. that is such a good way for this community to just pay for capital projects without actually having to borrow money. Number one, number two as we do the capital grant next year, all those things that we would have planned on borrowing money for that we had debt payments and interest. We're not going to have so it actually opens up more headroom in our capital plan

with leftover operating funds. And that really sets us up to do future capital projects that we would not have been able to do because we didn't have the headroom in the plan. So I just want to say, The Chair of Budget and Fiscal Oversight is somebody who really agonizes over long-term financial liabilities. This is one of the most satisfying times of the year when we do this, so thank you

Bates, Feltner, Gannon. Issa, President Sideris.

Yes thank you. Each change resolution authorizing approving

the expenditure of a gift of funds from the Armenian Memorial Church. Mr. Manager.

Thank you, Mr. President. The Armenian Memorial church held its annual fair in May each year the Fair Committee to receive a donation equal to 10% of the fair's proceeds. This year, following the tragic motor vehicle accident on Bigelow Avenue last December that claimed the lives of two members of their community, the Army U Church elected to donate these proceeds to the Lawertown Fire and Police Departments Vehicle Accidents, and Vehicle Fires. The Police Department will use its share to support the National Night Out event in accordance with MGL 4453A. Gifted funds require approval of the City Manager and City Council. I respectfully request the support of the Council on accepting these funds and and with thanks to the Memorial Church for thinking of our public safety agencies in the work that they do. Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank You. Can I get a motion approving this expenditure or gift of funds? So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion? Roll call please. Feltner. I'm sorry, Councilor Feltler. That's okay.

I was just curious if the fire department knows yet what equipment that might be. of Accidents, but it's great to see this gift.

They have not specified the details to me, but I know that those are the type of equipment they occasionally invest in to try and improve their responses.

It's wonderful. Thank you.

Bayes, Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo. Yes. Councilor Offei?

I'm not going to read this because I read it all the time.

You are aware of section 20b of chapter 286a, which requires a council vote when an individual is holding two city jobs. Here we have an instructional

Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei.

costing the city auditor salary. AHM is also same thing, but I'll explain that these two are two of the council's employees similar to what we did with the city manager back in the end of June. We have to do these salary adjustments by ordinance, so this is a first reading on that and I will be providing the composite there are evaluations at that time and this will be on the agenda for public hearing in August. And then 8M is the same thing as a public hearing it's a first reading on our proposed ordinance adjusting the city Clerk's salary. Again, the same thing mandated by the charter that we do this by ordinance so this is a first reading and that will also be brought up on August 11th Cifra.

Committee 9A is a Committee on Human Services report regarding its meeting on June 23rd. Councilor Palomba? Thank you. The Committee on

First. That's the committee interviewing Phyllis Perron for appointment as a member of opportunities for seniors. She has visited other senior centers to gather ideas and noted that Watertown Center and increasing male participation through targeted programs such as a men's group, and exploring models like Belmont's focus on transportation, social services, and meals rather than and the importance of intergenerational interaction and programming that serves the full range of seniors 60 plus. She highlighted the need to better engage younger seniors who may be more

in visiting it as a, quote, a center for active living, quote-unquote, with a gym, activities, ample parking and classes. Councilor Bays made the motion. The following motion, the Committee on Human Services recommends that the City Council appoint Phyllis Perron as a member of the council on 18 for a term expiring May 15th, 2021. Izzo, and Pass 3-0. Ray Nicholson. The committee interviewed Ray Nichols for reappointment as a member of the Council on HB4 term expiring May 15th, 2029 appeared as a resident, not in his capacity as our fire chief. Discussed his positive experience on the council including collaborations

and attracting younger seniors. Councilor Bays made the following motion. The Committee on Human Service recommends that the City Council reappoint Ray Nicholson as a member of the Council on Aging the motion was seconded by Councilor Izzo and passed 3-0. The meeting adjourned at 555, my appreciation to Councilor

Thank you. Can I get a motion to accept the report? So moved. Is there a second? Second.

Gardner, Yes. Councilor Izzo? Yes.

to the City Council appoints Phyllis Barone as a member of the Council on Aging for a term to expire on May 15, 2020. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

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

and Council on Aging for a term to expire May 15, 2029. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Roll call please.

Councillor Bays? Yes. Councillor Feltner? Yes Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli.

Manning's report regarding its meeting on June 23rd. Councilor Izzo?

The committee convened on June 22nd, 2026 at 620 p.m., present were myself, Emily Izzo chair and John Gannon, Vice Chair and Theo Offei, Secretary. The purpose of the meeting was to conduct interviews for appointments to Watertown Ketel Access Corporation Board of Directors and Planned Giving at Pine Street Inn in Boston, a role she's held since January 2022. In an internal writing and project management role on the major gifts team, she writes reports and proposals for donors hosts small donor engagement events and manages volunteers. Before Pine Street Inn, she spent four years at Perkins School for the Blind in Watertown advancing from development associate to stewardship officer to development officer. and previously worked as a part-time grant writer for FoodLink in Arlington. She holds a Master of Science in food and agricultural policy from the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition, Science and Policy

and a Bachelor of Science in Nutrition and Dietetics from California State Polytechnical University at Pomona. She brings an extensive background in nonprofit fundraising and development, amongst these creating and leading the execution and planned giving donors stewardship calendar at Pine Street Inn, partnering with gift officers on gift proposals, reports and other written materials and mailings. Implementing a new board member welcome package and outgoing board member recognition gifts, and managing gift acknowledgements for major donors. Ms. Robertson applied after receiving a letter from the city manager inviting her to apply. While she has no prior familiarity with the Cable Access Corporation Board She indicated she would be happy to contribute her expertise in fundraising to further the mission of Watertown Cable Access. She's a member of the Watertown Rapid Response Network.

Gannon made a motion seconded by Councilor Offei to appoint Adrian Roberts to the Watertown Cable Access Corporation Board of Directors filling the unexpired term of Christopher McKenzie with a term expiring September 15, 2027. The motion passed 3-0. Next up is Lindsey Graham. Ms. Graham is the Assistant Director of Athletic Communications at Stonehill College, where she served as a primary media contact for Division I men's basketball program and several other varsity sports. She brings nearly a decade of experience in athletic communications, marketing and media production including four years as Director of Marketing Promotions and Athletic Communications at Simmons University in two stints in athletic communications at Harvard University. She also serves the city of Watertown directly as program coordinator of the Watertown men's summer basketball league for the recreation department, She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and International Studies from McDaniel College, and is completing a Master of Science in Sports Leadership at Northeastern University.

She brings an extensive background in media communications and community programming amongst these include securing increased regional and national exposure for Stonehill Skyhawks with games on Linear Regional Network, Nessun and ESPN. and coordinating with Bridgewater TV, a regional award-winning community cable access station to broadcast athletic events on Nessun, ESPN and NEC front routes. Miss Graham is familiar with the Cable Access Corporation Board having read meeting minutes, attended meetings in person or virtually and watched cable access recordings. She indicated she's passionate about engaging community and promoting all the great things the city of Watertown and wants to increase continued participation. Councilor Gannon made a motion seconded by Councilor Offei to appoint Lindsey Graham to the Watertown Cable Access Corporation Board of Directors with the term expiring September 15th, 2029 the motion passed three to zero. The meeting adjourned at 6 43 p.m and thank you to Councilor Offei for preparing these minutes.

Thank you can I get a motion to accept the report? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli. Hayes, President Sideris. Yes, thank you.

Can I get a motion that the council appoint Adrian Roberts as a member of the Watertown Cable Access Corporation to fill the unexpired term with Christopher McKenzie and the term to expire on September 15, 2027. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

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

Can I get a motion to appoint Lindsey Graham as a member of the Watertown Cable Access Corporation for a term to expire on September 15, 2029? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

Roll call please. Councilor Feltner. Yes. Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris, Watertown, Councilor

Thank you, Mr. President. The Committee on Economic Development and Planning convened on Monday June 22nd, 2026 at 5.01 PM in the council office, present were myself as chair, Vincent Piccirilli as vice-chair and Lisa Feltner secretary. The purpose of the meeting was to conduct confirmation interviews with following residents. First, Simone Worsdale grew up immersed in the arts through theater, visual art and craft which shaped a lasting appreciation for creative expression. And she is interested in cultural initiatives that strengthen community engagement. She holds a master of science degree in global strategic communications and has studied at the Harvard Business School. Simone moved to Watertown about five years ago while working for the Harvard Kennedy School in digital marketing and strategy, and her experience in outreach and stakeholder alignment will contribute to thoughtful review of applications received by the Watertown Cultural Council.

Simone has also served as a mentor for the Arboretum, Sprout Socials, The ARB Community Platform, Harvard Women in Tech Network and Big Brothers Big Sisters Programs. A motion made by Councilor Feltner seconded by Council Piccirilli to recommend City Council confirm Simone Worsdale as an appointed member of the Cultural Council to May 15, 2027 to fulfill the unexpired term of Nick Haddad. This was approved through the method. The next nominee was Kevin Lee, he has lived in Watertown for almost 10 years. He holds a master in architecture from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design and has over 16 years of experience in the architecture profession, which has encompassed small-scale public art projects to large scale mixed youth developments.

his involvement on 212 Stewart Street in Boston is an example of successfully connecting Boston's historic Back Bay Village neighborhood with modern high rises in the Back Bay. In the 2010s, Kevin served on the Fenway CDC which was a vital community pillar and that area's redevelopment. He is passionate about discovering the historical significance of places and believes in stewardship of Watertown resources as a resident. Kevin Fields' open collaboration is key to successful placemaking and improving the public realm, while the preservation is ideally an act of pressing preserving memories as well as places. Motion made by Councilor Feltner, seconded by Council Piccirilli to recommend that the City Council confirm Kevin Lee as an appointed member of the Historical Commission to October 1st, 2026 to fulfill the unexpired term of Marilyn Roach.

This motion was approved by a vote of three nothing. Phyllis Barone has served on a cultural council for four years and is eager to continue her involvement. Although her resume is tech heavy as a senior project management professional, the arts have always been a passion of hers. She paints, draws and participates in events at the Senior Center. And she has led many teams for projects with teenagers because she mostly enjoys the community aspect of arts and culture. The Cultural Council is wrapping up for the Arts Market on August 8th at Arsenal Park. And they have become more active on social media platforms to engage volunteers to match your ambitions. Motion made by Councilor Feltner, seconded by Council Piccirilli to recommend that the City Council confirm Phyllis Perrone for reappointment to the Cultural Council for a term to May 15, 2029. And this motion was approved 3-0.

at 5.57 p.m., Council Feltner made a motion to adjourn, second by Council Piccirilli which is approved through nothing, respectively submitted Lisa Feltener and I thank you Lisa Feltner for preparing the minutes of this report.

Thank you, can I get a motion to accept the report? So moved. Second. Any discussion?

Roll call please. Councilor Gannon Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris Feltner?

Yes.

President Sideris? Yes, thank you.

Can I get a motion to confirm Simon Simone Worsdale as an appointed member to the Cultural Council to fulfill the unexpired term of Nick Haddad to expire on May 15, 2027. Submitted. Is there a second? Second.

Any discussion? Phone call please. Councilor Gannon.

Yes.

Councilor Gardner?

Yes.

Councillor Izzo. Yes.

Can I get a motion to confirm Kevin Lee as an appointed member of the Historical Commission to fulfill the unexpired term of Marilyn Roach Gannon. Yes.

Gardner, Issa, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Feltner, Sideris.

to confirm Phyllis Ferron for reappointment to the Cultural Council for a term to expire on May 15, 2029. So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, and Offei. Yes. President Sideris. Yes, thank you.

Communications from the city manager. Mr.

Manager. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a few somewhat detail-oriented things to address at this late hour to be sure the council's aware of some of the activities going on from the perspective of the city manager. It had come to my attention that at a committee meeting earlier this week, I believe, or last week, late last week I believe A letter was read from a resident expressing concern about a potential conflict of interest issue related to the police chief Ware, of his concerns about this and addressing it going out in this way to make sure not to create a conflict of interest around is going back over a couple of years of discussion on this particular topic. He put that together in a memo to me.

I asked that he also file the disclosure on conflict of interest, which we'll file at the city clerk's office and with me to make it absolutely clear I want to step back and put some context around this. We are very, very lucky in Watertown. Our police chief is a regional statewide leader in police procedure and police training, he spent years the individual who wrote the book on police legal procedure in Massachusetts. The big advantage to that is I don't have to go find some outside trainer to train our staff on police and legal procedures in Massachusetts, I have an expert sitting in the chief's office every single day

the ability for him working through this department and coming up through this Department to go to law school, to get that background, to compile that background and understand that background. The challenge is it does create these circumstances where he has to be very careful about the potential conflict of interest under certain circumstances. So as we presented to you back at the beginning in the budget process adopting this Blue Voice AI system which we will be implementing this year, which provides in-cruiser on time information and many other systems to say, how can I deal with or not deal with this specific situation? It draws its data from a bunch of datasets that are the best datasets available how you deal with legal reference to the interest of these questions.

It is without question that no matter how you do this, the best way to provide a police officer in Massachusetts the best information for the data set is to include Chief Hanrahan's book of Massachusetts. From the beginning of the process to conversation with Blue's voice, Chief Hanrahan was well aware of the fact that he needed to address not only conflict of interest but appearance of conflict of interests. He spoke very early to the deputy chief that he could not do under these circumstances. He recused himself from participating in the decision to bring Blue Voice to Watertown, that decision was made by the deputy manager and two police captains. He informed me today that he wasn't even aware we were moving forward with Blue Voice until he got the budget book because that decision was made separate from his involvement to ensure he was not a part of it.

He's also worked with Blue Voice to specifically exclude any compensation attributed to the City of Watertown's purchase, subscription or use in a Blue Voice program. He receives no financial benefit directly or indirectly from the city's use of the product. One of the reasons why I trust Chief Hanrahan and I work so well with him is because I know that he will always go above and beyond to be absolutely sure that he holds himself and his department to the highest ethical standards. He's provided three pages of written documentation here explaining conversations that we've had over the course of the last couple of years to make sure that in this particular circumstance he's not compensated from this, he is not involved directly in this. The product was independently evaluated by people without his involvement and I feel 100% confident that there isn't a conflict in this particular circumstance.

I also feel that he has done what is necessary to ensure that there wasn't an appearance of a conflict either, but one thing we did not do is publicly and openly disclose that to everybody else in the community prior to making the decision allowing the possibility for somebody to write a letter and say, hey this doesn't look right. but I wanted to be clear the council upfront before this conversation on this particular topic goes any further that the chief through his conversations with the State Ethics Commission and through the way we've developed the financial compensation to Blue Voice is completely worked carefully within the confines of the state ethics laws in order to make sure to address this. So I just wanted to put that out there He and I are very determined. We've worked so hard to build a team that takes ethics, it takes the state rules so seriously.

And I realized that if there was anything we should have done that we didn't do, it would tell you right up front that he and I have been having these conversations, but essentially he was very careful to make sure that he stayed within the confines of the ethical rules and did not participate in this decision. So wanted to share that first. Second, I want to talk about two particular ordinances that have been sitting in my office and I want has concerns about my staff working with them. They've been sitting in my office for the last few months awaiting activity, and I want to explain where each of them is. One is the tree ordinance which as you may recall, we put a hold on the tree orders while we were waiting for some data from University of Vermont where they were studying their tree canopy. That data is now in. I'm working with the Public Works Department to release that data and then in the confines of that data, we can go back to the conversation about whether or not a private tree ordinance makes sense and what the impact is on Tree Canopy and Watertown.

But with that data I think we are better equipped the tree ordinance, what it might be, where it might work, whether there might be strengths and weaknesses to a particular strategy. And that should be coming up very soon. The second one is the building energy ordinance, the Virto. coming back from the council, the council gave it back to the manager's office and the administration asked us to do some more work on it. Since that time we worked with one consultant on it we worked to address some particular issues around whether or not we should be regulating condos, or whether or now we should regulate certain types of buildings. That then came back to me and I did two spot checks on it one in checking in with folks who've been using this Group that's been doing some consulting for other communities. The reason why this ordinance remains in my desk right now is because I believe that if I submit this ordinance and it gets passed the way it is currently written, we do not have the administrative capacity to implement

and I do not have the financial capacity to make a request to the council to give us the resources necessary to implement it, which I think would require hiring more people to manage this ordinance than I think makes sense under the circumstances of what we're doing. I'm looking around working on some possibilities of some way. Some other communities have set this up that has made it less burdensome for the staff to be able to have this happen. That's taking time, and while I'm committed to making sure the council can have a conversation about building energy regulations and wanting to do it right. And I've probably been a little quiet for a little too long on what's going on, I have spent some time on it, the team has spent some We're going to have to go back and spend a little bit more time on it because I don't want to present you something that I am looking at you saying, I can't put the team together to do. Especially in a year where I wasn't trying to add an entire department of people to be able to address those certain things.

So I'm concerned about it, I wanna make it happen, I want to make it go right. I know it's going very slow. Part of that is sitting in my office try to pull the team together to get a little bit more help in the next couple weeks and try to find a path forward, but that is where it sits right now. I want to talk about two issues that relate to the legislative activity going on at the State House. The first we already covered and the Senate. I appreciate the work in the House, and the forthcoming work of the Senate on our taxable home rule petition. It is the most important thing for Watertown as far as legislative priority and financial priorities that signed this, and it gets us into a position where we are not faced with substantial double-digit tax bill increases in this year. Our House delegation worked very hard, Steve Owens and John Lowe work very hard to get this through a very complicated committee process.

our assessor Earl and I had the chance to go and speak in front of the revenue committee that then went quickly through Ways and Means, was able to come out and get voted. And I really appreciate that all of that has happened It's on the Senate side. I've had conversations with Senator Brownsburger, he is working very hard on this for us. He feels optimistic about where it's going from here and I was always of this fear that we were going to be doing this in November so i'm really happy that we are making steps towards progress here you might notice that there is a second bill that I myself have been having some conversations with people both on the legislative side and in a variety of organizations that are involved in the regulatory process, and that surrounds some changes to the State Zoning Act. And I just wanted to make the council aware there was a substantial change to the state zoning act

budget bill this year. We just received some information from KP Law about what that actually means. I think a lot of us who work in and around the planning profession are still observing some of this some of it surprised us a little bit. It completely changes the standard by which a zoning board reviews a variance. It allows a zoning to grant a use variance for residential use in a non-residential district, doesn't require them to but it allows them it requires a little bit more thought just to see what impact that's going to have on local cities and towns, and how that's gonna go. But I will just say that those of us in Watertown who work on planning every day are committed to the idea that zoning process makes the most sense when it goes through comprehensive planning, when it goes through thoughtful zoning conversations with a legislative body and gets passed as legislation.

and not when it sort of picked apart as one-off variances in circumstances just because we made it a little bit easier to do that. And maybe the rule makes it a bit easier but I'm still committed to the idea that we need to have the best zoning ordinance because that's a much better way to get projects approved than to sort of lean on a zoning variance process to say, you know we couldn't get it right from the regulatory side so we'll lean on an administrative board process to address those shortcomings. I'm still focused on doing that. Nonetheless, the bill gives the zoning board a lot more flexibility but I think it doesn't take away from the need for us to get zoning right. There is also a piece sitting in the governor's bond bill that would change the way we do site plan review. Now, site plan reviews, which remember is the process that we use in the Watertown Square by Wright District, which goes just to the planning board

Site plan review has never been authorized in state law. It's always been a creature of local government, and 351 towns if anybody does site plan review they do it a completely different way than every other town. And there's been an urge on behalf of the planning committee Community, which I respect very much to have some sort of statewide standard to site clarity review. Which I think makes sense. and so what's in the governor's bill is a compromised concept that was pulled together by a bunch of different organizations that establishes a timeframe for site plan review. establishes a requirement that there be written performance standards for site plan review, and then has a provision in it that says that a written performance standard for site planning review cannot regulate aesthetics. the term that by the way is not defined in the ordinance anywhere. It says you can regulate bulk and height, but it just says you cannot regulate aesthetics. I have expressed some concern to our delegation at the way this is worded

depending upon how it's interpreted, because different people are giving me different interpretations of it might be confused in such a way that it causes people to say that we cannot do the architectural review and the design standard strategy that we have set up for Watertown Square and its worst, if looked at the way it's worded. I am concerned that if a passage says worded and is interpreted in the most broad way it could potentially be interpreted to define aesthetics, it would leave us in a situation where people might come to say to us you know oh yeah I know we promised that you could do all these steps with Watertown's I've expressed that concern to the delegation. That bill is also now in the Senate, Senator Brownsburger a few of my planning community colleagues also have this concern so I just want the council aware that this legislative conversation underway at this point in time.

If it does pass as is, I think I will have to and so on. So I'm hoping that having a structure upon the public realm interaction of the building could be understood as being a performance standard that is not aesthetic but is really about a far more important issue of how buildings and streets interact. but I also understand that I'm worried that that undefined term creates an uncertainty that hasn't existed in the past. Now, finally for the last announcement a little bit lighter than all of the other stuff I've gone through today and I just want to take a moment to remind everybody 2 to 5 p.m. at the Mosese Center for the Arts, we will be celebrating Treaty Day.

This is Watertown's most important contribution to the 250th anniversary of our country because it celebrates something that actually happened this week in July and 250 years ago, which is the signing of the first treaty in the United States of America, which was called the Treaty of Watertown. and that is a treaty between the United States government and a couple of the Native American communities there on the US Canadian border. and we are very happy to have members of those tribes that signed the treaty traveling to take part in a celebration at the Mosesian Center on Saturday. Special Opportunity, and you've celebrated the treaty before but never quite like this because we've never had such a big anniversary moment like this. So that is all I have Mr. President thank you very much for giving me time to share those pieces of information.

Feltner. Any requests for information?

Thank you, Mr. President. I had some questions about the design for the critical gap in pedestrian and bicycle backbone of our community path so I'll send those questions concerning safety how it might affect Arsenal Street travel, parking lanes, et cetera. Also what the estimated costs are and what funds will be used for these improvements My second request is, when will the sidewalks and planting strips on Bellevue Road be fully restored? There's a lot of trash. I have images up and down Bellevue Road from the construction of the road between MWRA and those repairs, and sidewalk half put together with asphalt. So I will share this with administration as well.

Any other requests? Announcements, any announcements? Seeing none we go to public forum is there any member of the public wish to be heard? Seeing none, can I get a motion to adjourn? So moved. Is there a second?

Second Councilor Gardner Yes

Feltner, Councilor Gannon, President Sideris.

And previously worked as a part-time grant writer for FoodLink in Arlington She holds a Master of Science in Food and Agricultural Policy from the Tufts Friedman School of Nutrition, Science, and Policy and a Bachelor of Science and Nutrition and Dietetics from California State Polytechnical University at Pomona. She brings an extensive background in nonprofit fundraising and development. Amongst these, creating a leading execution of a major and planned giving donor stewardship calendar at Pine Street Inn partnering with gift officers on gift proposals, reports and other written materials and mailings implementing a new board member welcome package an outgoing board member recognition gifts and managing gift acknowledgements for major donors Miss Robertson applied after receiving a letter from the city manager inviting her to apply. While she has no prior familiarity with the Cable Access Corporation Board, she indicated that she would be happy to contribute her expertise in fundraising to further the mission of Watertown Cable She's a member of the Watertown Rapid Response Network.

Councilor Gannon made a motion seconded by Councilor Offei to appoint Adrienne Roberts to the Water Town Cable Access Corporation Board of Directors, filling the unexpired term of Christopher McKenzie with a term expiring September 15, 2027. The motion passed 3 to 0. Next up is Lindsey Graham. Ms. Graham is the Assistant Director of Athletic Communications at Stonehill College where she serves as a primary media contact for the Division I men's basketball program and several other varsity sports. She brings nearly a decade of experience in athletic communications, marketing, and media production including four years as Director of Marketing, Promotions and Athletic Communications at Simmons University and two stints in athletic communications at Harvard University. She also serves the city of Watertown directly as Program Coordinator of the Watertown Men's Summer Basketball League for the Recreation Department. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science and International Studies from McDaniel College, and is completing a Master of Science in Sports Leadership at Northeastern University

She brings an extensive background in media communications and community programming. Amongst these include securing increased regional and national exposure for Stonehill Skyhawks with games on linear regional network, Nessun, and ESPN. and coordinating with Bridgewater TV, a regional award-winning community cable access station to broadcast athletic events on Nessun, ESPN and NEC front row. Miss Graham is familiar with the Cable Access Corporation Board having read meeting minutes, attended meetings in person or virtually and watched cable access recordings. She indicated she's passionate about engaging the community and promoting all the great things the city of Watertown and wants to increase continued participation. Councilor Gannon made a motion seconded by Councilor Offei appoint Lindsey Graham to the Watertown Cable Access Corporation Board of Directors with the term expiring September 15th, 2029 The motion passed three to zero. The meeting adjourned at 643 PM and thank you to Councilor Offei for preparing these minutes.

Thank you, can I get a motion to accept the report? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

Felder, Gannon. Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris, Watertown, Councilor

Adrian Roberts is a member of the Watertown Cable Access Corporation to fill the unexpired term of Christopher McKenzie and the term to expire on September 15, 2027. So moved. Is there a second? Second.

Feltner, Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Sideris, Watertown

Can I get a motion to appoint Lindsey Graham as a member of the Watertown Cable Access Corporation for a term to expire on September 15, 2029? So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion?

Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei.

Gannon, report regarding its meeting on June

Thank you, Mr. President. The Committee on Economic Development and Planning convened on Monday, June 22nd, 2026 at 5.01 PM in the Council Office. present were myself as chair, Vincent Piccirilli as vice-chair and Lisa Feltner secretary. The purpose of the meeting was to conduct confirmation interviews with following residents. First Simone Worsdale grew up immersed in the arts through theater, visual art and craft which shaped a lasting appreciation for creative expression. And she is interested in cultural initiatives that strengthen community engagement. She holds a Master of Science degree in Global Strategic Communications and has studied at the Harvard Business School. Simone moved to Watertown about five years ago while working for the Harvard Kennedy School in digital marketing and strategy. And her experience in outreach and stakeholder alignment will contribute to thoughtful review of applications received by the Watertown Cultural Council.

Simone has also served as a mentor for The Arboretum, Sprout Social's The ARB Community Platform Harvard Women in Tech Network, and Big Brothers Big Sisters Programs. A motion made by Council Feltner seconded by Council Piccirilli to recommend City Council confirm Simone Worsdale as an appointed member of the Cultural Council to May 15, 2027, to fulfill the unexpired term of Nick Haddad. and this was approved 3-0. The next nominee was Kevin Lee, he has lived in Watertown for almost 10 years. He holds a Master in Architecture from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design, and has over 16 years of experience in the architecture profession which has encompassed small-scale public art projects to large scale mixed youth developments.

his involvement on 212 Stewart Street in Boston is an example of successfully connecting Boston's historic Back Bay Village neighborhood with modern high rises in the Back Bay. In the 2010s, Kevin served on the Fenway CDC which was a vital community pillar and that area's redevelopment. He is passionate about discovering the historical significance of places and believes in stewardship of Watertown resources as a resident. Kevin Fields' open collaboration is key to successful placemaking and improving the public realm, while the preservation is ideally an act of preserving memories as well as places. Motion made by Councilor Feltner, seconded by Council Piccirilli to recommend that the City Council confirm Kevin Lee as an appointed member of the Historical Commission to October 1st 2026 to fulfill the unexpired term of Marilyn Roach.

This motion was approved by a vote of 3-0. Phyllis Barone has served on the Cultural Council for four years and is eager to continue her involvement. Although her resume is tech heavy, as a senior project management professional the arts have always been a passion of hers. She paints, draws and participates in events at the Senior Center and she has led many teams for projects with teenagers because she mostly enjoys the community aspect of arts in culture. The Cultural Council is wrapping up for the Arts Market on August 8th at Arsenal Park and they have become more active on social media platforms to engage volunteers to match their ambitions. Motion made by Councilor Feltner, seconded by Council Piccirilli to recommend that the City Council confirm Phyllis Perrone for reappointment to the Cultural Council for term to May 15, 2029. And this motion was approved three to nothing.

at 5.57 p.m., Councilor Feltner made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Councilor Piccirilli which was approved through nothing, respectfully submitted Lisa Feltmer and I thank you Lisa Feltner for preparing the minutes of this report.

Thank you, can I get a motion to accept the report? So moved. Second. Any discussion?

Roll call please. Councilor Gannon Gardner, Izzo, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Feltner.

Yes, thank you. Can I get a motion to confirm Simon? Simone Worsdale is an appointed member to the Cultural Council to fulfill the unexpired term of Nick Haddad to expire on May 15, 2027. Submitted. Is there a second? Second.

Any discussion? Phone call please. Councilor Gannon?

Yes.

Councillor Gardner?

Yes.

Councilor Izzo?

Yes, yes.

Can I get a motion to confirm Kevin Lee as an appointed member of the Historical Commission to fulfill the unexpired term of Marilyn Roach to expire on October 1, 2026. So moved. Is there a second? Second. Any discussion? Roll call please.

Councilor Gannon.

Yes.

Gardner, Issa, Offei, Palomba, Piccirilli, Bays, Feltner, Sideris. Can I get a motion?

to confirm Phyllis Ferron for reappointment to the Cultural Council for a term to expire on May 15, 2029. So moved. Is there a second?

Second.

Any discussion?

Gannon, Gardner, Izzo, Offei. President Sideris. Yes, thank you. Communications from the city manager.

Mr. Manager. Thank you, Mr. President. I have a few somewhat detail-oriented things to address at the late hour, and I'm going to try my best to do so to make sure that Council's aware of some of the activities going on from the perspective of the City Manager. It comes to my attention that at a committee meeting earlier this week, I believe, or last week, late last week I believe A letter was read from a resident expressing concern about a potential conflict of interest issue related to the police chief making me aware of his concerns about this and addressing it, going out of his way to make sure not to create a conflict of interest around this. Going back over a couple years of discussion on this particular topic. He put that together in a memo to me.

I asked that he also file the disclosure on conflict of interest, which we'll file at the city clerk's office and with me I want to step back and put some context around this. We are very, very lucky in Watertown. Our police chief is a regional, statewide leader in police procedure and police training. He spent years assisting with police assessment processes. And one of the advantages is having on Police Legal Procedure in Massachusetts. The big advantage to that is that I don't have to go find some outside trainer to train our staff on police legal procedure in Massachusetts, and the experts sitting in the chief's office every single day

the ability for him working through this department and coming up through this Department to go to law school, get that background, compile that background and understand that background. The challenge is it does create these circumstances where he has to be very careful about the potential conflict of interest under certain circumstances. So as we presented to you back at the beginning of the budget process, we are adopting this Blue Voice AI system which we will be implementing this year. Which provides in Cruiser on time information to police officers who need training assistance to say, how can I deal with or not deal with this specific situation? It draws its data from a bunch of datasets that are the best datasets available to make a determination as with legal reference to the interest of these questions.

It is without question that no matter how you do this, the best way to provide a police officer in Massachusetts the best information for the data set is to include Chief Hammer handspoke in that data of Massachusetts. From the beginning of the process of the conversation with Blue Voice, Chief Hanrahan was well aware of the fact that he needed to address not only conflict of interest but appearance of conflict of interests. He spoke very early to the deputy chief could not do under these circumstances. He recused himself from participating in the decision to bring Blue Voice to Watertown. That decision was made by the deputy manager and the two police captains. He informed me today that he wasn't even aware we were moving forward with Blue Voice until he got the budget book, because that decision was made separate from his involvement to ensure he was not a part of it.

He's also worked with Blue Voice to specifically exclude any compensation attributed to the City of Watertown's purchase, subscription or use of the Blue Voice program. He receives no financial benefit directly or indirectly from the city's use of a product. One of the reasons why I trust Chief Hanrahan and I work so well with him is because I know that he will always go above and beyond to be absolutely sure that he holds himself and his department to the highest ethical standards. He's provided three pages of written documentation here explaining conversations that we've had over the course of the last couple of years to make sure that in this particular circumstance he's not compensated from this, he is not involved directly in this. The product was independently evaluated by people without his involvement and I feel 100% confident that there isn't a conflict in this particular circumstance. I also feel that he has done what is necessary to ensure that there wasn't an appearance of a conflict either, but one thing we did not do is publicly

prior to making the decision allowing the possibility for somebody to write a letter and say hey this doesn't look right which is a fair question to ask but I wanted to be clear of the council upfront before this conversation on this particular topic goes any further that the chief, through his conversations with the State Ethics Commission, with me, through the process we set up and through the way we've developed the financial compensation to Blue Voice is completely worked carefully within the confines of the state ethics laws in order to make sure we address this. So I just wanted to put that out there at his request, because the question came up last week He and I are very determined. We've worked so hard to build a team that takes ethics, it takes the state rules so seriously And I realized that if there's anything we should have done that we didn't do it was tell you right up front that he and I have been having these conversations, but essentially he was very careful to make sure that he stayed within the confines of the ethical rules and did not participate in this decision.

So wanted to share that first. Second, I want to talk about two particular ordinances that have been sitting in my office and I want has concerns about my staff working with them. They've been sitting in my office for the last few months awaiting activity, and I want to explain where each of them is. One is the tree ordinance which as you may recall we put a hold on the tree ordinance while we were waiting for some data from University of Vermont where they were studying our tree canopy. That data is now in, I'm working with the Public Works Department to release that data and then in the confines of that data, we can go back to the conversation about whether or not a private tree ordinance makes sense and what the impact is on Tree Canopy and Watertown. But with that data I think we are better equipped to have a thoughtful conversation The concept of the tree ordinance, what it might be, where it might work, whether there might be strengths and weaknesses to a particular strategy. And that should be coming up very soon. The second one is the building energy ordinance, the Virto.

coming back from the council, the council gave it back to the manager's office and the administration asked us to do some more work on it. Since that time we worked with one consultant on it We worked to address some particular issues around whether or not we should be regulating condos, or whether or no we should regulate certain types of buildings. That then came back to me and I did two spot checks on it. One in checking in with folks and a group that's been doing some consulting for other communities. The reason why this ordinance remains in my desk right now is because I believe if I submit this ordinance and it gets passed the way it is currently written, we do not have the administrative capacity to implement it. And I do not the financial capacity to make a request to the council to give us the resources necessary to implement, which I think would require hiring more people to manage this ordinance that I think makes sense under the circumstances of what we're doing.

I'm looking around, working on some possibilities or some ways some other committees have set this up that has made it less burdensome for the staff to be able to have this happen. That's taking time. and while I am committed to making sure the council can have a conversation about building energy regulations and wanting to do it right, and I've probably been a little quiet for too long on what's going I have spent some time on it, the team's spent some on it. We're going to have to go back and spend a little bit more time on because I don't want to present you something that I am looking at you saying I can't put and the entire department of people to be able to address those certain things. So I'm concerned about it, I want to make it happen, I wanna make it go right. I know it's going very slow. Part of that is sitting in my office try to pull the team together to get a little bit more help in the next couple weeks and try to find a path forward, but that is where it sits right now.

I want to talk about two issues that relate to the legislative activity going on at the State House. The first we already covered really appreciate the work in the House and the forthcoming work of the Senate on our tax with home rule petition. It is the most important thing for Watertown as far as legislative priority, financial priorities that the Senate passed this sign this and it get us into a position where we are not faced with substantial double-digit tax bill increases in this year. Our House delegation worked very hard, Steve Owens and John Lowe worked very to get this through a very complicated committee process. and our assessor, Earl, and I had the chance to go and speak in front of the revenue committee that then went very quickly through Ways and Means, was able to come out and get voted.

And I really appreciate that all of that has happened. It's on the Senate side. I've had conversations with Senator Grumsberger. He's working very hard on this for us He feels optimistic about where it's going from here. And I was always of this fear that we were gonna be doing this in November, so I'm really happy that we are making steps towards progress here in July and hope to see some action soon. you might notice that there is a second bill that I myself have been having some conversations with people both on the legislative side and in a variety of organizations that are involved in the regulatory process, and that surrounds some changes to the State Zoning Act. And I just wanted to make council aware there was a substantial change to the state zoning act in the governor's budget bill this year. We just received some information from KP Law about what that actually means, I think a lot of us who work in and around the planning profession are still observing some of this

some of it surprised us a little bit. It completely changes the standard by which a zoning board reviews a variance. It allows a zoning to grant a use variance for residential use in a non-residential district, doesn't require them to but it allows them and so on. requires a little bit more thought just to see what impact that's gonna have on local cities and towns, and how that's going to go. But I will just say that those of us in Watertown who work on planning every day are committed to the idea that zoning process makes the most sense when it goes through comprehensive planning, but it goes to thoughtful zoning conversations with a legislative body. It gets passed as legislation. and not when it sort of picked apart as one-off variances in circumstances just because we made it a little bit easier to do that. And maybe the rule makes it a bit easier but I'm still committed to the idea that we need to have the best zoning ordinance

Wing, get projects approved and to sort of lean on a zoning variance process. To say we couldn't get it right from the regulatory side so we'll lean on an administrative board process to address those shortcomings. I'm still focused on doing that. Nonetheless, the bill gives the zoning board a lot more flexibility but I think it doesn't take away from the need for us to get zoning right. There is also a piece sitting in the governor's bond bill that would change the way we do site plan review. Now, site plan reviews, which remember is the process that we use in the Watertown Square by Wright District, which goes just to the planning board. Site plan review has never been authorized in state law. It's always been a creature of local government City, 351 towns. If anybody does site plan review they do it a completely different way than every other town and there's been an urge on behalf of the planning committee which I

Community, which I respect very much to have some sort of statewide standard to site clarity review. Which I think makes sense. and so what's in the governor's bill is a compromised concept that was pulled together by a bunch of different organizations that establishes a timeframe for site and so on. in the ordinance anywhere. It says you can regulate bulk and height, but it just says you cannot regulate aesthetics. I have expressed some concern to our delegation that the way this is worded depending upon how it's interpreted, because different people are giving me different interpretations of them might be confused in such a way that it causes people to say that we cannot do the architectural review and design standard strategy that we have set up for Watertown Square

and its worst, if looked at the way it's worded I am concerned that if it passes as worded and is interpreted in the most broad way it could potentially be interpreted to define aesthetics, it would leave us in a situation where people might come to say to us you know oh yeah I know we promised that you could do all these steps with Watertown in the Bi-Rite District, but now you can't do this and this part of those steps. I've expressed that concern to the delegation. That bill is also now in the Senate. Senator Brownsberger has a few of my planning community colleagues also have this concern so I just want the council aware that this legislative conversation underway at this point in time. If it does pass as is, I think I will have to rely on the strategy of our legal team to tell us essentially what that may mean for the circumstances surrounding by-right projects that go through site plan review.

I am hoping that having a structured design and so on. So I think that the performance standard that is based upon the public realm interaction of the building could be understood as being a performance standard, that is not aesthetic but is really about but I also understand that I'm worried that that undefined term creates an uncertainty that hasn't existed in the past. Now, finally for the last announcement a little bit lighter than all of the other stuff I've gone through today and I just want to take a moment to remind everybody at 2 to 5 p.m. at the Locesi Center for the Arts, we will be celebrating Treaty Day. This is Watertown's most important contribution to the 250th anniversary of our country because it celebrates something that actually happened this week in July and 250 years ago, which is the signing of the first treaty in the United States of America, which was called the Treaty of Watertown.

and that is a treaty between the United States government and a couple of the Native American communities there on the US Canadian border. and we are very happy to have members of those tribes that signed the treaty traveling to take part in a celebration at the Mossession Center on Saturday. And I really hope lots of folks from the community come out, this is a very special opportunity. We've celebrated the treaty before but never to share those pieces of information. Thank you.

Requests for information? Any requests for information, Councilor Feltner.

Thank you, Mr. President. I had some questions about the design for the critical gap in pedestrian and bicycle backbone of our community path so I'll send those questions concerning safety how it might affect Arsenal Street Travel, parking lanes etc. Also what the estimated costs are and what funds will be used for these improvements My second request is, when will the sidewalks and planting strips on Bellevue Road be fully restored? There's a lot of trash. I have images up and down Bellevue Road from the construction of the road between MWRA and those repairs, and sidewalk half put together with asphalt. So I will share this with administration as well.

Any other requests? Announcements, any announcements? Seeing none we go to public forum. Is there any member of the public who should be heard? Seeing none, can I get a motion to adjourn? So moved. Is there a second? Second Councilor Gardner

Gannon.

Yes.

President Sideris. Thank you for presenting.