City Council 12/09/2025

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Worcester City Council meeting. Please stand, if you can, for the Pledge of Allegiance and the Star-Spangled Banner. Aye. It is loaded with liberty and justice for all.

Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hailed At the twilight's last gleaming Whose broad stripes and bright stars Through the perilous fight O'er the ramparts we watched We're so gallantly streaming And the rocket's red glare The bombs bursting in air They proved through the night that our flag was still there.

O say does that star-spangled banner yet wave O'er the land of the free and the home of the brave

and the home of the brave.

Bergman, Here, Councilor Colorio, Here, Haxhiaj, Here, Councilor King, Here, Councilor Mero-Carlson, Here, Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda, Councilor Pacillo, Councilor Russell, Councilor Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

So we have approved the minutes of March 4th, 2025 and November 18th, 2025. All those in favor? Opposed, so ordered. Public participation, pursuant to the acts of 2021. People can speak for two minutes and any item to appear on the agenda. This is your city of residence. Item number, Mr.

Clerk. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Rule 39, items of public interest at every meeting of the City Council under public participation, portion of the agenda. The Chair shall recognize any person seeking such recognition for the purpose of addressing the City Council on any eligible item on the agenda for meeting both in person and remotely. any person who wishes to speak on more than one agenda item shall combine their testimony on all items at one appearance at the microphone the time for speaker channel I see two minutes for any one speaker 30 minutes for all speakers Rule 40 petitions. On the first occasion, any petition appears on the City Council agenda. The Prime Petition may address the City Council for no more than three minutes on a subject of their petition.

Does your name state your residence and item number?

Fred, Nathan, Worcester. Items number 8A through 8I. they're all dealing with tax classification in one way shape or form or another. Let's just face facts. You cannot raise more than two and a half percent above the taxes. So one way or another taxes are gonna go up, because they certainly not going to go down. I mean, I think there would be a snowstorm in the middle of July before the taxes will go down. and there is a better chance of there being a snowstorm in the middle of July than the tax is ever going down, one way, shape, form or another. I don't know the numbers, but there's about 50 odd items in here of dealing with speed humps, bumps, whatever you want to call them. And I find it very, very interesting that every single one of those items was placed on file. In case there's anyone out in

In the real world, it doesn't know what that means. When it gets placed on file, the circular bucket, that's where it goes. Item number 19C. There seems to be an issue with 100 Providence Street, at some point in time, the city will have to either take charge, take the property, sell it, do something with it, or once the ambulances leave there, it will sit vacant for 30 years. I hope that doesn't happen. You got property, something to do with it? Do something with it. Sell it? Don't let somebody come in and tear it down and build condos there. You need more housing. Housing. Housing. Should I say it one more time, Mr. Mayor? Housing.

Thank you. Is your name, city residents, and item number?

Good evening, members of the council. Mike Kane from the Worcester Regional Chamber of Commerce. I'm also a renter here in the city of Worcester. On behalf of the chamber, we'd like to offer our support for line 250. of the tax classification vote tonight to lessen the tax classification gap here in the city. Ever since 1984, Worcester has operated under a dual tax rate system, and these have been designed to protect the homeowners. However, over this time, what we've seen is the commercial and residential tax rates have widened significantly, and now Worcester has one of the highest commercial tax rates in the Commonwealth. This imbalance has produced economic consequences. We've seen that businesses are being discouraged from coming to the Worcester, locating here, investing here, and expanding. I had a conversation this week with a business owner who actually invested here in the city of Worcester.

And they saw a 100% increase in their tax rate when they invested. That corresponded to $20,000. just for their tax rate for investing here in the city. Additionally, what we've seen since 1984 is that the total property values for commercial tax rates has decreased significantly. It was 34%, now it's only 21%. So supporting line 254, it's not going to give businesses a break, but it's ensuring that Worcester has long-term financial stability. It's strengthening our commercial tax base, stabilizing future residential tax bills, and sending a clear message that Worcester welcomes investment, welcomes jobs, and welcomes a balanced economy going forward here. Thank you.

Thank you. Is your name, is your residence item number?

Lenzalaskis, I think it's item eight or somewhere around there. I'm advocating for line 260, which I feel is the most fair assessment. I also would like to advocate for the reason I come every time is because I'm a school teacher of Worcester Public Schools and I'm here to advocate for the kids and I'm hoping that this year that of the City meets the minimum requirement and that we get the money that the law says we're supposed to. and some at some point we didn't and someone pointed out to me that we have or we will this year So I appreciate that. If it's not, when you see the budget, whoever's going to be on the committee when the budget comes out, please make sure that the minimum requirement, which is the foundation budget, is met and not

99.9 cents and not 99 cents, but 100% a dollar. That's what we're looking for. So 260 is the line I'm looking for. I also I have a brother-in-law that owns a company and he also has a house in Worcester and he feels and I do especially that that's equitable because we want to support business. We need jobs. We need jobs to support the kids that I teach. and so I can see both sides of the avenue and with line 260, it's around 3% for homeowners like myself and for businesses. So I would appreciate line 260 and I would also appreciate on behalf of the children of Worcester that we Pay the minimum so that if we run out of money or we have a challenge, we can say to the state, hey, we need help. And they don't say to us, hey, you don't even meet the minimum requirement.

So why should we give it to you? So thank you.

Thank you. Is your name C-Residence and item number?

Happy Holidays. My name is Gary Hunter. I live in District 5. I hope you'll indulge me a little bit on the taxes. And maybe I don't understand completely the dual tax system. I know it gives advantage to the homeowners, which I am one. if somebody could talk why we still have a dual tax rate would be great and also somebody brought that up earlier that If it goes over, I saw some estimates it was going to go up three point something percent or whatever. Does that mean it has to be a two and a half override? The other one I'd like to just mention is 12-B. With the snowstorm, I was on Facebook and I was defending the city's work on the snowplows.

and apparently a lot of the city was not pre-treated and I just hopefully we'll come up with something and see why that wasn't done. The last one is 12A. We have a homeless situation, a housing situation, and we've had it for years. It just doesn't seem like it's an urgent and many more. As far as the homeless were more apt to kick people and have the police play loud music and kick them out for the only place they could go to get out of the weather. I don't see a replacement for what was at the registry. And I think we need to talk louder and get something done. Look at the temperatures this week. The last thing I want to say is I was not at the meeting last week. I was at the meeting the week before, and I'm ashamed of the City Council.

you cut off public debate. This should be automatic. You cut 13 people off the phone and didn't allow any debate beyond that. I think that's a disgraceful and I think that we should

Thank you.

Not allow that. And I think if it happens again, we might have to do something about it. Thank you. Action. I know it's over.

Thank you. Next speaker, please.

You can cut me off.

Joe Pagano, resident of Worcester, speaking on number eight, tax classification. Thank you for the opportunity. 5,266 dollars. That's the average annual single-family tax bill. It strikes me as low. for the baseline services we enjoy. 24 hours a day we turn on faucets and have clean water to drink. We flush toilets all day long without concern for stressing our property's septic system. Trash and leaves are picked up at the curb. Streets are paved, swept, plowed, and at some point repaired. Children have the privilege of attending public schools of choice. Beautiful parks provide a place to play. Law Enforcement and Fire Personnel, keep us safe. Have an emergency? Call 911. Have a concern? Call 311. Have a complaint? I don't want to hear it. but I will speak of one that relates to business. Tax incremental financing with developers that have not gone as planned. Sometimes in business, like in life, deals fall apart. You move on, you make new deals.

I'm not a fan of TIFs, but they are necessary, particularly in distressed areas to stimulate economic development. We wouldn't be so dependent on TIFs if our tax structure is more fair to business. Business drives the economy, which expands the tax base. With the eighth highest commercial tax rate in the Commonwealth, we're driving business away. Growing our tax base will not only decrease dependency on issuing TIFs, it will decrease dependency on federal and state funding, for critical social services that too many residents depend upon to survive. Finally, as one of the fastest growing cities in New England, Worcester's tax base will need to increase to maintain and improve upon public services We depend upon and enjoy. For these reasons, I strongly urge the Council to continue its commitment to narrow the gap between the residential and commercial tax rates to benefit generations to come.

Thank you.

Anybody online?

We got one person.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We do have one calling user online. Try me, Tom Henry. Please say your name, city of residence, and I am your caller.

Tom Henry, yes, hello. David Webb, Olympia. Sorry for the fake name. I was worried Nico would put me last again. 10.7a the DPW double-dipping should bother people especially since neither jobs are done well 11c a good city would already be doing this 19b the report on the Worcester Police Department failing to follow their own procedures and protocols in regards to specifically body-worn camera usage. This is not a new thing. I filed many complaints about the matter. It seems like the Worcester Police Department doesn't feel the need to engage their camera when interacting with the unhoused community likely because the Worcester Police Department doesn't see them as people unfortunately that is not the only issue The City Law Department consistently withholds public records despite having had to pay $180,000 to the Telegram two years ago and being told not to continue that pattern of practices by the judge then.

Your law department seems to function to protect the city from liability rather than ensuring its administration and employees are in compliance with the laws they're supposed to be following, like open meeting, public record, and simply respecting people's rights. City Solicitor Alex Kalkunis, the new public records officer, cannot possibly do both her jobs well because if she actually started following the public records law and providing footage from officers, she'd have a lot more liability to answer for. The city's ongoing pattern of promoting the person trained by the last guy, the Worcester way, rather than having a search for a competent, qualified candidate, continues to screw over constituents through mediocre services and unending lawsuits. Yes, please. Make sure the cops are actually using the cameras. They're paid extra to use. But also, please comply with the public records law and fork over the videos of their bad behavior without making people endlessly appeal to the state.

The judge said in 2022 that she expected you to do your job with integrity. It would be wonderful if you all started.

Thanks. Okay. Okay, we'll close that part of the meeting. Okay, first up on the agenda, we have an election of two residents of the Library Board of Directors. We have three applicants, Sharon Boateng, District Three, Stephanie Pasha from District One, Ron Laudel from District Four, So the clerk was how we're going to vote on this. The clerk is going to call the role of the city council with each member indicating the preference for each of the two available positions. The person or persons receiving the most votes and who also receives six more votes, which is a majority of the full council, should be elected to that position. If a position is not filled on the first ballot, the list of eligible candidates shall be reduced by removing the candidate who received the least number of votes on the prior roll call.

As the candidates, you don't have to, but if you want to say a few words, you're more than welcome. Seeing nobody rushing up to the podium, I think that's a no. Okay.

Chairman, Councilor King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I said a quick question. I didn't see it on here, but these other folks, do we have an idea when they're coming off? I'm just wondering, because of the numbers and what we're voting on, do we know, through the Charity Administration, District 1, 2, 3, and 5, one of those folks? I already know, obviously, Bagdas and Wallace. But outside of that, do we have a general year within which that they're coming off before we vote?

The Library Director here, Jason.

Through the chair. Elections, we have a 12 board membership. The design is every six years, they roll off. So essentially, you vote for two every Our next two that are coming off will be Matthew Ngo in 2026 and former Senate President Harriet Chandler. Her term ends in 2026. However, one stipulation is that board members are allowed to serve up to 10 years, but not more than 10 years. So if someone fills in term, they may ask to renew their term as long as that total is in more than 10 years.

Okay, that's sufficient.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wardell?

Yes, I have a comment here that I'd like to share, if that's possible. Good evening, Mayor, City Manager, City Councilors, members of the Selection Committee, Jason. My name is Ron Waddell. Truly grateful to be here. Otherwise, I'd be at home trying to figure out seventh grade math. I'm grateful for the opportunity to share why I think I should serve on the Worcester Public Library Board. My connection to the library isn't just theoretical, it's practical. From 2014 to 2017, I was the inaugural pilot of the second bookmobile, Lilly, pulling up the housing complexes, schoolyards, neighborhoods, and corners where Access mattered most. I watched kids light up when they got to hold books in their hands and listened at nauseam as they talked to Siri on the iPads. I saw parents discover resources they didn't know existed and strangers become neighbors as we pulled together and brought knowledge to them. I also stand here as a dad.

I have two sons that are in the Worcester Public Schools. and the library has shaped their childhood, literally. Isaiah was born while I was on Lilly. One City One Library, Talking Books, Museum Passes, Tech Labs, Literary Programs, I've watched as all those have allowed their world to expand because of the library. and I want to have the same access for every family, especially now, when information, technology and truth don't reach everyone equally. Professionally, I lead Legendary Legacies, a nonprofit focused on reentry for formerly incarcerated and community violence intervention. We started with a seeding of an idea and now are a multi-million dollar organization serving over 150 people a year. With that, we are working with folks navigating trauma, incarceration, unstable housing, and all other barriers to opportunity. So when I talk about equity, it's not theory again. I sit with the young men trying to apply for a job.

and sit with those who are trying to make their way through challenging times. A mother looking for a safe place to bring her kids and returning citizens to learn how to use the library. That's why the library's mission resonates with me, to be the heart of the community, to nurture lifelong learning, and to champion intellectual freedom and to make information and services available to all people. I know these realities and I know the opportunity within them. In that, I also serve on the Worcester Education Collaborative Board, the Greater Worcester Community Foundation Board. I am the Vice President of the Church Council at the Journey Community Church. And these roles have taught me what governance is. that it requires listening deeply, asking good questions, stewarding trust, and aligning mission and strategy. If selected, what I bring is an equity lens grounded in practice, ensuring that the library doesn't just open its doors, but actively reaches, equips, and supports people who don't yet feel invited.

strategic thinking connecting the library's mission to civic learning, digital resilience, and community well-being, and deep relational leadership grounded in collaboration, Curiosity, Accountability, and the belief that solutions are strongest when shaped with the people who are most impacted. Lastly, we are in a moment of misinformation, division, rising need, and widening gaps, not just in literacy or technology, but in trust, connection, and dignity. It's my opinion that libraries sit at the intersection of truth, learning, and hope. They safeguard our democracy and expand imagination and anchor community. Sometimes they are literally places of refuge, be it for sources of warmth or cooling, but always places of belonging. At the end of the day, this isn't just a board seat for me.

It's a chance to widen the circles for those who belong, a chance to make sure every child, every family, every neighbor, whether they came for books, for safety, for warmth, or for hope, knows that this library is theirs. I've spent my life building these pathways and it would be an honor if you saw it fit for me to serve in this capacity. Thank you.

Thank you. Did you name?

If he did, I may as well. Stephanie Pasha, District 1. Thank you for your time this evening. Mr. Mayor, Manager Bautista, members of City Council, I'm seeking reappointment to the Worcester Public Library Board of Directors and humbly ask for your support. Many of you may have some PTSD seeing me here, as I was in touch with you regularly during my first term serving the library, seeking support for new ideas, sharing updates about successful initiatives, and inviting you to events. The Worcester Public Library is my whole identity. My social media feed is almost entirely dogs and the Worcester Public Library. On a really good day, it's dogs at the Worcester Public Library. My friends all know that every conversation with me will include something about the library, whether it's sharing an event, how to use Libby, information about sewing classes, a recitation of the items in the Library of Things collection, There's always a reason for me to bring up the WPL.

And I fear that if I send Jason Homer one more TikTok idea, he will block me. Serving on the board for a second term may seem greedy. but the experiences I gained in my first term and historical knowledge that gives me would be an asset to the current board as well as to the executive director and his team. It provides me with a broader lens to help evaluate and offer guidance on the execution of new initiatives. I've also had the opportunity to build relationships with the Executive Director and members of his team, We've worked well together in the past and have developed trust and mutual respect. As a Worcester resident for nearly two decades, I also bring a network of friends and professional connections with me. One of the most important roles the board members have is to advocate for the library, and I do so shamelessly. Every year I get new people from my circle to attend events, give money, and even to sign up for a Worcester Public Library card. including friends from Cambridge, Stoughton, and Canton.

In short, I am respectfully asking for your support and confidence so that I may continue to meaningfully and wholeheartedly serve the institution that I love so dearly. and that serves its patrons in the community so richly. It is an honor and a privilege to be affiliated with the Worcester Public Library and serving on the Board of Directors is not something I take lightly. It is a deep commitment and should I be selected, I assure you that I will accept that responsibility fully and enthusiastically. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thank you. Online we have Sharon Boateng. Sharon, I don't know if you wanna say a few words?

Yes, thank you very much, Mr. Mayor. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, City Council, and members of community. My name is Sharon Boateng. I am very honored to be here tonight as well. Online. I am a candidate for the Worcester Public Library Board of Directors and thank you for the opportunity to speak. I am a proud Worcester resident and a firm believer in the power of of Public Spaces, especially libraries. The Worcester Public Library is one of the few places where people of all backgrounds, ages, and experiences can come together freely. I believe it provides access to information, support learning, and offers opportunities that many in our community would not otherwise have. That being said, I think it's something worth protecting and expanding on. My community involvement has taught me a lot about Western needs, ranging from I am a sexual assault counselor at

I support survivors through crisis situations and help them to navigate medical, legal and social systems. Through this work, I have learned and seen how important it is for people to have safe spaces, trustworthy institutions, and accessible resources. I have also volunteered in places like Emma Bowen Foundation, the Andesatic at South High Community School, with Christopher Hite, Assistant Living, and my local church. These experiences have all come together and really shaped my understanding of community dignity and equity, which I think are values that guide my commitment to public service. Professionally, I work as administration at Brigham Women's and Hospital. I handle philanthropic gifts with attention with accuracy. I have also worked to manage databases, which I think is very important in the library resources.

I understand that this board plays an important role in ensuring the library remains accessible and responsive to community needs. During my research into the meetings that have been previously done before, I noticed that there is a lot of talk on hybrid participation, maintaining public facilities, and I think and I believe also that the library governance should continue to reflect those same priorities, creating policies that ensures everyone from every neighborhood in the city and background can fully access the library. Todd for long planning and also making sure resources are funded at levels at real community meet and demand. If selected, I will bring dedication, curiosity, fairness, and a strong work ethic. I will listen very carefully, collaborate respectfully, and also keep the community at the center of every decision. I want to help and share the Worcester Public Library continues to be a welcoming place and enriching and also fast forward thinking for youth and children.

Thank you for your time and thank you for my consideration in the Worcester Public Library Board of Directors.

Thank you.

Okay, so we're going to choose the two candidates each council will vote for. If you don't get picked, someone will not be picked. You can apply next year. Sometimes it takes twice to get on the library board. Okay, everybody else set for the procedure here? You're good? Okay. Two candidates. Yep, so you'll pick two candidates.

Okay, roll call. Councilor Bergman. Stephanie Pasha, Ronald Waddell. Councilor Colorio.

Sharon, Enron, Waddell.

Councilor Haxhiaj.

Pasha and Waddell.

Councilor King. Pasha, Waddell. Mero-Carlson, Sharon Boateng, and Wallace Waddell. Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda, Pasha, and Waddell.

Councilor Pacillo, Pasha, and Waddell.

Russell, Pasha, and Waddell.

Councilor Toomey, Boateng, and Waddell.

and Mayor Petty. Stephanie Pasha and Ron Waddell. Okay, Mr. Mayor, on the first ballot, we have Stephanie Pasha and Ron Waddell being elected.

Okay, congratulations. I look forward to working with you.

Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, we're gonna go to the tax classification hearing. Hopefully it goes as smoothly as the library vote. So we have 8A through 8I. So we'll do proposals and people can speak. And Councilor Toomey.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Looking at I thought it was very important that the message be sent that there's equity. and if you look at line 266 you'll see it's the closest percent change to the tax bills from year over year for both the residents and for business. So, line 267 is one that I would propose.

Okay, so 267 would be the... the factor for the CECIP factor would be 1.7446 and that would be a 3.56% increase for the residents, and 3.57 for the businesses, which averaged about $188 for residents, and 12.92 for businesses. Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think for most of us, at least for myself, this is one of the nights I least like coming to City Council because we can't make it seems like we can't make anybody happy and I get it because half the people that own commercial property aren't going to like what we do and the other half that are residential property I'm going to propose line 269 which is the lowest and it's slightly different than the previous I did spend a significant amount of time over the last few days discussing these numbers We're basing the increases, you just mentioned what there would be under line 267, based upon a median

and I'm assuming same thing with the condo, two family and three family. The truth is a lot of properties don't fall nicely into that median. And if you look at the mean average, which is the average of all the properties together. With the residential properties, 40% are going to be higher in value than the average that's put on these tables. So in other words, 40% of the property owners in residential properties tax bills will be higher than no matter what number we pick. That's just the reality. Compare that to the commercial property owners, only 44. and 44 properties fall above the average as opposed to 10,000 under the residential. So we will affect 10,000 people, in my opinion, greater then the 44 property owners under the commercial. By no means am I minimizing the burden this puts on commercial property owners and I think

I say this every year when it comes time for the tax classification vote and it never seems to materialize and I'll take it upon myself. and the next term to try to be more outspoken about it. But we really need to prepare ahead of time for the options that could be available so that we don't run into this dilemma of hurting one versus helping the other. Because my intent, and I think all our intent, is to help everybody in Worcester, whether you're a residential or commercial property owner. But we can't do that. and the way the current system is set up. So in the coming weeks, Mr. Chairman, I'd like and I will file an order for us to consider to consider how we tax nine or more units. And going by the numbers, if we tax nine or more units like we tax commercial property, and let's face it, if you own a building with nine or more units, you're not likely to be owner occupied and you're likely to be running that as a business, not as a residential owner.

If we were able to tax The approximately thousand properties on the tax roll that are now taxed as residential properties that have nine or more units We would collect an extra $18.18 million in tax revenue. So that's not the only suggestion I have, but I'm sure others will have other suggestions. But we can't leave this conversation to tax classification night because it always ends up like it will end up tonight. Some people will be happy and some people won't. And I think we can do better if we're more creative. It's not going to happen tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Seeing nobody else, Councilor Pacillo, followed by Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. You know, I want to start by agreeing with Councilor Bergman. This is a really unfortunate meeting every single year and we can't make Anybody happy? And I think it's important to note that this past fall, the Massachusetts Municipal Association released a report called the perfect storm cities and towns face historic fiscal pressures. This lays out very plainly, state funding has not kept place with inflation. Unrestricted local aid is down about 25% from the early 2000s when you adjust for inflation. and this means cities like ours are asked to do more every single year with less. We are absorbing rising costs in schools, public safety, DPW, There has to be a better way than sitting here every December and fighting each other. It shouldn't be residence versus commercial. It really isn't a productive conversation.

So this is mostly about how do we keep Worcester livable for people who are here? We want new families. We want affordable houses. We want to make sure people can afford their rent. Every little bit counts. And, you know, I said this last year, as Councilor Russell pointed out to me, but we feel the pinch at my house just like everybody else between heat, you know, the rising utility costs, gas, groceries. Everyone in Worcester are juggling rising costs throughout all aspects of their lives, and it's the holidays. We don't want to push the residential rate too high and make it harder for people to stay in their homes. I want Worcester to always be a place that's affordable for everyone. and that's why I want to keep the residential rate as reasonable as I can. But at the same time, we need to be honest about the commercial side of the equation. Worcester has one of the highest commercial tax rates in the region.

Last year we set a rate just three cents above the lowest possible residential, which is why I think Councilor Toomey's suggestion is reasonable. It's two cents more. And I know that doesn't give a lot back to businesses, but it does send the message that the gap between business and residential and commercial needs to be shrunk down. And I say this as someone who is actively trying to help bring grocery stores into Worcester. and I was thinking about it recently, I drive to Shrewsbury on Sundays to go to Market Basket. As soon as you cross the line into Shrewsbury, You have Market Basket, Trader Joe's, Whole Foods. These grocery stores should be in Worcester. Our tax rate in Worcester for commercial properties is more than double shoe spree. So I just really believe there needs to be a balance. We need to keep homeowners stable and renters protected.

but we also need to show small and mid-sized businesses that Worcester is a place where they can grow. And at the end of the day, I don't want to live in a city where the only businesses who can afford to be here are chain restaurants. I would live in Phoenix if that were the case. So I support Councilor Toomey's suggestion of line 267. Thank you so much.

Thank you. Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is an important vote. and I think one of the things that I like to see is again some equity We know that right now in Worcester families and small businesses continue to feel the pressure of rising costs, housing instability, and uneven economic recovery. Tonight's vote will have a real impact on families, small businesses, seniors, small landlords, homeowners, Those decisions should be grounded in equity and in the lived experiences of both residents and business here in the city. Folks need to understand that.

I agree that modest increases for both residential and commercial property owners in order to meet our obligations for essential services are important. I also believe, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman, I also know this one thing. We have to take a look at the budget. Every year, I know this past term, we took a vote and reduced the amount of back and forth we can have as a council and finance committee. However, we need to work with the city manager to look at essential services versus desired services. We are approaching the next five years that are going to be extremely difficult. We have A situation where the cost of living is rising, inflation is rising, wages are not. Services and the need for services continue to rise, Mr. Chairman.

A gradual movement towards a greater balance between commercial and residential certainly makes sense, but we have to be fiscally responsible while protecting households already facing financial strain. and that financial strain has a direct impact on business, on commercial entities. And that's in the form of making sure we have a local workforce. If they can't afford to live here, we don't have a reliable workforce. We know that. Purchasing. Right now folks' discretionary funds that they're using, they're going out to eat less. They're engaging in things less in a more conservative way. Residents deserve this equity and I also like to ask a couple of questions.

One of the things that continues to be asked about me is the valuations of our residential properties through the chair to the administration. I would just like and so forth. I think that's sort of a response to the market fluctuations, our valuations of commercial industrial property values and residential property values and their market adjustment. residentially, what people are seeing in the neighborhoods is that properties are selling at a higher rate. And that's impacting, you know, and their bottom line. In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, we know that in Boston, they're looking at the commercial and the residential and their dual tax rate.

the thing that I'd like to see is when we talk about equity is as Councilor Pacillo and Councilor Toomey mentioned, how close can we be to fairness? But if we could ask a question to the Chair with those two specific questions regarding the current market and property valuation.

Suhaib Safsa.

Good evening. Through the chair to you, Councilor King. Your question was regarding what were the average market adjustments for residential properties, commercial, industrial, et cetera, this year.

So through the chair, if I could quickly again, what folks are saying, you know, the property next to them residentially, it's increasing. People are paying overprice for the impact that that has. How's that impacting the market? And then additionally, the question around are commercial properties decreasing in value? Are they increasing? Are we in a different situation than Boston, for example, through the Chair?

King. So this year was actually a relatively calm year with respect to market adjustments. Within the single family class alone, We saw roughly on average a 2.7% market adjustment up. The two and three family classes were with the two family was roughly right around five and a half percent. Bring it down. Bring it down? There you go. Is that better? Yes. was roughly around 5.5%, and the three families this year had a market adjustment up around 3.5%. and so when you're wanting to know about the commercial values going up or down again it was a very calm year.

With respect to commercial values changing, they didn't go up much, like less than 2% on average. and our industrial class was very, very calm with respect to market adjustments being less than almost half a percent. So things were very calm on that front. you know with respect to people paying more for their their properties and the market itself obviously this year compared to the last five years has been one of the the and I think that can all be attributed obviously to what the interest rates are relative to what they were maybe five years ago.

And, you know, it's the open market, the free market speaking. I will say this though that we have had a tremendous amount of new growth in the last five years here at Worcester and that has been a really good thing. So it seems almost impossible to drive down almost any street without seeing something being built or having been under construction. and that has really been a huge help for the overall health, financial health of this city. You were asking another question regarding the city of Boston.

Right. So I was just asking in comparison to Boston, where they're looking at their commercial property rates going down, where it sounds like we're not in that situation. It's pretty even. Is that right through the chair?

Through the Chair to you, Councilor. Boston has had a very different economic impact over the last five years, primarily due to the pandemic and the massive influx of Office space now having been vacant. We had that here in Worcester, but Worcester recovered and is recovering much more quickly in part due to the fact that a lot of these office buildings that were vacant are now being converted into mixed use style properties where there's apartments maybe on the second floor up and some retail or office space on the first floors. And there's a plethora of those developments going on right now.

Thank you. And I just wanted to ask you another question, Chair, with regards to the tax levy. If you could just compare last go-around with this go-around. I know we were at 421. Mr. McGruthy?

To the Chair, are you asking the difference in the tax levy between FY25 and FY26?

Yes.

So in FY25, we had a tax levy of $396 million. This year it's a proposed tax levy of $399 million. This year it's a proposed tax levy of $421 million. that's a result of the proposition two and a half allowance the new growth that was referenced by the assessor and that includes the overlay which is not in the budget per se but it is an amount raised by the city to address any abatements that are processed throughout the fiscal year.

and what should the public take that to mean? How does that impact things through the chair? . Is there any other way to explain it to the public so they can understand?

Essentially what we do is each year the property tax is raised by 2 1 , New growth, which the assessor mentioned, is new investment within the city, new buildings, new utilities that are subject to personal property tax. and so on. It's about that kind of new value that's added to the city. It's not about year over year growth in the value of an existing building or an existing home. It's about something new that's entered. Those two components allow for the city to increase its property tax year over year to address the cost of operations on an annual basis.

Thank you. To the Chair. Last year, I remember Councilor Russell mentioning tax it to the max. If you could speak to the allowable tax levy and what that will result in. What numbers will we be looking at?

So the city, under the law, the city is authorized to raise $446 million this year. Due to actions by this council under the financial integrity plan, the council has chosen to waive the right essentially to raise certain taxes along the way, usually new growth over budget. that amount goes into what's called the unused tax levy capacity the city's unused tax levy capacity is 25.8 million right now that puts us at eighth highest in the state we're one of the kind of strongest communities in terms of monies that are authorized to be taxed but not taxed. The result of that is a tax savings to the taxpayer in the sense that if all of those funds were included in the tax base, which they could do by vote of this council, that would increase the levy, it would increase the associated tax costs.

As mentioned, this council has chosen not to do that. So those funds, $25.8 million, are in that unused tax levy capacity. This proposed budget maintains that unused tax levy capacity per past tradition.

Thank you. I'm not for taxing to the max. I want to make that clear. I'm going to be supporting Councilor Toomey's recommendation, but I do have a question regarding one of the things that I brought forward to the council unanimously supported and that's going to come before us tonight is the personal property tax exemption. One of the things that we are looking to do with that is to give small businesses a break. We're looking at close to 3,000 businesses that would receive a break. And I know that the personal property tax is part of I believe the new growth this year. So if we could speak to personal property tax exemption A and then B for the public, if we could speak to the new growth that we're experiencing, that way.

And again, for the public, the personal property tax that I put forward exemption for small businesses for those, I think the value is $10,000 and under. But you can speak to that through the Chair.

Mr. Sasser.

Thank you. Through the chair to you, Councilor King. So if we take the total number of taxable personal property counts and we apply the threshold and the maximum threshold exemption, which is $10,000, out of a total of 4,267 taxable accounts, we would be exempting 2,821 of those accounts. which is roughly a, it's a 66.1% and so forth. That's all the personal property accounts. So the percent total value that could be exempted would be

Because we're dealing with so much value in this class, it's not even 1% of the total value within personal property itself. if you were to look at the taxable impact of exempting these 2,821 plus accounts You would realize roughly a $231,397 difference, meaning under $232,000 in tax revenue would be Exempted. You had a question regarding the new growth and how that relates to these exemptions. Yes. So in almost all municipalities throughout the Commonwealth,

The largest growth that any municipality will get in personal property is of course through the utilities. and that rings very true for us here in Worcester and I can assure you that those accounts will not be exempted. and with respect to the new growth on these 2,000 plus accounts, it would be very, very minor. Bear in mind that if we were to abate all of these accounts, say abate or exempt, The average exemption amount would equal $82.03 for these accounts. So it's a very minor impact with respect to that.

Mr. Chairman, if I may just add. Is there a number before you continue? Is there a number associated with the PPE personal property taxes that are coming in through growth before you continue? Is there a number that we've? and so forth. And so we're going to settle that.

Through the chair, you're referring to the amount of new growth that the city received this year from that amount actually equaled $5,653,641 taxable dollars in new growth. And that was primarily through our utility values.

Thank you.

Thank you.

To the Chair, just quickly to add to what the Assessor said, as he just mentioned, much of personal property, if you think about utilities, utilities are often located in rights of way or across other people's properties. and so in that sense they do not receive a real estate bill they are primarily billed as personal property and so the large majority of personal property is based on utility . . . . . . and so forth, but the utilities are a big part of that. And that's why you see such a significant disparity even though 66% of the total number of personal property taxpayers would be exempted,

that only represents less than 1% of the total personal property tax liability because so much of the personal property tax is carried by either major utilities or major corporations. the exemptions account for very small operators.

Thank you. And through the chair to the administration, with regards to accessory dwelling units and property values, you know, one of the concerns again is around valuation, et cetera. what rate are we, you know, experiencing accessory dwelling units coming on board and what is the impact on property values to the chair?

Mr. Assessa?

Sure. Through the Chair to you, Councilor King. We have been tracking the ADU Accessory Dwelling Unit building permits and there have been some that have actually come online. If you were to ask me the exact number, I couldn't give that to you, but I think it's roughly around 20 so far that we have in our database, with more coming online and permits being pulled for future ADUs. With respect to the value that it is adding to this property, that is oftentimes determined by a number of factors. A, the square footage of the improvement. B, the grade. of the Quality of Construction. And of course, since it's new, we're going to consider it in reasonably good condition with respect to the cost to cure.

but on average you're looking at a range that could go from roughly 65,000 depending on the lower end all the way up through well over 150,000 in value being added, but it is entirely dependent on those primary three factors.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, again, I think 267 is the best place that we can land. Moving forward, what I would like to see instead of the sort of approach that we've had, if by way of an order, if we could receive an updated or a new 10 to 15 year plan that incrementally reduces the gap. with considerations of course for folks on the residential side. It'll allow for predictability for business and residents because there's a fundamental question that remains. and that fundamental question is how do we create a tax structure that supports both businesses and our residential taxpayers? That's not just a fiscal challenge, Mr. Chairman.

That's a commitment to justice, community sustainability, and economic justice as well. And I think that's what We know those folks with the triple net leases are struggling. We know that folks that are cost burdened with their rental obligations or mortgage obligations went from 30 to 50 percent in the last couple of years. and there's a real need for assistance out there. I think that the only suggestion that's made sense tonight is the 267. as far as tax breaks go. I'm hoping that we get a really, perhaps an unanimous vote this year on that particular line item, but I want to again go back to what can we do for small businesses? We're taking the step in the right direction.

Not only will this personal property tax exemption will impact close to 3,000 businesses, but it will also SAVED THE CITY FROM MY NUMBERS HALF A MILLION DOLLARS IN ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS OVER THE NEXT DECADE AND FREEING US UP TO GO AFTER THE FOLKS THAT ARE NOT MEETING THEIR OBLIGATIONS Rather than scrutinizing our small businesses. So I'm very happy that we're moving forward on that and I look forward to and so on, continuing that work, Mr. Chairman. Hopefully we can gain some equity with our rental challenges. Hopefully we move forward with some rent control measures here and try to get that through the state. With our next council, but we have to be equitable and well-rounded. Thank you. Mr. Chairman.

Thank you

Mayor Joseph M. Petty.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank everybody for coming out tonight. It's an important issue. I think everybody pretty much summed it up. It's one of those votes you don't want to take because both sides aren't going to walk away happy at the end of the day. I am going to support Councilor Toomey's motion on two lines 267. It's hard, this brings us $8 more based on this chart. to the residents, but it's also a large increase. It's around almost $1,300 for the businesses. And just like last year, it wasn't a great decision either. I think we might have been in Amherst last year, if I remember, but we're pretty close. and what we did last year. And I just have some questions, really. It was said that Ms. McGrathie, Brandon reports that when it comes to business, some of that I mentioned tonight, from the commercial tax rate, we're at the 8th.

and for residents, I thought we were one of the lowest in the commonwealth. It doesn't make it right or wrong, but just lowest in the commonwealth.

I mentioned we're the eighth highest unused tax levy capacity. But similarly, I don't, the number is actually in our frequently asked questions item. You are correct. Our commercial tax rate is one of the highest, and our residential tax rate is probably in the bottom third.

The bottom third? Statewide. I think that's correct. So we've done our job here, there's no question about it. We don't tax to the max with $25.8 million below that. We started that 20 years ago. I think it was probably back in 2002, 2003, where it was probably a million. maybe close to zero, then about a million dollars below the cap, then we raised that to 25.8 million. Imagine if that was being taxed on top of this right now, taxes would even be greater right now. and there's so many costs. Look at cost of insurance, cost of water throughout the state, cost of utilities. It's almost a mortgage payment now. You get that gas bill and electric bill in the mail now, what are you looking at, a mortgage payment for some people? It's pretty expensive. And this is also expensive. There's no question about that. But I think it's important. We started 10, 15 years ago to bring Gradually bring the rates closer together. Not to say we'll ever get to a single tax rate, but we did start that 10 years ago. Don't we get away from that? And hopefully we can start that back in the future. We can know what Councilor Bergman has to say.

and how we can move on that forward too. That was actually discussed several years ago and there was no real appetite because you need state approval to do that. but something we can look at again. Because it's important that we look at ways to bring down some of these rates, whether it be the residents and definitely the commercial tax rate. Because people want to expand here and the cost, I think every, if I remember in the report, maybe joint city of town was Auburn that wasn't at the single tax rate, but they were pretty close. And the rest of them all were. Fitchburg was like us. Now they're at the regular single tax rate. and Auburn's on that direction, too. I think there's another city in town that also did it recently, too. So we want to compete. We've got to take this seriously. because why not go to Auburn? Why not go to Shrewsbury? Why not go to Fitchburg and invest there on your property? I just have one question.

When you look at these tax rates, I know we talked about market adjustments and things, Mr. McCarthy, but what goes into the rate when you do the rate? What are all the numbers, all of the factors that you look at?

.

Through the Chair, as mentioned, the tax rate is essentially the cost of providing government with the tax levy required. So in this case, we're looking at $421 million. that amount is then divided among all of the taxpayers based on the value of the property and the class of the property. So if it's residential, Under Worcester's dual tax rate system, they would be valued and taxed at a residential rate or taxed at a residential rate based on their value. If it's commercial, it would be valued and then taxed at the commercial rate. That amount, the budget amount of $421 million is based on, again, the 2.5% increase allowed under the law. any new growth that is new investment into the city that can be captured under Proposition 2 1⁄2.

that number is what we use to build the budget each year and then when we come to the tax rates what we're simply doing is funding the budget that was approved back in the spring with minor changes related to free cash and new growth over budget and the like.

Okay, now budget, we do a pretty good job on the budget. You know, I think the compact administration, we can talk about cutting, we've talked about that for years, but most of it's the labor. The majority of the budget would be police, fire, teachers, D.P.W. workers, people who do the jobs every single day. That's where most of the budget's at on essential services. Just one more mention. I worked out what Boston's doing, Cambridge. I think Boston's increasing their rates by 13% this year. And Cambridge is right behind them. I think the commercial rate went up 22%. If you talk to some of the contractors who work in the Boston area, developers, they're coming out west more. So I think this is, if we can really plan this all in the future, this is our chance to capture some of those developers, some of those businesses. It's getting too expensive in Boston, and they're coming out this way. Development's down in those cities and towns on the east, Eastern part of the state for a number of different reasons.

But if we can capture some of those in the surrounding area right here in the city of Worcester, I think that's important to have those discussions. Look at the new growth. I think the assessor was saying new growth in the last five years. You couldn't ask for better new growth here in the city of Worcester. And that's really because what the Council does, what this community does, what the City Manager and his team does when it comes to our finances, our new growth, people are still coming here to develop. and we just don't want to lose that going forward in the future. And because it makes a difference when Mr. McGrath, he's doing the tax rate, I think we're always going to spend money on for the next year. That new growth money is so important for the future of Worcester and we need to continue that in the future. So everyone's going to support Councilor Toomey's item. Thank you.

Councilor George Russell, District 3.

Mr. Chairman, Every year I've talked about the tax rate. I'm going to do this just for the fun of it. I'm going to remind folks that might be at home and don't really understand this. But think of the tax rate as a seesaw. and the more you push down on the residential rate, the business side is gonna come up. and for those of the business community that want to push down on the commercial side, it's going to push up the residential side. Make no mistake about it. It's a seesaw. It's a seesaw, Mr. Chairman, that members of this council have always fought long before I was here and will fight over it long after I'm gone. because an equal tax rate, many people in the community say, why isn't there an equal tax rate? Well, there isn't an equal tax rate because single family homeowners

on their equal tax rate would get a tax bill on average is about almost 30% higher than the one that they have today. And commercial uses, commercial businesses will get a tax bill that's about 40% less. on average. That's what would happen. Mr. Chairman, this sheet that the administration gave us, the big sheet, is an excellent tool. And I really want to congratulate them for doing it. I don't know where you got the great idea, but it's really helpful. and it's helpful because you can look at it all across the board. And when I look at these charts and I hear the conversations on the floor, I hear people talking about You know, what can we do for small businesses? Well, there is something we could do. We could have done it the last 14 years while I've been here. but there's never been an appetite for it.

And I hope going forward that the next council will have an appetite for it. And I'll ask for part of a report to come out of the administration for the small business tax exemption. that is right now allowed under state law. or future councils can adopt, if they choose, a small business tax exemption, which would give a little bit of a break to small businesses. If you want to do that, you can do that. If there's six votes, you can do that. and I would challenge my friends in the business community to advocate for that. In the 14 years that I've been on this council for, I've had various different members of the business community come They say, oh, the poor small business people. But not one of them have ever said, let's adopt the small business tax exemption. Let's all get on the same team. Let's adopt that in the future, small business tax exemption.

Mr. Chairman, my friend and colleague, who I'm going to support his motion for the lowest rate, talked about taxing apartment buildings nine units or more. Well, I think that's one thing that maybe in future years it might be helpful to have another chart or another line on this report. Because when you look at these apartments, to be able to guess Apartments in general, you know, 10-unit building is a big difference between a building with 200 units. There's a big difference here, especially with some of these new modern buildings that are built today. But under the lowest residential tax rate, Mr. Chairman, and my fear of that kind of a thing in the future would be if you're going nine units or above or any number that you pick is that by taxing them, taxing those units more, the ones that have whatever number you pick and above, you're basically passing that bill along to the renters. The renters are going to pay for it.

Okay, it might be a corporation or a big property owner that owns the property, but at the end of the day, Real estate and rentals is a math equation. And once you add on that equation with higher taxes, it's not going to be eaten by the people that own the buildings. In the long run, it's going to be passed along to the tenants, and even under the lowest possible tax rate, the lowest possible tax rate, the tax rate that Councilor Bergman put forward, the one that I'm going to vote for, if I get a chance to vote for it tonight. That rate for the apartments is going to see an 8.24% increase. 8.24% increase on the average apartment complex or the apartment building. What do you think the landlords are going to do with that when they get that bill? You think they're going to say, oh, OK, we'll just pay it and live our merry life? Or you think they're going to pass it along to the tenants?

They're going to pass it along to the tenants. We talk every day about the housing crisis we have and how we need more housing. The growth, much of the new growth that we're talking about is residential growth, which is a good thing for the tax base. and I hear people talking about Market Basket. I go to Market Basket on a regular basis because it's so close to my house. But you know what? You also need land. You need large parcels of land. In our district, we had a supermarket. That supermarket is like a drop in the bucket geographically compared to the ones that they're building today that was being used for the registry headquarters now. You know, but under this lowest tax rate, apartments are gonna see an 8.24% increase. Single family houses are gonna see a 3.41% increase. and the commercial will also see a 3.85% increase. Here we are again, same conversation over and over again.

But I just want to say, small business exemption, and I'll ask for that formulated form of a report. could be adopted today and could be adopted in the future if there's an appetite here for that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor. So seeing nobody else... Okay, nobody else? Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, I'm inclined to support 267. 269 is the lowest residential tax rate. But before I take my vote and make my final decision, I just want to ask you, the Chair, to the administration, if you can walk us through the difference. I know Councilor Russell made some statements. If you can walk us through the difference between 267 and 269. on this as it relates to single-family, three-family condos, commercial. One of the things I've tried to do is take a look at you know as as close as we can be in terms of equity for increasing things so through the Charity Administration if you could kind of share that before I land on my final decision of 269 or 267 through the Chair.

Through the Chair to you, Councilor King. So your question was regarding what's the difference between...

So we have 267 and 269. Yeah, if you could walk me, myself and the public through, you know, the differentiation and what it means.

So if we refer to page 10 of the packet, this is going to list the average single family and also the average commercial property value. Okay. And if we go with line 267, the residential tax rate is going to be $13, and it's awfully small up here, but it's $13.30 per thousand. To put that in perspective, FY25's tax rate Residential is $13.19. On the commercial side, The commercial tax rate will be $28.98 per thousand. And relative to FY25's commercial tax rate, it was $28.61.

If we move down from line 267 and we go to the very bottom, That changes the residential tax rate from $13.30 down to $13.28. It's a two-cent difference. We look at the commercial component. and the difference is from $28.98 per thousand to $29.06 per thousand. So it's eight cents per thousand.

My mind went, my eyes went raw. Where is that again?

That's line 269. And if you're on page 10, it's going to be under the column listed as CIP tax rate. so eight cents on the commercial side two cents on the residential side and that does not change throughout any of our tables, obviously. Line 267 and 269 will have those same tax rates. but if you were to look at the the difference between the residential and the residential tax bill at line 267 it would increase ON AVERAGE ROUGHLY $188 FOR FISCAL YEAR 26 VERSUS $180. SO AN $8 DIFFERENCE BY CHANGING IT TWO CENTS PER THOUSAND.

When you were looking at the commercial tax bill, the average tax bill for commercial would be roughly $1,292 at line 267, that would be the increase for that year. And you're looking at it being $1,395. So you're looking at roughly and so forth. So we're looking at a hundred and two dollar difference on the commercial side by moving at eight cents. And how much on the residential? Eight? Eight cents per thousand between those two lines. So again, if we go to a three family, I would refer you to page, I would go to page 24 out of this packet.

and if you go to line 267 on a three-family tax bill you would see roughly a $307 increase per 100,000 for line 267. And the tax rate would be $13.30. If you move down to line 269, $13.28 per thousand, that would lower the average three-family tax bill from the $307 to a total of $295. So you're looking at roughly $12 difference for the year.

Per 100,000, is that right? Or total? The total value of the, or per 100,000, what is it?

You're through the chair to you, Councilor King. The difference would be $12 in an increase or decrease from the average and so forth. So if we go to line 267, the average single family tax bill increase for the average value of the three family is going to go up roughly $307. On page 10. That's on page 24. 24, okay, I was on the wrong page. That makes sense, okay. For a three-family.

Total.

and then if you go from line 267 and you go down to the last line 269, the difference would be $12 less. It would be a $295 increase versus 307. for a three family property.

Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Okay.

Okay, so we'll take Before we do the line items, we just have to do things in order. So the first vote we're going to take is on 8I and 8H. 8I is the Senior Double Tax Exemption, which we give every year at City Council. and also the personal property tax exemption 8H. You can take those collectively if you want.

Roll call. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj? Yes. Councilor King? Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson? Yes. Councilor Nguyen? Yes. Councilor Ojeda?

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo? Yes. Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes. Now we have dropped the roll call of the budget adjustments for 8F and 8G. And okay, so we have Councilor Toomey's recommendation is 267, which is an increase of... 13 dollars and 30 cents for the residential tax rate not an increase but the rate is 13.30 per thousand and also for business would be 28. 98 per thousand, which is about 3.5%, 3.56% increase, and 3.57% increase.

Mr. Chair, point of order. Could you also take Council Bergman's line item after Council Toomey's? Yes. Just to have it on the record?

As long as it doesn't pass, yes.

Are we allowed, if Councilor Toomey passes, are we allowed to just take a roll call on Councilor Bergman's order? No. We're not, okay.

Okay, so we're gonna take a roll call on line item 267.

Roll call. Along with A&F and A&G, Councilor Bergman.

Mr. Chairman, that last statement got me confused. So 267, if this fails, it will go down to 269.

No, I understand that. But there was other items that were just suggested. Oh, I thought you were referring to line two. I could be wrong. I thought you were referring to line two.

I'm referring to the motion that Councillor Bergman made.

No, I understand what Councillor Haxhiaj is saying. I said, yeah, just to clarify, ADEF and AG are the budget adjustments that we have to vote before the light of them.

So we're doing that first? We're not voting on 267? That was my mistake. That's okay.

Thank you. That helps.

So what are we voting on now?

We're going to vote on 8G and 8G. 8F and 8G.

So there are budget adjustments before the line item.

Those are the adjustments separate to the line item.

Yeah, I should have done that before we did the budget, before we did the tax rate. So we can take those collectively.

Bregman, Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, and Mayor Petty. Yes.

Okay, now we're on the tax rate, which is line 267.

Roll call. Bregman? No. Councilor, Colorio?

No.

Councilor, Haxhiaj?

No.

Councilor, King? No. Councilor, Mero-Carlson? No. Councilor, Nguyen? No. Councilor, Ojeda? Councilor Pacillo?

Yes.

Councilor Russell?

No.

Councilor Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty? Yes. So that fills three to seven? Yep. Okay, so we're going to the line 269. Roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj?

Yes.

Councilor King? Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson? Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda?

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo?

Yes.

Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes.

Okay. MOTION TO RECONSIDER.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER.

MOTION TO RECONSIDER. MOTION TO RECONSIDER. COUNSELOR BERGMAN? COUNSELOR BERGMAN? COUNSELOR BERGMAN? NO. COUNSELOR BERGMAN? NO.

COUNSELOR BERGMAN? NO. COUNSELOR COLORIO?

NO. COUNSELOR COLORIO? NO.

COUNSELOR COLORIO? NO.

COUNSELOR GA? NO. COUNSELOR GA? NO. COUNSELOR GA? NO. COUNSELOR KING? NO. COUNSELOR KING? NO. COUNSELOR KING?

NO.

COUNSELOR MERO-CARLSON?

Noyan, Councilor Ojeda?

No.

Councilor Pacillo?

No.

Councilor Russell? No. Councilor Toomey? No. And Mayor Petty?

No.

Okay, we have a couple motions from Councilor Bergman and Councilor Russell, so take those collectively. All those in favor? I'm sorry, a roll call? Roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio? Yes. Councilor Haxhiaj? Yes. King, Mero-Carlson, Noyan, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, Petty.

Okay.

I'm sorry, we have to file B, C, and D?

Yep, next item is to file B, C, and D, roll call.

Yes, Mayor Petty.

Yes. Go on petitions.

So, Mr. Mayor, 9-8, we're gonna send that to Public Works. Russell, is that okay?

Okay, we have nine.

Yes, that should go to committee.

Say that again? Councilor Russell, what'd you do? Oh, you wanted the committee, okay.

Yeah, the staff is not ready to act on it, otherwise I would have passed otherwise.

So 9A, we're going to 9B, we're going to refer to Public Works Committee. 9C and 9G, we're going for the Traffic and Parking Committee. If there's anybody here for any of these petitions, just let me know. Okay, so I take those collectively, roll call.

Bregman, Councilor Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, Mayor Petty. Yes.

We have 9H refer to the law department for an answer on the open meeting law complaint form. Opposed, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj?

Yes.

Councilor King? Yes, Mayor Petty. Mayor Petty.

Yes, we have appointments. 10.2A, recommend the appointment of Jennifer Guzman-Gayforth to the Advisory Commission on Latino Affairs, roll call.

Burgman, Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Manager, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, Mayor Petty.

Yes. I recommended, this is a 10.7A, recommended adoption in order to grant exemptions to three snowplow contractors who are also municipal employees. Roll call.

Bergman, Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Manager, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey,

Mayor Petty. Yes. 10.11 A. Transmitting information and communication with the selection of local street resurfacing rehabilitation projects for fiscal year 2728 was sent out to Public Works. Councilor Russell.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, I'd ask that we send it to Public Works and we also vote to reconsider afterwards.

Motion to send to Public Works, those in roll call. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj?

Yes.

Councilor King? Yes. Councilor Carlson, Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda. Yes. Councilor Pacillo. Yes. Councilor Russell. Yes. Councilor Toomey.

and Mayor Petty.

Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes. Okay, we are on Transmitting Information Communication Road. Reconsideration, Mr. Chairman? I'm sorry, reconsideration?

So Bergman? No. Councilor Colorio?

No.

Councilor Haxhiaj?

No.

Councilor King? Carlson, Nguyen, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

No. We have Transmitting Information and Communication of the proposed Purple Hot and Gold Star Memorials. Councilor Kim?

What item is it? 10.19a, transmitting information communication relative to the proposed Purple Heart and Gold Star memorials. Mayor Petty.

I'd just like to thank the manager and his team, Robert Tonnelli and Parks and everyone who was involved with this. and our veterans agents, I should thank them too, right? So, especially them. I know this is something that came up probably, I think I might have filed this several years ago. I know Auburn had a nice one. We talked about doing one in Worcester. and people remember Joe Janduso. He was a Korean War vet. He passed away last year. This is his number one priority. I know he called to see, I think when he was in the hospital, ready to pass away, and called the day before that week to ask where was this in the process. So I think this is a pretty important endeavor that we've undertaken here. I'm not sure if anybody wants to describe what this is going to look like or what, just take maybe a few, I think it's worth to take the time, Mr. Manager, to talk about this.

Mr. Manager.

I just want to thank the Department and Division of Veterans Affairs. They've been very dedicated on this particular memorial here. They've been working and the Parks Department and the veterans community to try to put together these hearings to hear from the veterans, hear from the community. And so they put in a lot of work. So I want Dr. Robinson and our Interim Commissioner of Health and Human Services, Alex Arriaga, who actually this work started with him and then he passed it along to Dr. Robinson who's been working I'll turn it over to them so they can talk a little bit about these memorials in terms of what we're doing and what the steps are that we're moving forward and what's next. Thanks.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. If you could please just state your name and title for the public before you begin. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. To the chair, my name is Alex Arriaga and my title is Interim Commissioner of Health and Human Services.

Through the Chair, I'm Dr. Joe Robinson, Director of Veterans Services for the City of Worcester.

Thank you.

through the Chair. As the Mayor said, well, first of all, thank you so much, Mr. Manager, for your leadership on this and your commitment to the veterans here in the City of Worcester. Thank you to the to the Council, Mr. Mayor and the Council on also their support for the residents, not just the veterans themselves, but also their family members. So I really appreciate that. During my tenure, as Director of Veteran Services. You know, I was humbled and really honored to have met Joe Janduso, who was both a Marine Corps combat Korean veteran who was a Purple Heart recipient, and actually was a City of Worcester police officer, police detective, retired. He had incredible energy.

He was in his 90s and would check in periodically with me and I believe with the mayor's office with regards to the Purple Heart. So that energy that he was very infectious and he really was an advocate for those veterans in the city of Western just around the Purple Heart, but also in his engagement in the community. So we set out to look at potential opportunities for this, and there are There was a lot of commentary internally as to the purpose. The purpose was to honor those. both who have received the Purple Heart and also for that matter the families, the Gold Star families who then are a result of that ultimate sacrifice. So I don't want to go into too much of the details.

I actually want to relay that in a particular honor to our new Director of Veterans Services, Dr. Joe Robinson.

Dr. Robinson. Thank you to the Chair, to the Council, City Manager, Mr. Mayor. Taking on this task is a Deep honor of mine being a retired Marine and I never got a chance to meet Mr. Giudento, but I've heard so much about him at every event we've hold in the city for Veteran Services. and we hear a lot from the veterans that they just thank the city for advocating for veterans and it's been a tough road as far as Gathering information, putting this all together. But I think we are now in the first phase and we're going to be having a hearing on December 22nd at 630 p.m., a public hearing to get some feedback from the community on this project. We haven't put together any numbers yet, so that's gonna be part of phase two after we have this initial hearing, just in case we have to make any revisions on what we already have kind of designed.

We work with Department of Public Works on a particular design on the back of the Worcester Common. So we're looking forward to having this hearing on December 22nd. See what kind of feedback we get from the community.

Mr. Mayor.

Excuse me, Department of Parks.

Mr. Mayor.

Parks and Rec? Yes. Okay. Yes, sir. Dr. Robinson, Alex, thank you for putting this together, work brought me into knowing the Parks Department. Something we talked about well before you arrived here. and I think the Veterans Services here in Seaworth does an excellent job and your whole team does. Thank you. And the way you promote veterans, you never give up, which is, you know, some challenges and you do a pretty good job addressing each year. I think this is something, Mr. Manager, we've talked about several times to get this off the ground and I'm glad you're moving forward. You're going to have pictures and everything up at the 22nd and you're going to have Yes, sir, we will. Renderings and things?

Presentation and pictures.

Yeah, so I just make this nice, and I don't have to have to tell you to make it nice. We will. and so I just want to say thank you and I'm looking forward to this. What do you think about a year away before you get this up and running? What do you think if it goes through the parks?

to the Chair, to the Council, Mr. Manager, and Mayor. It depends on funding. That's what it comes down to. So I like to expedite these things and get them done. We'll do everything in our power to put the pieces together work with whomever we decide as far as vendors to get this thing done.

Yeah, I remember going to Mr. Gentilson. He grabbed me, went out to Auburn. We looked at the design that was done there, which was really nice. I think we can make ours even better, I hope. And this is important to the veterans. We honor our veterans every year here, Memorial Day, Veterans Day, pretty much every day throughout the year. So I want to thank you and your team. Look forward to this getting up and running. Thank you.

Thank you.

King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just quickly, I know I spoke with some young folks that are watching tonight, the entire council meeting. and for their civic studies. If you could just give context and significance to the young people that are watching and others. regarding the Purple Heart and Gold Star Memorial, what it means, what the sacrifice was, etc. for the folks that are watching who need a little more information to help them understand. To the Chair, to the Council.

To those that served, and certainly to those that didn't serve but may have had a family member that served, The Purple Heart is one of our highest honors in the nation. It is awarded for anyone injured, killed, combat action, or passes away from injuries as a result of a combat and conflict serving the United States of America. And the Gold Star Award for the family, Gold Star family, excuse me, That is a recognition of those who have lost those loved ones in combat as a result. So it's very dear to anyone that served, anyone that has a family member. and we just want to pay homage to those and those that sacrificed the most.

I like to say that some gave all and some gave and we are recognizing these individuals that gave all. for the freedoms of this country.

And if you could just share for the folks, for their educational purposes, the gold star, what that means.

Yes, sir. Dr. Robinson. To the Chair, to the Council, City Manager. The Gold Star families, we work with a number of Gold Star families here in the City of Worcester. and it means a great deal of them. I don't wanna mention any names, but the Gold Star families, we really work hand in hand with them and just recognize all of those that have passed on. The Gold Star families are recognized because they have endured those losses. They're honored across the nation. for those sacrifices, for those losses. I don't know, Alex, you want to add much more to that?

So I'll just add a little bit more around how is it defined. So yes, it's those immediate families which are parents or step-parents if they were living at the time of the loss. Children, Stepchildren, Grandparents. It really is a recognition, as Dr. Robinson said, to mourn the sacrifice of those who were lost. as a result of their service to our nation. And that's who qualifies. There is a process that you can actually register as a Gold Star family with the federal government. and there is some proof that needs to be relayed usually in the form of formal Department of Defense document for casualty. Now, with regards to the Purple Heart, I'll just go a little bit into that is

There's been expansion of that. Now, that meadow was originally, it has its history with George Washington. and that's why it has his face. It's a gold and purple medal with the face of General George Washington and our first president. It is dear and dear to me particularly because, you know, as Dr. Robinson said, I gave some. I am actually a Purple Heart recipient. I was involved in a rocket explosion during my tenure in Iraq, for which I received, I could say received, but was subject to a traumatic brain injury for which I had to recover. Now, there are others who I have served with and those that I know that weren't so lucky.

and those are the names and those are the people for which I live that I may be of service to others.

and many more.

So, you know, continue to serve. Although my time was cut short in the military, I try to serve those who I serve this country and by extension their families. It's important that we do both because when somebody serves, their family also serves along with them. It is so timely and unique that we're going to be looking at these as a packet. that we're going to do the best job we can to also place them close to each other is very intentional. So I just wanted to share that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Krishna.

Well, I just wanted to follow up on the Gold Star question and explain to those that are listening how it actually started. Gold Stars, most people don't know that it used to be Right after or during World War One, families used to display on a flag a blue star. And then once for every service member that served in the household. And once the service member passed on, they changed it to a gold star. So hence, that's where the gold star families came from. So if you had a gold star displayed, It displayed that you have lost a loved one for participating in the armed services and serving the United States of America. So it's something deep run, long history from World War I.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you both for your service for us on our behalf. We have a quality quality department here. in the city for our veterans. We always have. I think it's enhanced with both of you folks. And we are definitely indebted to our soldiers, our veterans, our Gold Star families. or Purple Heart Recipients. And you folks hit it right on the head. I say this at every veteran event, and that is that You serve along with your family, your friends, your loved ones. And during a time when the values of this country are being questioned, no better time than now to bring both of those together in symbolism, in space, and in honor.

So I want to thank everyone that was a part of this. I really appreciate the transparency and the authenticity. As a brother of a retired U.S. major combat veteran artillery, we know that the costs are seen and unseen. for family and otherwise. But we definitely appreciate that. And I look forward to this coming to fruition. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, let's send that to Christian.

Do you have my agenda? Yeah. No?

Yeah. Let's get my notes on. Okay, I'm going to say that to Veterans and Parks, Recreation, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Yes, Mayor Petty. Yes.

Next we have finance items 10.35A through I, 10.37A. Motion, Councilor Ojeda.

On E, I just need to re-choose myself.

Okay, so we'll take all items except E. And E, recommend adoption resolution to final accept to expend the grants of $300,000 to the master, final, elementary, and secondary education. So you can refuse yourself, no, you can, stay for this, then the work is yourself. So we'll take everyone except 10.35E, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj? Yes. Councilor King? Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson? Yes. Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda?

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo?

Yes.

Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey?

Yes.

Mayor Petty? Yes. We will take 10.35E. Councilor Ojeda has accused himself. Roll call.

Bergman, Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Mr. Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes. 11A through 11C, motions to adopt, roll call.

Bergman, Yes, Councilor Calorio, Yes, Councilor Haxhiaj, Yes, Councilor King, Yes, Councilor Mero-Carlson, Councilor Nguyen, Yes, Mayor Petty.

Yes.

Okay, we are on. Auditors, request the City Manager provide counsel at the next meeting with a report outlining the impact the U.S. Department of Housing urban cuts and permanent supportive housing will have in the city. Said the report should include how many permanent supportive housing units are expected not to be renewed. How many residents of those units are expected to lose permanent housing? And how these cuts will impact homelessness numbers in the City of Worcester? Councilor Haijiaj?

Thank you Mr. Chairman. And I understand that the City Manager is already having these discussions with and others, but I wanted to outline a few concerns that go beyond the funding issue. which it's a big avalanche coming our way. Hopefully the data will be broken down by the city of Worcester, the continuum of care, is the final through which the federal government gives us the planning and coordination and housing dollars for chronically homeless individuals who also have a disability, individuals and families. And so we know that throughout Worcester County, There are over 700 permanent supportive housing units. The number for Worcester is probably a little bit less than that, but it's quite significant.

The reason why this is significant is that these adult households and family units are in these units because they have chronically homeless status and they also have a disability. And so we're not just talking about unsheltered adults. We're talking about family units where one or more member of that unit and so on. They are called permanent supportive housing because they are permanent. The reason being that these folks need and so on. for a long time, and rightly so, they need a lot of support throughout their lives. What's at stake with the federal administration

saying essentially that we cannot use more than 30% of the dollars that the Worcester County Continuum of Care gets and every other continuum of care. No more than 30% on permanent supportive housing. Instead, what they wanted originally to do is transition people to transitional housing. Transitional housing is a two-year program Not only that, but at the end of the two years, you have to move on. So in other words, if you're chronically disabled, if you have a disability, if you're a family with kids, that meet those requirements, or if you're an adult who actually has those conditions, you cannot stay in this housing for more than That's transitional housing. Where folks go from there? Well, that's up to the specific community to figure that out. And as we know, we haven't figured that out because we can go into a million directions as to why that is.

both from the federal and the state governments. What my concern is, even though the Trump administration removed or rescinded the application for and other communities to apply for this funding abruptly before the court case that came as a result of nonprofits throughout the state, throughout the country, as well as the Attorney General's Office. without telling people what exactly they're going to, what's going to happen. The concern that I have is that between now and May, when these programs have to pay their staff, they have to keep folks' rents, Paid, we have no idea how these things are going to happen. So a few things can happen. Folks who are going to have to get evicted who have these housing units and non-profits that are funded by these programs are going to have their staff

LAID OFF. THAT'S BECAUSE THE DOLLARS JUST ARE NOT THERE ANYMORE. SO WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WITH THE NEW APPLICATION FOR FUNDING, BUT WHAT WE DO as I have said over and over again on this Council floor is that we have a hidden avalanche of a humanitarian crisis that extends to unsheltered people that we see tucked under the bridges, under the overpasses, who get moved from location to location and included in this population are also families with disabilities, literal family units that have kids who meet these requirements. And we don't often talk about those populations and that community because we think that families are typically taken care of by the shelter system. it's no longer the case. The state of Massachusetts as we have known for the last six months is clearly and very deliberately

diluting the right to shelter, which means that we have both chronically homeless individuals and we have families who simply have gotten evicted, displaced. unable to keep their housing, now struggling to find permanent supportive housing or simply affordable healthy housing. Under these conditions, it is important for the community Mr. Manager, for you to share these conversations and the landscape that we are going to be facing. The Trump administration has made it very clear, in addition to cutting funding for permanent supportive housing, and doing away with the Housing First model, which is a data-based proven model that actually works to keep people safe, safely housed and stably housed, they are attaching inhumane conditions that we know by research, by practice, and by the experiences of those that are unsheltered, they don't work.

and some of those things that really concern me that are outlined or that at least were outlined in this application have to do with local law enforcement, municipalities collecting data on whether law enforcement will enforce Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, So there is a clear collaboration and a clear requirement for service providers now to add law enforcement actions against unhoused folks in the mix. We need to understand what the policy of the City of Worcester Police Department is going to be. And we need to have that in writing. I'm sure that we have talked

Many times on the City Council floor about the 14-day policy in relation to encampments. I'm not super clear what that's in writing. There needs to be an understanding. The Trump administration says the only The only time, the only way that you could house people in transitional housing programs is if they agree to be subject to drug requirements and if they agree to be forced into treatment. Both things do not work. It takes trust and it takes work for people who suffer with substance abuse or disorders and or mental health issues to get to the proper programs. and I do also want to say that those programs don't exist because we're losing beds left and right. I am concerned that there's an immigration requirement to the dollars attached to these programs.

That means that at least in the previous application that was just rescinded the Trump administration has made it very clear that anyone who has an immigration status whether they're here as an asylum seeker, whether they're here under some sort of legal status, that our service providers are going to have the data reported to them. And the intention, of course, is that those folks are not worthy and should not be receiving services. Another thing that really concerns me is the elimination of anything having to do with diversity, equity and inclusion. We know, and I don't think we talk enough about this, that most folks, specifically adult unsheltered people who are mostly hit by unsheltered homelessness, meaning the folks that you see out on the street, are mostly in the black and Latino community. This is not a fault of their own.

It's a direct derivative of the systemic racism that informs who becomes homeless and who gets services. What the Trump administration is saying is that there shouldn't be any sort of requirement that gives those folks the ability and the priority to get services, which is how we prioritize specifically equity in homelessness. I am really concerned both about how the City of Worcester and the expectations that the City Council or the next City Council is going to have, Mr. Manager, that you're going to have. on how to manage this avalanche. I don't think our nonprofit sector has the ability to manage on its own. I have no idea what the governor or the secretary of the Office of Housing, Livable Communities intends to do to support our community.

What I would like to find out is that when you have these conversations with the service providers, that you present to council what I have asked now for months, which is a an emergency plan to both inform your lawmakers, your advisors, this council that's coming up in the next two years, What is it that we need to do to meet this crisis that we have on our hands? I need to, I think, stress the fact that that plan is going to have to come up with some solutions. What kind of dollars is the City of Worcester going to be willing to put up to support this beyond CDBG, beyond shelter monies, which we know is going away. I think we need to understand the role of the police department. That needs to be a clear memorandum of understanding and a clear written policy

that if the city of Worcester and the police department, I think I'm entitled to a second five, aren't I?

You're well past that.

Okay, well, can I ask for a suspension of the rules then? Because this is important.

Motion to suspend the rules. Roll call.

Gregman, Councilor Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Nguyen, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey,

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So in short, I'll close here since I'm going over time. I have outlined the problem. I have outlined the way that it will impact our residents, our neighbors. And what I'm asking for specifically in terms of tangible things that this city council should consider is for a plan that the current community of providers along with you, Mr. Manager, will have to manage This humanitarian crisis that our residents are going to face and also attached to that what exactly you are going to instruct your police department to do if the federal government is mandating the local COC to have requirements both in terms of racial profiling, discrimination, immigration status, as well as mandating people to go into programs that they are not ready to go to.

We need to understand also what is it that the police department is going to do in terms of If the directive from the federal government is to both report immigration status, but also disband any encampments that are formed as a result of people not having anywhere to go. and lastly it would be great if this hearing were to happen in the public health committee whatever iteration that is in the next city Councilor Pacillo that the public and the city Councilor King truly understand what the role of the lawmakers and the city is in managing this issue. Thank you.

Thank you. So send that to the manager. By doing so, Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. We ought not to be moving in any direction towards criminalizing the homeless. We ought not to be moving in the direction of any sort of reduction in services, wrappers around services and the like for this population of folks that are unsheltered and disabled and families and individuals. I'd like to sign on to this. We're in the midst of a federal policy shift. We know that Moving forward, it sounds like the city manager is in the process of having some discussion. So before I continue, I just want to ask, through the Chair to the Manager. If you can get an update on what the Council is referencing, what work is going on by your administration through the Chair and with the private sector.

Mr. Manager?

To the Chair, to the Council, I meet on a monthly basis with providers to discuss our challenges related to the in-house, the shelter system, and trying to come up with solutions. And these providers are again very flexible in trying to figure out ways We're looking at our resources and which ways we can be adaptable to some of those demands. We're trying to put together a strategic plan. We had a consultant that came forward from Rutgers University and BU who provided a full assessment of what's happening in our community and what are the numbers that we need to reach. And so we want to take that assessment, create some strategies and put that together. I think one of the challenges and that's what the council is alluding to is that the federal government keeps throwing different curve balls through the situation which is causing us to then pivot our ability to strategize especially around the funding.

The council mentioned some of the policies related to if you want access to these dollars, what are the type of enforcements you need to do to have access to those dollars? that throws things into the mix, right? We as a city, we don't take that approach, but then If you want access to those dollars, then you have to take that approach. So that's something that we have to navigate collectively with our providers, because again, Our families, our individuals in our neighborhoods and our residents, they need some support. So we need to figure out that funding solution to be able to support them. We're looking at all of our current dollars that we received through HUD. whether it's ESG dollars, whether it's block rent dollars, whether it's home ARP dollars. I mean, you name it, we're looking, we're trying to look under the hood and find ways in which we can stretch that or think differently of how to reallocate those dollars to our current providers. So I look forward to bringing that plan to the council in the new year. I know it's been taking a little bit longer.

The committee, like I said, we meet monthly and there's an operations team that meets weekly. to try to come up with some of these strategies. We're trying to also identify KPIs that we can measure over time. So we're coming forward to the council. I know that it's an urgency, but we're working as quickly as possible to try to come up with these solutions and these strategies moving forward.

Thank you. Mr. Chairman, this federal shift is a shift from the housing first approach to, as mentioned, housing. that's temporary, housing that doesn't have all the service provision necessary for folks to sustain and move themselves forward. Mr. Chairman, I know that we're talking about millions of dollars statewide that are potentially at risk, upwards of 90 million across the state when it comes to this funding. We know that there's going to be more encampments. That's what this means. There will be more encampments here in the City of Worcester and beyond. What are we going to do? Mr. Chairman, I know that Boston and Cambridge have engaged in litigation against the federal government regarding this continuum of care funds.

I'm not asking specifics, but have we explored any sort of litigious approach to this matter through the chair? Mr.

Manager?

Yeah, our continuum of care has been involved in a lot of these discussions statewide. She's extremely involved. CMHA is the one central mass housing alliance. is the agency that oversees this continuum of care and all the providers and partners work in collaboration and provide referrals to the CoC. So she's been in the forefront day in and day out. We engage in conversations almost on a daily basis The Attorney General of the state of Massachusetts, inconclusive with many communities and also other states filed that lawsuit. I think collectively everybody's involved in that. And so we're hoping that there's some results to that or so at least put a stop to it. But right now that's currently at play where our Attorney General of the state of Massachusetts in partnership with the CoCs is moving forward on that.

Yes, the Attorney General did join the suit along with 19 other states, Washington D.C. as well. We also know that Boston and Cambridge have mounted their and all of our own challenges this year as well with regards to the Trump administration, Mr. Chairman. I'd certainly like some communication from the city manager ruling out or ruling in such an approach by way of a motion. This is having a direct impact on the city through the Charity Administration. If you could just share to the public. I made it very clear we're going to see more encampments if this continues to move forward. What are the potential impacts in addition to the criminalization you mentioned, potential criminalization of the homeless that you foresee based on all the communication, all the work your administration has been doing in this regard through the chair?

Through the Chair to the Council, I think the impact is significant. We're talking about individuals, number, hundreds of units, hundreds of families, individuals that will be impacted by these funds. Not only them, but also people who work, who are case managers, who provide the support and services. So a lot of these agencies have a lot of People who are employed providing these crucial services to the individual. So it's a combination of not only the housing is impacted, the individual itself is impacted, the workforce is impacted, which again, at the end of the day, that impacts the ability to be able to afford and be able to pay their current bills or be able to be employed, et cetera. It's a combination of things that is happening. It's increasing the number that we're seeing in our city of the need for services. Our also agencies are Some agencies are at capacity and we're trying to find ways in which we can stretch that capacity with the partners as well.

Again, we're trying to turn every stone as much as possible to address the issue. We've seen an increase in homelessness in the city. and we're trying to address that in the long term. That's why we're putting our efforts in the resource center and trying to look to see if we can look at additional permanent shelter beds in the city on top of the current overflow work that we're trying to do. But at the end of the day, The money that comes to support all of that work is starting to go away. And that's the area that we're trying to put our efforts to think creatively, think more collaboratively, think more about partnerships, in ways that we can stretch those dollars so that we can continue to have the impact.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm going to encourage your administration to take a look at what Boston and Cambridge did above and beyond or in addition to or complementary to The actions taken by our Attorney General, Andrea Campbell. Because you're right, it is critical. It is a crisis. And Mr. Chairman, it's winter. It's cold outside. We don't have a shelter. And since the manager brought it up, you can kind of give an update on where we are with things. In terms of sheltering, it was very, very, very, very cold outside. and I would be remiss not to ask, given that you broached the subject, to the Chair, to the administration.

Mr. Manager?

Yeah, through the chair to the council. So over the past few years, the city of Worcester, we work with partners to try to open an overflow shelter. I don't want to call it emergency. I want to call it an overflow shelter. and the reason for it is because in our current shelter network, the need is greater than our current capacity. and so that's why there's always a need for an overflow shelter and the city has been working even before me in opening up these overflow shelters to try to provide those services in our community. In the past few days, there's been cold weather or there's been snowing. And so we have worked with partners to try to open up an emergency shelter. that emergency shelter is for the purposes because we currently don't have an overflow shelter. However, when people sometimes ask, well, why isn't the city or the emergency communications emergency management

Moving to open up emergency shelter or cooling or warming centers is because according to MEMA regulations, there's a threshold that requires our emergency management to activate these spaces because then we get reimbursement. on that cost to operate these spaces and so these current emergency shelters that were established in the past few days were more so to fulfill the fact that we haven't yet opened the overflow. We've been working with a partner We're working with a location right now. We're having a neighborhood meeting tomorrow to discuss this location that we're proposing to hopefully start in the next week or so.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd just like to get a report back on the RMV location, what the communication and time frames were around. you know, the state communicating with the city about their intent or whoever owned the parcel there to the city. We are the second largest city in New England. It's cold outside. Folks are without a place. I know that we had some issues that was in the media that happened that were extremely concerning, regardless, folks that were unsheltered and were put in peril. I'm not sure where folks are going to go. Through the Chair of the Administration, are the shelters at capacity? I saw numbers 180, 190, something like that. If you could share through the Chair what our status is in terms of shelter.

Capacity, and what sort of support are we going to be getting from the state, from Governor Haley and folks?

Yes, our current shelter network is at capacity. We currently work right now with the current shelter providers, SMOC, to try to expand some of the current locations that they have. And we're working with the state to try to relieve a little bit of that and provide more spacing in that. That's why every year we try to seek a site so that we can create an overall full shelter because we know that there's a need in the city for more shelter beds. and many more. The shelter system is at capacity. We work. And when we know that we need to have a shelter, an overflow shelter in the city, we reach out to the state. The state has been very gracious over the past few years to provide some funding and and they've graciously again provided some funding this year again to us to be able to do that. However, unfortunately the funding is not at the same limit

that we received in the last two years is much lower, which means that the funding can only be stressed to a certain amount, so we can't serve the same amount of Clients or individuals or residents in the city, same as we've done in previous years. So that's a challenge that we're going to have to face and we're going to try to face it right now in the next A few months, but again, we're working many different angles to find ways inclusive that we're working with regional network. There's other communities in the region that we've reached out to working with CMHA to see if they can potentially lift up a shelter, whether it's a 10 bed or 15 bed shelter as well. Most of them are very inclined to work with us and work Incline to open them up. It's a matter of finding the right resources that could be able to fund these operations. But we've been not only working to try to provide and expand the network here in the city, but also we're working with regional partners to try to do that in the towns surrounding our city.

Thank you. And through the chair to the administration, funding requests through HUD for the continuum of care matters. Do you have an idea when that deadline is? I understand it's mid-January or so. In addition to that, this is why I was talking about joining perhaps Boston and Cambridge. I know that Boston and Cambridge filed their lawsuit in order to get more time to be responsive. That's why they went for their injunctions. So through the Charity Administration, you could share around those timelines.

Yeah. Through the Chair, through the Councilor, the timeline really is at the end of January based on the federal budget. Whatever comes out of that is what really is going to dictate. So there's a lot that's already been kind of we've been hearing proactively from these agencies at the federal level. We've been seeing reports. We've been hearing, you know, whether it's the president or others communicate that. So we're anticipating based on those conversations and that information that we're receiving from federal agencies of what potentially will look like come January 31st. and so that's where I think the Attorney General's Office stepped in with working with other states to try to step in at the state level to try to put a halt to this. Now, I understand that Boston and Cambridge have also taken that approach, but the state collectively, the AG's office stepped in to try to collectively do that for the entire state of Massachusetts.

Mr. Chairman, I I'm deeply concerned. Our shelters are at capacity. We have no overflow shelter. It's cold outside. and we do have a neighborhood meeting coming up as I understand. through the chair of the administration. If in fact that goes well as I anticipate it may, what's the timeframe to get something up and running through the chair?

Yeah, to the Chair, to the Council. If everything goes well, December 15th, Monday, we will be ready. I think it's Monday is the date. December 15th, we'll be ready to go.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I echo the questions that the Councilor Haxhiaj had asked pertaining to how are we going to respond and so forth. So I look forward to having the requests that I've made honored and brought back in a timely manner. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to sign on to this. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, so thank you. And I just want to thank the people who volunteered over the last week at the overflow shelter we put together. and bring people off the streets and looking forward to the work that we've done. Mr. Manager, your team is done for the emergency shelter going forward. So thank you for working on that. So send that to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, I'm sorry, roll call.

Bergeman, yes, Councilor Colorio, yes, Councilor Haxhiaj, yes, Councilor King, yes, Councilor Mero-Carlson, yes, Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda, yes, Councilor Pacillo, yes, Councilor Russell, yes, Councilor Toomey, Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes. Request the CMH request Commission Public Works by the Council with their report concerning the department's performance during the December 2nd, 2025 snow event, including but only to assessing the pre-treatment of roads that occur. The timing of the start of the snow operations, the sufficiency of the number of snow equipment operators, and the sufficiency of the number of pieces of equipment, Councilor Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was almost tempted to say as it reads, but I'll just speak very briefly on this. As we all know, we had a recent snowstorm. I know from the years on the council that the first snowstorm is always not a good snowstorm to judge. I think people kind of forget from the previous winter how to drive in bad weather and there's usually a lot more accidents and sometimes if it comes early enough in the season some of the snowplow operators don't have their Summer and Fall equipment removed from their vehicles. So it takes a little time to get up and going. I will say I had mixed reviews from what I heard. personally, and on social media as far as the storm and how it was dealt with. Taking into consideration it was the first storm of the year, I think it's appropriate to get this information. I would also say I don't know if if pretreatment was or wasn't decided early on that it would happen or wouldn't. I do recall after last year, we had some questions about that.

We were told that if the temperature is close to 32, 33 degrees where it's freezing. That pretreatment can happen and can be used. Maybe it was used. It certainly wasn't used in the neighborhoods I heard from. I don't know what time. and the equipment got sent out. So it could have been a job, an event that was handled quite properly. And then maybe things that the commissioner can share with us that he learned from that storm. I guess it was Good that the prediction of the type of storm and when it was going to hit was accurate and also that the snowfall was less than expected but moving forward and I certainly hope not a scare so I hope there's no more snow but I suspect there will be and I look forward to the Commissioner's report how we could do things better. Thank you.

We'll send that to the Manager. Roll call.

and Mayor Petty.

Yes. Request that the manager reach out to representatives from National Goods to determine the reasons power was lost in the Portco Street neighborhood on Thanksgiving, as well as the steps taken to mitigate the issue. Councilor Pacillo.

Thank you so much, Mr. Chair. So I do just want to bring attention to the fact that there was a blackout in Bernco on Thanksgiving. I was sitting in the dark with friends and family as well. I would say it was probably about half the neighborhood for a few hours. you know fortunately we fortunately it was later in the day so hopefully most people were done cooking but it's definitely disappointing when the cost of our utility bills continue to rise year after year it seems like every six months we have an increase and then on Thanksgiving, half the neighborhood had no power. So I would love, you know, going forward, just a report. It will probably be at the next council and that's fine. Just to understand why this happened, how long it took to fix the problem because we were in the dark with about 8 kids under 8 for probably 2 to 3 hours.

So just going forward, it would be nice if National Grid could not lose power on Thanksgiving and tear up our streets and charge us extra money. Thank you.

Bergman.

Thank you. I think it's a very good order and I was going to say that I don't know if it could be taken as a friendly amendment or as a separate order, but I think the ask of National Grid should be that they should report to us Every time there's an extended outage as to what happened and why. I will tell you that in the Newton Square neighborhood yesterday where I live, power went out three times. First time I went out for four hours in the morning. Then I went out for about an hour around 5 o'clock. And then at 6 o'clock I went out and there was an update from National Grid that we're going to be back on at 10 at night. Wasn't back on at 10 at night. Another update will be on at 1 in the morning. It wasn't on at 1 in the morning. Came back 6 o'clock this morning, almost a full 12 hours. Now, granted, it wasn't Thanksgiving. But there was no snow yesterday. It wasn't particularly windy day. I mean, I don't know. And it was affected. I went online, affected from Newton Square to Tatnick Square. Not all of it, but a lot of it.

So I'm certainly not comparing it to being home with young children on a special day like Thanksgiving. But I think when there are significant outages, There should be a report back to us why it happened and what was done to correct it because I think people need to know that. A lot of people, their heating system runs on electricity. and in the wintertime with an extended outage like that, I'm sure there was a lot of people that were very cold, especially this time of year. So I don't know if we could look into it through the chair to the city manager, but I think It wouldn't be overly burdensome for National Grid to report to us on a regular basis, hopefully not on a regular basis, that we're not having outages, but whenever we do, what happened and why. Thank you.

Thank you. Send that to, as amended, we'll send that to the administration. Those in favor, opposed, so audit. I'm sorry, roll call. Councilor Bregman?

Yes. Councilor Florio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj. Yes. Councilor King. Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson. Yes. Councilor Nguyen. Councilor Ojeda.

Yes. Councilor Pacillo. Yes.

Councilor Russell. Yes. Councilor Toomey. Yes. Mayor Petty.

Yes. Okay, the communications has made the approval of the City Council. The City Council meeting scheduled for the calendar year 2026. Motion is to accept. Roll call.

Yes. Councilor Bergman. Yes. Councilor Colorio.

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj. Yes. Councilor King. Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson. Yes. Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda.

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo.

Yes.

Councilor Russell.

Yes.

Councilor Toomey.

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Yes, we can take several of these items together. 14A and B, Economic Development Committee, we'll adopt on a roll call.

Bergman, Yes, Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey,

Yes.

Mayor Petty.

Yes. 14C to 14F except on the roll call.

Councilor Bergman. Yes. Councilor Colorio.

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj. Yes. Councilor King. Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson. Yes. Councilor Nguyen. Councilor Ojeda. Yes. Councilor Pacillo.

Yes.

Councilor Russell. Yes. Councilor Toomey.

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Yes, we can take several of these together. 15A to 15F, motions to advertise the proposed audiences. 15G to 15F. Aye. Motion accepted to adopt. 15M to 15Z, the motion is to accept. 16A to 16Z, the motion is to accept.

Mr. Chairman, can we take out 15? M through Z. Can we vote that separately as a block?

Okay, we're gonna take those out. Okay, roll call.

Accept 15M and 15Z. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj? Yes. Councilor King? Carlson, Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda, Councilor Pacillo, Councilor Russell, Councilor Toomey, Mayor Petty.

Yes. Okay, 15M to 15Z. Motions to accept. Roll call.

Bergman, yes, Councilor, yes, Councilor Haxhiaj, yes, Councilor King, no, Councilor Mero-Carlson, yes, Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda, yes, Councilor Pacillo? Yes. Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes. We have 17A to 17O, motions to accept, and 18A to 18F is the day on a roll call.

Mr. Chairman? On 18F, I intend to ask for reconsideration after. So I'll let you know. There was a purpose to that. There was a request.

Let's hold off on 18F right now. We'll come back to it. Yeah, that's fine. Thank you. So everything except for 18F, roll call.

Council Bergman, yes, Councilor Colorio, yes, Councilor Haxhiaj, yes, Councilor King Yes, 18F, Councilor Bergman.

I'm just, it can be called for roll call vote, but I intend after for motion reconsidering. Oh, I see what you're saying. That's all. Okay. My apologies if I'm confusing.

18F just asked for a roll call. 18F is on the zoning district establishment of the Commercial Corridors Overway, the vicinity of West Oberlin Street and Park Avenue.

Okay, roll call. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio? Yes. Councilor Haxhiaj, Councilor King? Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson? Yes. Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda? Yes. Councilor Pacillo?

Yes.

Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty. Yes. Motion for reconsideration. Reconsideration, roll call. Councilor Bergman? No. Council Colorio? No. Councilor Haxhiaj?

No.

Council King? No. Council Mero-Carlson? No. Council Nguyen? Council Ojeda?

No.

Council Pacillo? No. Council Russell? No. Council Toomey?

No.

No.

And Mayor Petty.

No. Hold on to privilege. The first one is 19A, COI, Transmitting Information and Communication. We'll go to the follow-up to the 2023 investigation of the Worcester Police Department's overtime and detailed policy procedures as well as reports issued on January 15, 2024. as presented by Clifton, Lawson, Allen Forensic Services Team. Under the privilege, we can send out the public safety.

Roll call. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio?

Yes. Haxhiaj?

Yes. Councilor King?

Mr. Chairman, what did you say that's going to? Public safety. No. Okay, keep going.

Mero-Carlson, Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda, Councilor Pacillo, Councilor Russell, Councilor Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, City Auditor, Distributing Information and Communication of an Analysis of the Worcester Police Department's Party-Worn Camera Program Performance by Clifton L. Allen. Lassen and Allen, I'm sorry about the privilege. King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly appreciate this report that was requested. There's a number of positives in this report. I'm certainly not going to take up too much time here, but there are also opportunities for improvement. One of the things that it references is that that when looking at footage from body-worn cameras that officers almost always activate their cameras in accordance with policy. there's also as part of this report that existing policies and practices are functioning as intended relative to I have a few of those.

and others as it relates to sleep mode. Sleep mode is if a body-worn camera is in sleep mode, there's a buffering of 30 seconds that would not be recorded prior to initiating the body worn camera where things are lost. There's also concern I have regarding footage access. Currently, footage access is not restricted to officers from their body worn cameras prior to doing a report. The only time there is a restriction is if there's a use of force. that meets a certain criteria. The recommendations are that access should be restricted prior to any reports. You know,

there's also a concern I've spoken with some attorneys here in the city of Worcester that do business down at the courts and are representing folks and they had concerns again about Obstructing of cameras, muting versus turning off of cameras, and all these things are touched upon. in this report. Concerns about, you know, that there are recommendations here where the manager's team has responded for the most part. in a way that will be constructive and will take actions in regards to all this. But there is need for additional policy enhancement. that I look forward to going to committee and having those folks dig through that in an effective way, Mr. Chairman.

There are some concerns about application gaps and what have you. A need to increase feedback from officers. It was found that supervisors are taking the appropriate steps for oversight here. and that the supervisors who are providing oversight of the body worn cameras demonstrate flexibility and discretion when they're auditing and selecting. But there is also some recommendations that there needs to be more work providing comments from those supervisors in the reviewed recordings so there's a lot to dig through here and I'm just hoping that the Public Safety Committee will rise to the occasion and take a good look and be a part of working towards improvement. And particularly in some of the areas that I mentioned, Mr. Chairman. And lastly,

There is a lack of restriction on body worn camera footage, that there's a broad access in some instances that increased risk of unauthorized viewing. I really hope that the manager and it takes a look at that in addition to this committee as we move forward. But certainly appreciate this report. And Mr. Chairman, to the chair, to the manager, can we ensure that the auditor is also a part of this. And the reason just for you know the public why I voted no on the private prior matter pertaining to overtime is historically that's gone to municipal operations I think once this last term it went down to

The Public Safety Committee really just requires a different sort of analysis, you know, and what have you. So my question to the chair of the administration with regards to the body warrant camera, can we be assured that the auditor will be there, like he's open to that? I know he's our employee, so I'd like to make a motion that we request that the auditor be present in that meeting, that being my motion. But is there any barrier to that through the chair to the administration?

Mr. Manager?

To change the cause of you asking for the honor to a barrier for the honor to be part of the subcommittee.

Yeah. So, yes, one area. Is there anything that will prevent that from your perspective?

No, I think it just provides a more fruitful conversation. If there are questions related to the actual report that the chief of the administration may not be able to answer, the auditor can be more specific about kind of the work that the firm did in terms of providing or getting that information. So it may provide better discussion at the committee level if you have the combination of both.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And before I rest, there's a recommendation here. with this document and this analysis that was commented on by our city audit, Robert Stearns. In the last paragraph, there's a recommendation that with response to equity audit recommendations that the Worcester Police Department should prepare an annual review and completed report in February of each year. and that information could be helpful in consideration for performance reviews and the like. So Mr. Chairman, through the Chair, I would like to make a motion that this council would request that the manager consider working towards preparing an annual review.

and completed report with the Office of the Auditor that they work collaboratively to that end to make sure that we realize such a report yearly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, so we'll send that To the Public Safety Committee. I'll move the motions to the Manager. Roll call.

Councilor Bergman?

Yes.

Councilor Colorio?

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj? Yes. Councilor King? Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson?

Yes.

Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda.

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo. Yes. Councilor Russell. Yes. Councilor Toomey.

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Russell. Yes, Communications, Seeing Manage, Recommended Adoption, and All Other Regarding the Jurisdiction and Supposition of the Real Property of the 100 Providence Street. Councilor Russell?

Mr. Chairman, on this item I was contacted by one of my constituents, Mr. Courtney, Don Courtney, which I think all of us know, who asked about the feasibility of this building being used to house some of the artifacts of the Worcester Six because from what he had said that there was The plan to put it in Union Station didn't quite come together as of yet. And this might have been an option. I know I've talked to the manager and others that have said that there might be a possibility of using this facility or this piece of real estate also for the lock of Box 4. Canteen Truck that is looking for a location. So I'm going to ask for those two things to come back to the council.

and a formal report from the administration, the feasibility of and what would be involved for a dollar commitment if those were able to be utilized. Are any other types still waiting? We asked last week, we asked for the information about the possibility of of the Ambulance Service, a private company being there. So with all that in mind, I'm asking for the new report, and I'd also ask to table this item so it could be taken up by the next council after those reports come in.

Okay, so Mr.

Manager? Yeah, through the Chair to the Council. Yeah, we'd be happy to provide some reports and I just want to be careful that we can't provide too much information about interested parties that might be interested in the potential property. because again it's a municipal property so any property that the city engages whether there's a lease or an actual sale of that and requires an RFP procurement process so we want to be careful about kind of providing that much information about will come forward with a report in terms of what are the potential feasibilities, et cetera. I know that there's others since then have started to reach out, people who are just general interest, since they're hearing about 100 Providence Street now. they're getting free advertising on a potential sale of a property. So people are reaching out and wanting to see the property, tour the property. is generating interest from many different parties.

I appreciate that information, Mr. Manager, through you, Mr. Chairman. When I was talking about the The other two uses, I wasn't thinking of them as being a potential buyer. I don't think they're corporations that have the ability to do it. But I look forward to seeing that information and cheering on the next council as they take part in that decision. So I motion the table.

Okay, thank you. Councilor King?

Chairman, if you could just tell me what the other motion was.

Say that again?

The other motion, what was it, about the artifacts?

He was just asking to get a report back on the feasibility of putting the Worcester Six artifacts and using that building as a city building.

Is that through the chair? Just a question to the administration or whomever. So I can recall discussion around Union Station and there being a fire. Department, or Firefighter Museum there. Is my recollection correct to the Chair, and if so, what happened with that?

Mr. Manager?

Through the Chair to the Council, yeah, I'm not quite sure kind of what happened in terms of when the decision was made not to pursue and why that happened. I'd be happy to provide a report back on that. I just don't have the details. So when we come back forward with the feasibility that the motion that the council has put forward, we'll try to explain kind of a little bit further and provide some historical context to it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to make that by way of a motion that we get that report back to find out exactly what happened. Mr. Chairman, I just want to re-emphasize, you know, I was part of, as a union measure previously, Going out there and protesting when they, you know, took that location away from the fire department, what have you. And, you know, fortunately an ambulance service was there. Anything that we can do to keep that neighborhood safe I hope would be prioritized. I'm really hopeful that, you know, I'm hopeful that this additional attention doesn't rule that out in terms of bidding. I'm not sure what that would look like. unless we put out a specific RFP for, I don't know, public health something. I don't know how specific that RFP would have to be.

But Mr. Chairman, I think we really should guard that and that be a priority as I stated the last time. And to the Chair, can you just, Tell me again, precisely, how many votes to get that off the table? I'm not inclined to support putting it on the table, to be quite frank with you, but I just want to know, is it four votes, is it six? Six votes. It's six votes. And through the chair to the administration, What impact would this have on the current process if we table it till January, February, March, April, May, June, or July?

Yeah, through you, Chair of the Council, we would have to hold that property in. take on any carrying costs to potentially heat the property, keep the property sealed, anything that were potentially any maintenance to the property, et cetera, just carrying costs related to that effort.

Mr. Chairman, this particular item is 21C, is that correct? Mr. Manager? It's a 19C? Do I have the wrong thing here? So it's not the request for the report, right? Yes, please explain to the chair.

Yeah, through you to the council. So the adoption of an order regarding the jurisdiction and disposition of real property is basically right now this property is under the jurisdiction of the Department of Facilities. They oversee it. They manage it. They managed the lease, et cetera. So what this is doing is this order is allowing the transfer of that property to the city manager, so then giving the city manager the disposition to then potentially sell it. So knowing the concerns of the council.

Put it out to bid.

Put it out to bid, yeah. Whether it's a release or for sale, et cetera. Based on the conversation of the council, based on the and the priorities of this council and what has been communicated to me. By approving this order here, yes, it gives me authority to then, if I want to put out the bid, to put out the bid. But then if I do that, in some ways, I'd be defying what the council is asking me to do. which is provide reports get more information and find feasibilities for this property to be able to be housed for other purposes so again it doesn't preclude me from that it just It's just what it does is if that doesn't go in that direction and that is not something that then the council or other support, then I can quickly move and pivot and submit an RFP for the public for acquisition.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I personally am aware of folks that are interested in this location in order to provide I can say that with conviction. And my concern is that delaying that type of service could place that neighborhood at risk. It doesn't necessarily mean they're going to get the property if it was put out to bid, but I'm not going to vote to hold it. I'd like to see this moving forward, and I would like the reports that Councilor Russell requested in 21C to be honored quickly. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. So the motion is to table the item, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio? Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, Worcester,

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Yes, on Council of Russell and Council of King's motions, roll call.

Councilor Bergman.

Mr. Chairman, I apologize, but I think that last statement got myself and maybe some others off guard. We just voted to hold Councilor Russell's item. Correct. So what is left for us to vote on?

Councilor Russell has an order on requesting the use of the property where it could be used for the artifacts of the Worcester Fire Department.

Just asking for a report. Yeah, just asking for a report. And Councilor King?

Councilor King, I forget what he said. Did you have a motion?

I don't recall one. That kind of threw me off track.

Yeah, let me think about it. I think Councilor King asked for a report as well for what happened to the fire. Oh, the fire, what happened to the union station. Bergman, Clerk, Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Manager, Mero-Carlson, Ojeda, Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson. Yes. Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda.

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo.

Yes.

Councilor Russell. Yes. Councilor Toomey.

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Yes. So we have a motion to adjourn.

Mr. Chairman, suspension of rules. Suspension of the rules.

Roll call.

Bergman, yes, Councilor Clorio, Councilor Haxhiaj, yes, Councilor King, yes, Councilor Mero-Carlson, yes, Councilor Meehan, Councilor Ojeda, yes, Councilor Pacillo, yes, Councilor Russell, yes, Mr. Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty? Yes.

Councilor King? Thank you Mr. Chairman. In light of the information that came out to me today regarding a potential December 15 go date, perhaps, if all things go well, regarding an overflow shelter. Sorry. What? I want to have an understanding. about what work we're doing with the private businesses and with the population that's unsheltered given what occurred on Grafton Street. and the folks that were sleeping in the dumpster. That was very concerning. And I'm wondering in terms of numbers of folks that we have calculated

are out there, what will the capacity need to be for the shelter that we're discussing? And the reason I'm asking that is because I can recall, I think last year, when we had to request the state to expand the capacity. So that's my motion, that's my order. If the manager would like to comment on it, fine. but I do have some concerns that way, duty chair.

Okay, Mr. Manager.

Yeah, to the council. It's a good question that, again, we and working with providers are trying to grapple. We don't know what that capacity is. We know that there's individuals in the streets and that community is very transient. So one day we may need a capacity of 60, the next day we may need a capacity of 100 more. We don't know that. And also what oftentimes happens is when we open overflow shelters, the word gets out. So other communities, other hospitals, other agencies know about it and start making phone calls and asking if they can place their residents here as well. So then what we tried to do and what we tried to do last year is we tried to first go to our iron house population in our current city that are

whether in the woods or wherever it may be that the Quality of Life team, the outreach workers, everybody is in those and trying to get them to the shelter first and then is when we open it up and the shelter fills up pretty quickly. and again when it fills up pretty quickly it's coming from all different angles whether it's local people or it's coming from people across central Mass that are being sent because they know that there's a vacancy there. So it's really tough to target what exactly that number is. We know what the currently unhoused number is in Worcester. And we know that we need an overflow based on the current capacity of the current shelter network. Last year it was more specific in terms of the need because the need last year was specific, driven for the LGBTQIA and women who wanted their own space.

and so we try to move quickly with the state to try to increase that capacity to provide their own space because of challenges and their unique supportive services that they need that they may not feel comfortable, whether it's at Queen Street or other locations. That has been Kind of addressed at some level where we've now designated a specific location in the city for women. And we have about 64 women in that shelter right now. I'm in conversations to look at LGBTQIA plus shelters in the city. We just had a conversation with a partner just last week on that to see if we can open one and what are the resources that we can allocate or Put together to try to support that. So there's there's a lot of work happening around this. But I think one of the challenges becomes is because the community is so transient, We're also trying to figure out like what's that number? What's the number that we're aiming for? Is it 100? Is it 50? Is it 200?

But we know that right now, currently right now, what's the numbers in the unhoused, chronically homeless, unhoused? in the streets. It's definitely the need is a little bit greater than what we currently have in terms of capacity in our current network.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Castile was a champion for us here in the city of Worcester. and that position is vacant as I understand it. Right, we have an interim. I'm just wondering what the planning is for that. I'm asking for it now, like a report back. It's very important we have someone with that level of expertise ready to execute, Mr. Chairman. We are in a crisis and I'm going to repeat my challenge to the city manager. that we take a look at vacancy factors, let's shift some money and let's increase the number of outreach workers and additional social workers. I know the concern was brought up that we might deplete the reservoir of social workers in the Commonwealth or in the city. And I stand before you as an expert in that field.

and that we should be moving as much as we can the population has increased significantly over the last couple of years and we need all hands on deck the last thing that we should do is investing more money in ways that would potentially criminalize the homeless. I'm not saying we're doing that but if we're putting money into treatment and outreach versus overtime and suppression, you know, and we have to comply with the feds and what they're asking. I think we should get ahead of the ball. So that would be me reiterating that challenge, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Yes, I'll send that to the Manager. All those in favor? I'm sorry, roll call.

Burgman, Councilor Colorio, Haxhiaj, King, Mero-Carlson, Noyan, Ojeda, Pacillo, Russell, Toomey, and Mayor Petty. Yes. Motion to adjourn. All those in favor, roll call. Councilor Bergman.

Yes.

Councilor Colorio.

Yes.

Councilor Haxhiaj.

Yes.

Councilor King. Yes. Councilor Mero-Carlson. Yes. Councilor Ojeda?

Yes.

Councilor Pacillo?

Yes.

Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey? Mayor Petty?

Yep.