City Council 09/09/2025

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Worcester City Council meeting. If you can, please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance and the Star-Spangled Banner.

To the model for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. O 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 were 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.

Can we do a roll call? Councillor Bergman? Here. Councillor Colorio?

Here.

Councillor Haxhiaj? Here. Councillor King? Here. Mayor Carlson. Here. Councilor Nguyen, Councilor Ojeda.

Here.

Councilor Pacillo. Here. Councilor Russell. Here. Councilor Toomey. Here. Mayor Petty.

Here, first motion to approve of the minutes of July 15th, 2025. All those in favor? Opposed, so ordered. Public Participation. The person may speak for no more than two minutes on any of them appearing on the agenda.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So Rule 39, items of public interest at every meeting of the City Council under public participation. Portion of the agenda that the Chair shall recognize any person seeking such recognition for the purpose of addressing the Council. on any eligible item on the agenda for the meeting. 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 speaking shall not exceed two minutes for any one speaker or 30 minutes for all speakers.

Okay. Is your name, see your residence, and item number?

Thank you. Fred Nathan Worcester. 11-15A about the home rule petition there. Colleges have gotten away with buying up property left and right, My estimate is 100 properties in the last 10 years, all the colleges combined, which they pay zero tax on. So any way that we can find out what they're gonna do with the property, whatever they want to do. Some place along the line we need to know what they're gonna do with the property. Your order, Mr. Mayor, 12A and also 12B. The other item, I'm not sure which item it is, number wise, relating to Bill Coleman. It was a very sad day when Bill Coleman died in that he never got a chance to fit in here and sit behind there with you guys and girls. I think he would have done a very good job. He's definitely been an advocate for the people of Worcester, and I always enjoyed watching the debates, Mr. Mayor. He definitely kept you on your feet there. So that would be a great idea. Oh, on the fire stations, trying to have calming, I don't know if it's the appropriate word because it almost sounds like, I don't know, I just think that people might interpret the word calming wrong. So if you could recheck that out and see if the calming word is appropriate.

Thank you. Our next speaker, name, seat of residence, and item number.

Good evening, Martha Cefa Ward 7. It's my first time back in City Hall in six years. I'm the mom of a toddler who adores firefighters. I support Attell's fire sprinkler resolution. A safe home is so important and everyone deserves to have one. I urge each counselor and the mayor to do what's right and not what those with money and power want. Worcester families are watching. Thank you.

Thanks. Should name see residence, not a member?

Hello, my name is Gary Hunter, District 5, proudly so. First thing I would like to say is the two resolutions about Mr. William Coleman. He was a gentleman. I love talking to him, and it's too bad he wasn't able to represent the City Council, but he deserved it, and I always save the vote for him. So I'm sure there's not going to be any argument passing those resolutions. Second thing I would like to talk to is 7A. I was here a little bit early before the meeting. I don't know why this hasn't passed already. This has been around for a while. And while it's not being passed, it's not... is endangering the fire people and the people in the apartments. We need this to pass. I mean, I sat here and people said, well, what if the landlord does this? What if the landlord does that? You have no control over that. But you do have control about passing this resolution to make it safer for the firefighters and the people in the apartments. Please pass it.

Good evening, counsel. Darren Barnard, Jermaine Street. I'd like to address number 9Y. Several of us have come out tonight in strong opposition City, and the City of Washington. and many more. Thank you. Thank you. We don't have students parking on the street during the day because we have resident only parking. That parking extends halfway up the street. There is parking that is available at the top of the street if people are so inclined they can park at the top of the street. This even putting a time limit on The day hours, we haven't yet seen what the new football stadium, what that's going to bring in terms of parking there at night when we have football games, when there are back to school nights, when there are any school functions there at night. Our street fills up with cars and if you've got two children with cars who drive and we end up with Thank you very much.

Katie Silverstein, Jermaine Street, and I'm here in opposition to Item 9Y. Like many people on my street, I park on the street. I don't actually have a driveway, so I have to park on the street. and I rely on the permit parking to sort of somewhat guarantee a space near-ish my house. I'm not really sure why this was even brought forward. I know that most people are in a similar situation as I am, but it seems that suddenly we want to remove it. I wish that Mr. Lynn Harris had spoken to his neighbors and found out exactly how we feel ahead of time. I didn't have a lot of time to do that myself because I just found out about this a day ago, but I was able to reach out to 10 of what I believe to be 14 houses that are affected by the permit parking and not one single one of them had any idea that this was not only coming tonight or at any point in the future. Of myself and the people that I was able to poll, 10 of us are very strongly opposed to changing the resident permit parking. That means we want to Prevent any time restrictions from going on it and we certainly don't want it removed altogether. This is something that should have been worked out on our street. And I actually do apologize to the city council for wasting your time with it tonight. So hopefully we can get this filed so it doesn't waste anybody else's time in committee. Thank you so much.

Thank you. should names for your residents, item number?

My name is Robin Rhodes. I live on Lake Avenue in Worcester, Massachusetts. I want to rise in support of the order that was submitted by District 2 Counselor Candy Mero-Carlson Regarding the obnoxious odors that continue to emanate from the Lake Avenue pumping station, I live right next door due north, and it never used to be a problem Now it's a constant problem. 24 hours a day, seven days a week, you feel like you're living in a laboratory. And I just think that with the How people don't understand that Lake Quinsigamond is actually quite clean, because I swim in it regularly, because I live there, that the odors give an impression that we live on Lake Quinsuamond. and it's not accurate. So I know that there's scrubber technology out there. There's other things that can be done to eliminate these, I mean, vile, offensive odors. So I would support Councilor Carlson's order.

Thank you. Is your name Seat Residence?

Hi, I'm Cheryl Rosen. I live at 161 West Mountain Street here in Worcester. I was Bill Coleman's, I still feel like I am, I was Bill Coleman's Best friend for over 35 years and I 100% support the mayor's requests to have an honorary city councilor for a day for Bill, the day that he chose as being October 20th. For those of you who don't know, was Bill's birthday. and about a week before that date, Bill would start sending me messages saying, don't forget October 20th, it's my birthday. So it's very apropos that that is the date that the mayor has chosen and also the fact that District 4 City Councilor Ojeda and the Mayor are requesting that a section Gardner Street be made for William S. Coleman the third way. I think that's very apropos. His church is over there and I think it's The fact that he never made it in a city position, the Mayor and I have spoken, he was able to do so much for our community not being in a city position because when he wanted to get something done, he just went out there, raised the funds, and just did it versus all of you get stuck sending things back and forth and back and forth and back and forth and a lot of times not getting things done. So I highly support both of these, and I hope you were able to get it done this evening. Thank you.

Thank you. Names to your residents.

My name is Teja Cerezo. I am a resident of Worcester. In 2023, while laying the foundation for my organization, Mero Safe Haven, a nonprofit dedicated to providing shelter to families and youth in the city. I turned to the city's website. and I contacted various departments to ask about empty properties and lots so that we may begin our process of developing shelter for families and youth. I was basically told that there was none. It was a bit disheartening as a new organization trying to get started at a time where the city really needed shelter. and as someone actively working to address homelessness and housing insecurity, I know the properties is this. What we need is a bit more transparency and accessibility and willingness to collaborate with community-based organizations who are ready to do the work. Now in the process of bringing a new program to the city to focus on treatment of black men in the city, We are at this process again. We are looking for space in the city that will be able to house us to do the work and provide support to residents of the city with support of the Office of Health and Human Services but again, we continue to find ourselves in a place where we can't find a space to operate. Items 12E and 17F are really critical first steps to folks like nonprofits who are looking to do the work in the city, but also to provide support to families and youth So more accurate public reporting of empty lots and spaces and availability of those spaces. to provide resources to the city will be very helpful. As long as they're empty, we're missing an opportunity to provide housing, healing and hope. and I'm urging folks to support both 12E and 17F not just with the vote but with active follow-through and partner with organizations like us who are looking to do the work in the city. Thank you.

Thank you. What's your name, state of residence, and item number?

Good evening members of the City Council. Mike Cain, I'm a resident here in the City of Worcester. I'm here tonight on 1115 Institutional Master Plans. As a college student here in the city, as well as an alum of a city college, I know the importance that it plays with students. Does it sound a little bit better? But as well I also know the importance that economic development plays. and we're seeing colleges take properties off the tax rolls and not knowing anything about it. That's not fair, that's not transparent and that's not gonna allow for sustainable growth here in the city. It's burdening our taxpayers, residents, and businesses, and it's just There needs to be a long-term plan that is presented by these colleges to our city, to our businesses, to even their students. It's important. and granted if the city ends up going forward with this home rule petition and it's successful, we won't be the first city that have been doing it in Massachusetts. Boston has it, Cambridge has it, and they've seen massive success with it. They even use it as a marketing tool for making kids come to their campuses. And I know Providence as well in Rhode Island has it. Again, this is an important piece of a tool that we have, and we have at our disposal, and we will look forward to it on the Worcester Regional Chamber of Commerce. to see it go forward here through a home rule petition tonight. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody online?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. We do have a few calling users online. The first caller and user I can identify is David Webb. Do you want to meet the resident now?

Hi, thank you for that picture of the clock, Nico. David Webb, City of Olympia. In regards to 1112A, the sprinklers, my new city has many issues, but it doesn't have a safety committee that prioritizes their landlord, friends, and clients over the safety of their entire city. I think 12P is a further attempt to control private contractors so the city can inconvenience them if they don't cooperate in a blatant overreach of city powers by Councillor Mero-Carlson. Regarding 12O, I know some counselors are always looking for an excuse to give their coworkers in blue more money, but it seems like they just got a bunch of new vehicles and guns in the past few months. So I'm not sure why we're trying to give the police more money. I'm against 13b. Neighborhood meetings function as a place for police officers to meet landlords and property owners, a space where counselors prioritize feedback over statistics and data. And I think we should strive to reach more people than these police inspectional services focused meetings do. Lastly, I'm still in support of 17a. While the city becomes more and more impossible to afford, you've had rent control tables for almost 16 years now. Please do your jobs. Thanks.

Next speaker.

Thank you. The next speaker is the phone number of the last four digits, 6714. Can you hear us? Please state your name and city residence.

Yes. Hi, it's Colleen West, Worcester, Massachusetts. I just wanted to say I support 12D We need to crack down on these groups of bikers that are endangering drivers and pedestrians. If you've ever been caught in the middle of it, it's frightening. Item 12S. The waste of time. Tax pays will pay for this budget cut. We know that. And we know where they're going to cut. They're going to cut the police. They're going to cut the fire. I'm sorry if I don't know the number here. So I think that we should file Section 261. I have Chief Dyer's letter right in front of me. It states that sprinkler systems are already mandated and new residential buildings with four or more units. This requirement has been consistently enforced in Worcester and the adoption of 261 would not alter this practice. and it would have no new measurable improvement in life safety outcomes in Worcester. That's Chief Dyer's words. So I don't know. I just think it's unacceptable that a sitting counselor would fearmonger and lie just to get her item passed. And, you know, I'm very tired. I think we're all tired of the divisiveness like this. and the chaos brought to the floor this week by the same people over and over again this year.

Please stick on the issue.

Okay, thank you. Roto, Essel, King and Ojeda, goodbye.

and anybody else online.

Mr. Mayor, we have our next calling user, Ashley Spring. I'm gonna try to identify the resident now.

Can you hear me?

Yep, please state your name and study of residence and the item you're calling on.

Ashley Spring, City of Worcester. I think it's absolutely absurd that we would consider the adoption of sprinkler system as indicated in 7a divisive rhetoric. If this doesn't affect any units in the immediate, it will affect these triple-deckers in the future. This is something that could save lives. This is not... This is not meant to be a divisive issue here. This is supported by our literal fire chief. So please don't drop the ball on 7A any longer. Please let's pass this. It's a safety measure that we need. 12P. I'm not really sure about that. I think a more appropriate A way to track issues in the city would be to adopt a user-friendly software that allows residents to track in real-time projects within the city. This will cut out a middleman. As David said earlier, you know, somebody that Somebody might have a reason to not be so clear about what's going on. So if we could adopt a user-friendly software, I think that would be much more beneficial to the residents of Worcester. Something that has been brought up by Keith Laniers in the past too. 12S, yes, please alleviate unnecessary taxation on communities who are already living in poverty and struggling. And this will lend itself to 17A, which I support. Please get this done. We need rent control. If we want to prevent families from becoming homeless in the City of Worcester, we need to implement rent control programs that center working class renters' needs, not developers, working-class renters in Worcester. That will lead me into 17F. Please establish an Office of Housing Stability. Again, these two things are critical. We have an ever-increasing houseless population in Worcester. Everybody sees it. Everybody knows it's a problem. These two things can help prevent it. Sadly, 17G lends itself to those as well. Gordon is right in suggesting that we investigate systemic racism within the council. Thank you. I appreciate it. Thank you.

The last speaker I can identify is Eric Stratton.

Good evening. I wanted to call in support of the sprinkler ordinance. Sprinklers, as others have said, shouldn't be divisive. While I can understand some people have concerns related to costs, this is no different than the cost that landlords pass on to their renters for anything else, from a boiler to a roof. and this will help maintain our housing supply and protect people and save lives. We have a significant amount of older housing stock as you all very well know. We have beautiful triple-deckers. I know I live in a 100-year-old home with horsehair plaster and all sorts of other fun, and some old house things. But for these multifamily units, very often they are not necessarily well maintained. They have potential other risks associated with them. and renters do not have control over a lot of these safety features. So it is important to have fire sprinklers to again, protect these properties as well as to save lives. This shouldn't be divisive. And I think the city can take some very creative ways to help cover some of these costs. They could implement a grant program to help cover retrofitting these buildings. with sprinklers. Potentially, they could look at things like CPA funds for historic preservation or affordable housing and tapping into those potential resources to help cover these costs for some of these buildings. Let's get creative and let's come up with a way to maintain our housing stock in the city. It is desperately needed. With the item related to bikes, 12D, I certainly have no objection to people following the law, following the rules, but I will point out that I have concerns here because, again, this is a council that seems to not have much concern with protecting vulnerable road users. Cars are not vulnerable. Cars are protected by hundreds, if not sometimes multiple hundreds of safety features. Thank you.

Thank you.

Go ahead, sir.

Oh, thank you.

Did your name say your residence item number?

My name's Aaron DeRouge. I live right here in Worcester, Massachusetts, 54 years. I've been all over the country and I've been all over the world. Don't ask me why, but I'm back. I'd like to refer to my own item, 9A, which is a request of an extension of a water line on Hastings Ave. Ladies and gentlemen, the reason why I'm here is there was a misunderstanding with this. I have already gone through this process and have approvals. I have printed them out if anybody wants to see them. that are signed and approved. So simply it was an oversight. I met with the very nice Mr. Westerling and we spoke and we feel that we can kind of handle all of this. in-house together, just human error. So I don't wanna waste anybody's time with this really, but I just wanna have it noted on record that I was here and everybody knows about it and we're gonna work to get it rectified. instead of having to go through the three, four month process all over again.

What number was that?

We are nine aye. Aye. Mr. Mayor? Yep, thank you. All right, and hey Candy, great job with Indian Lake by the way, we love you. Have a nice day, thank you.

OK. Go ahead. Is your name and see your residence item number?

Hi. My name is Trevor Brooks, Auburn, Massachusetts. And I'll be brief. I would just like to speak in support of 10F, 10G, and 10H. For a little context, I run a youth organization that will hopefully have ambassadors in Worcester Public Schools within the next two to three months. and I've heard from people that I've talked to so far about safety concerns across not only Worcester but surrounding towns and cities as well. So please consider supporting that. Thank you.

Thank you. Okay, so we'll close this part of the meeting. We will go to hearings and orders. The motion is to open a hearing regarding condo location Herman Street. and the current location on Harrison Street and the current location on Winfield Street. Motion to open the hearing. All those in favor, opposed, so awarded. Anybody opposed to these? That's 6A, B, and C. Seeing nobody opposed, the motion is to close the hearing. Those in favor, opposed, so ordered. The motion is to adopt. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. We are going to 7A, Kathleen Toomey as Chair of the City Council Standing Committee on Public Safety in accordance with Rule 33E. City Manager, recommend adoption of Massachusetts General Law Chapter 148, Section 26I, which mandates the installation of automatic fire sprinkler systems in residential buildings. with four or more dwelling units as presented to the City Council and referred to the Standing Committee on Public Safety as item 16KWC on April 1st, 2025. City Council agenda along with related items pending before the committee. and we'll take this along with 16A. So first of 17, adopt on the roll call, roll call.

Councillor Bergman? Yes. Councillor 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 Councilor Petty Yes Councilor Toomey

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We heard these in subcommittee. The committee voted to recommend to bring to the council at large and recommended to file. And we also had a resolution which I'd like to read and a Chairman's Order. The Chairman's Order is to request the City Manager provide the City Council's report concerning any incentives the City can implement to encourage individuals to install sprinklers in their properties. and then the resolution, whereas in March of 2020, the city contracted with the Emergency Services Consulting International SE, to conduct and create a standard of cover community risk assessment and master plan relative to the operations of the Wistful Fire Department and whereas at the September 22nd 2021 city council meeting the city's administration officially provided the council was set standard of cover community risk assessment master plan to set forth on a process that built upon the department's practices and and bring forward a new era of growth towards national standards and whereas the City Council of the City of Worcester continues to monitor and address fire station statuses and locations including a report from the Fire Department on August 27th, 24 that discussed siting and design process plans for new South Division Fire Station at 25 Madison Street, and whereas the most recent class of Worcester Fire Department recruits graduated on June 6, 2025, were set classing a 4.2% increase in BIPOC recruits over the most recent 10-year average. And whereas the department continues to evaluate its turnout gear, purchasing a new per and polyfluoroalkyl substances PFAS free gear on a 10-year replacement cycle per National Fire Protection Association NFPA standard 1851. Now therefore, be it resolved that the City Council of the City of Worcester does hereby reaffirm its established commitment to fire safety and prevention. We also will have a report coming back from the Fire Chief regarding the process on that, which I look forward to supporting that as a commitment as well.

So, Mr. Mayor, just for clarification on kind of what took place with this vote. So, everything out of committee that was discussed regarding the fire item is before the council for discussion now. So there's the Chairman's order that was brought forward tonight, the resolution, and the recommendation of the committee was to file the MGL communication from the City Manager on behalf of the Fire Chief. Okay.

I'm sorry. I didn't hear what he said.

So the recommendation of the committee was to file the item that was brought from the manager on behalf of the fire chief. All set.

Yep. So just for clarification, essentially, I think what people don't understand is that this this legislation is 39 years old and was in effect was put up there because there were cities and towns that did not have this Things have changed here in Worcester and we now have rules and regulations between the fire department and special services that far supersede I think that the codes currently meet and exceed and the Chief further stated that no existing buildings in Worcester would be affected by its adoption and it wouldn't trigger any new construction or retrofitting regulations. Sprinklers are already mandated in new residential buildings with four or more units, and that's been consistently enforced in Worcester. So because of the thought we could do this resolution, which affirms our commitment and support to the fire department as we move forward. The other thing that I think is confusing is that people were talking about three-deckers and the legislation itself specifically states four units or more. and so I think there's a lot of misinformation out there and the other thing is that continued collaboration with the Fire Chief and the Commissioner of Inspectional Services ensures that public safety is paramount. And I believe that those two professionals will continue to keep this going moving forward. So when tragedy strikes, we all want to jump into action, and especially when there's a loss of human life. but I think that working together our fire department has shown over the years that they're very assertive and aggressive in terms of coming up with new policies and again from the SE report we'll read later on tonight that the fire department has made significant progress towards achieving the goals that were set forward. So I appreciate the Chief. The other thing is that was mentioned, I do have to ask the question that people keep saying that with 26i would save lives and I don't I don't understand how that could happen when the current code supersedes that the statute I don't believe we'll have any literal material benefits on our housing stock, our residents lives, or those of our firefighters. and so I just want to move forward with this vote. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Ojeda. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Yes, we did see this in committee. And I want to apologize to the residents that showed up. I did make a vote to file. And that's my apologies. I was under. the understanding that we were filing actually transmitting the information that was received not not actually filing this resolution so you know I would like to change my vote on that I agree with the professionals in the room, and then the City Manager with moving this forward, Section 26I. So I just want to make sure I'm right on the same time. Thank you.

Okay. Thank you, Councilor Haxhiaj.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Let me just start by sending a big thank you to Chief Dyer for the work that he said his department do for doing his due diligence and reporting back to council what we asked and for his endorsement of 26 I. I want to thank the city manager for endorsing it the same. the State Fire Marshal. There is a letter submitted to all the City Councillors. I reached out to the State Fire Marshal to receive a letter from him. and the City Council regarding the 26i. He sent that letter to me and to Chief Dyer. That letter is provided to the City Council with his full endorsement. I want to thank the Mill Street Neighborhood Association, the Columbus Park Neighborhood Association for also their endorsement of the automatic fire sprinkler legislation 26I. The reason why all these folks are important is that they were actually right there when and my residence at Washington Heights went through two fires just in the last year and a half. In fact, between January 2022 and September 2025, there have been two major fires in multifamily units just in District 5. One building collapsed, as Council will remember, at the Mill Street building that displaced hundreds of people. And this morning, Mr. Chair, I came back from speaking to 13 of my residents on Stafford Street who were displaced by a fire this morning. And kudos to the fire department and specifically to Lieutenant Melvin for providing fast service but also providing extra information to the tenants in the way that they deserve to have. and while 26 I would not have applied to the fire on Stafford Street, I bring that up as a literal example of over hundreds of my residents just in the last year and a half being displaced by fires. That is what the lack of fire sprinklers does. It upends people's lives. I want to make it very clear. for anybody on this council and anybody watching that the only reason this is on the city council is because Captain Bull, a fire expert in the fire department, reached out to me after the major fires on Washington Heights to inform me, educate me, and urge me to have this on council. And I also appreciate the conversations that I've had with the fire chief who as recently as during the April budget sessions clearly and resoundingly offered an endorsement of this legislation. So I keep hearing this is symbolic and that we need to focus on education and rental registry. For the record, I have been one of the biggest proponents of not diluting or imposing exemptions on the rental registry, using code enforcement to make our housing safer and as far as education, right after the fires at Washington Heights, The chief, his team, Lieutenant Ushinsky, Lieutenant Melvin, and I facilitated conversations and educational components with the residents at Washington Heights and in the district. I have been doing my homework. We heard something changed between when the Fire Chief endorsed this measure and today. What exactly has changed? The law hasn't changed. The need hasn't changed. and later I will speak about actual buildings in Worcester that have gone major renovations that actually haven't had fire sprinklers. I think that it's good for the public to know that as the person who brought this forward, I have taken my time to speak to other fire chiefs. So I have spoken to fire chiefs in Fitchburg, Hopkinton, and the State Fire Marshal. as well as District 5 residents. It is because of them that this is here. I want to make it clear. It didn't happen on election year. It happened because my residents needed my support and advocacy and that is what I'm doing here. I want to mention also something that is not frequently mentioned on the city council floor. 193 communities as recently as have adopted 26i because they see the need to close the fire gap. Many vulnerable residents that we talk about here all the time live in Worcester older pre-1997 multifamily apartment buildings because mandatory sprinklers did not become a code requirement until that year. All I'm asking is for Worcester to take this step to better protect our residents and our firefighters. So let me address a couple of points. The statute that I've asked us to adopt requires multifamily buildings with four or more units undergoing significant renovations. That is what the Supreme Court in Massachusetts took up when Fire Chief Pond from Holyoke brought this case or the person that he had wanted to do renovations and fire sprinklers brought to the Massachusetts court. Opting in does not add new building code requirements. Nobody's actually saying that this adds new requirements. The law though, This law would allow the fire chief to enforce the statute during significant renovations to protect building residents, firefighters, and neighbors. That does not exist right now. If a building is going under significant renovations, the property owner can bypass the law by staggering the renovations. The fire chief can make recommendations. He cannot mandate the property owner for installing fire sprinklers. I'm going to read directly from the fire chief words. There remains a small segment of older buildings where current codes may leave room for interpretation particularly in the case of substantial renovations. By adopting Section 26I locally, we ensure that no gaps in fire safety remain particularly in vulnerable structures. This measure will further help reduce property loss by containing fires in the early stages. This legislation offers a straightforward approach to ensuring that necessary fire suppression systems are in place to protect both occupants and property. It is designed to enhance safety in a practical manner without imposing undue burdens on property owners. These are the words of the Worcester Fire Chief Dyer, who I deeply appreciate for bringing them forward. I am tired of hearing Councilor Toomey state this is symbolic and redundant. This is simply not factually true. There are three buildings in Worcester. The 24-unit building at 115 Pleasant Street went under significant renovations. There was no fire sprinklers mandated for this property. 26I would have mandated this. Just recently 132 Milbury Street was renovated substantially. No fire sprinklers were installed. 26I would have changed that. 26I is supported by the Worcester Fire Chief, by the City Manager, by the Massachusetts Firefighters Association, the Board of Fire Prevention, the National Fire Protection Association and the State Fire Marshal and 193 communities throughout the state. The State Fire Marshal and the Fire Chiefs Associations actually supported briefs when Chief Appont in Holyoke appeared in front of the Massachusetts Supreme Court to discuss 26I. So why can't we do this the same? I don't understand why the public safety community at large and here locally, including the fire union, including firefighters in the front lines, have declared that such systems are the best tool to control the spread of a fire. They have argued, as has our fire chief, That's a matter of public safety that the chief of this city department of the fire department has the ultimate authority to allow property owners to not bypass the law. I will give you an example. There is a loophole in the law. Some engineers or builders can minimize the work under the threshold to avoid the fire sprinkler law. They may perform partial reconstructions to not trigger sprinkler changes in larger complexes. I am going to read the words of the fire marshal to the letter Chief Dyer and I spoke back in March. For the safety and well-being of Worcester residents, I strongly encourage the Worcester City Council to adopt MGL Chapter 148, Section 26I Adoption of Section 26i would improve fire safety, protect lives, and reduce damage to property across the community. I am simply stunned. that at a time when I just literally came back from 13 of my residents newly displaced, when we know the impact that fires have on our firefighters and in our building properties, when we know that we have the oldest housing block, that we are using words like a symbolic redundant measure. It is not. it should be incumbent upon all of us to protect our residents, to enhance our fire safety, and Mr. Chair, I hope that this council takes a really close look at what a no vote means. What a no vote means tonight is that we are choosing to not take advantage of a simple straightforward measure that the Worcester Fire Chief and the City Manager have fully endorsed Council King

Just a point of order before my time starts, Mr. Chairman. Point of order before my time starts. We still haven't changed the time. I just, just for clarification, I'm a little bit confused about how this came out of committee so did it come out on a roll call vote how did it come out did it come out just to file it has there been a motion on the floor to file it yet? Through the Chair. Just so I can be clear.

Mr. Corkett.

Through the Chair, to the Council. So basically, my understanding from the committee meeting, I was not the Clerk, but the Deputy informed me that it was a roll call. to recommend file the manager's recommendation of accepting MGL. So tonight, before the council, based on the rules, you voted to suspend the rules to accept the committee's report. So the committee's report had the recommendation of the committee to file the recommendation of the city manager to accept MGL. There was a Chairman's order and there was a Chairman's resolution that Council Toomey read.

Thank you. And just for the public's purpose, as a point of order, can you explain what that motion to file meant? and so forth in this body. So the recommendation... Can you jump it down a little bit for these folks? Of course.

So basically, through the chair to the council, the recommendation of the committee was to file the acceptance of the MGL. I don't have the MGL in front of me, but I don't know, Councillor Toomey, do you have the actual item of the committee? I can read you the item in the agenda if you like.

if you feel it's necessary.

Sure. This way there's more clarity. So basically what's before the council tonight from the committee is it was communication of the city manager in terms of the fire department and the public safety committee. and it says Adoption of MGL Chapter 148, Section 26I, which mandates installation of automatic fire sprinkler system in residential buildings with four or more dwelling units. And that was referred to the committee. back in April, and now is coming back under suspension tonight.

Thank you, and through Chair again, point of order, in order to maintain my time. So, sounds to me, just if you could clarify, there was no action taken on, adopting the Mass General Law, the action was taken to file an item to committee. And the second, that's one question, is that a fact? And question number two is, did that body have the option based on the rules to take action and recommend adoption or not through the chair?

Chair, to the Council. So basically, in terms of committees, there are very different rules for Council and committees. The Chairs have a little more discretion based on The Chair of the Committee, Number 1. Number 2, they also rely on Robert's Rule of Order. Council is very different because it has outlined rules, as you know. So basically my understanding from the committee meeting was the committee could have recommended adoption or recommended approval or recommended file, which in this case they did.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'm ready to proceed. Thank you for that clarification, Mr. Clerk. It's very clear that the committee did not take action to adopt or oppose adoption, it took action to file an item. And I want that clarification as a member of that committee stated and their testimony on the floor, that that was their understanding. So thank you for the clarification. Through the Chair to the administration, I would just like to ask the Chief, if possible, and the City Manager to just weigh in on whether or not gaps would be filled if we adopted this through chair? And if so, what are those gaps? Chief?

Chief. Through the chair to the counselor, if everything is working properly between the code department and the fire department, there should not be gaps that exist.

Chair, I missed that. Could you just repeat? It was a little muffled.

If everything is working properly within the city, there should not be gaps between the application of the building code and Sprinklers being installed where appropriate. I think if we look at some situations in the past with perceived gaps, There was probably a lack of knowledge of the McLaren standard that came out of the Holyoke case in which I think people ascribe more power to the fire chief than the fire chief actually has. Part of my job is to protect the city against lawsuits and claims, and I need to make sure that I follow that standard, basically, that has been approved by the court. That means that it's not in the sole judgment of the Fire Chief to just go in and say that 26I qualifies here and therefore you have to sprinkle the building. I would have to apply the McLaren standard, which is very close to what the building code is.

What's the difference?

It's a matter of semantics. Not semantics. I shouldn't say that. Words matter. In the building code, it has a table in the building code that actually lists what substantial renovations are. in 26I, it has substantially rehabilitated. A lot of people would assume that that means that myself or my representatives or agents are taking a look at a building and saying, OK, this constitutes substantially rehabilitated. But in fact, when you apply the McLaren standard, you have to weigh the cost of the renovations. Will the building be like new upon completion? and so really it brings it very close to what the billing code is.

And can you explain your recommendation to the council pertaining to this matter?

Absolutely. Through the Chair of the Council, As a fire chief, I always support installation of sprinklers wherever possible. Symbolic or real, I support sprinkler installations. and education laws on the books that provide for sprinkling of buildings. That is why I made the recommendation that I made. That's why I still support the recommendation that I made. But I do think it is incumbent for me to provide this information that I learned later regarding the McLaren standards.

Thank you. You stand by the recommendation. Have you had any communication with the State Fire Marshal in this regard?

through the chair to the counselor, I did when he wrote the letter that was requested of him.

Can you share a little bit about the nature of that conversation?

We discussed the standard, or 26I, and the circumstances that brought it about.

And what's your understanding of the state fire marshal's recommendation?

I'd prefer not to speak for him. Okay. Did you read it? Excuse me? Did you read this? I did read it. Okay.

After you read that, is it your understanding that this letter is in support of your recommendation?

Through the chair to the counselor, may I take your copy for a second and refresh myself? Council, I substantially agree with this letter. I do caution in the third paragraph about the gaps. Once again, I'll reiterate, if the building code is applied appropriately, I believe that 26i would not come into play.

Thank you Mr. Chairman and The follow-up question is, during the budget hearings, did you make a similar recommendation today that you stand by, the recommendation that this body adopt this through Chair's measure during budget?

The Chair of the Council, yes.

Mr. Chairman, Fire Department's had a number of challenges over the years. We had significant audit of that department. We've had a change in leadership. We've had a union that is working with administration to make it better. And I think we're moving in the right direction. State Fire Marshal, our Chief, is recommending adoption of this. It's recommended it throughout this entire process. It simply makes sense, Mr. Chairman, to make sure. This sounds like a safety measure that will fill any gap that potentially occurs. And this is applicable to as mentioned any significant and so forth. So, we're going to be doing a lot of rehabilitation or substantial rehabilitations on properties with four more units. Through the Chair, if you could also just clarify, it's my understanding that the State Code also requires sprinkler units on new construction. Is that correct, through the Chair? Chief?

through the chair of the council. Four units or more. The state building code. Yep. The state building code requires installation of fire sprinklers for four or more units.

Yeah, so I'm not quite sure what we're, Quibbling over here. It's similar but can potentially fill a gap if there's something that's not applied in uniformity or if there's a circumstance that rises outside of the norm, Mr. Chairman. So for those reasons, I will support this. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else come to me for the second time?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. We ask to take 16A along with this, which is the report submitted August 19th. 2025 from the City Manager who brought forward the report from the Chief. The City Manager's report respectfully submits the attached communication relative to a Council request on the impact of adopting MGL Chapter 148, Section 26I, as received from Martin Dyer, Fire Chief and Forwarder for the consideration of your honorable body. The adoption of MGL Chapter 148, Section 266I in Worcester would not affect existing buildings trigger new construction or retrofitting requirements or impose additional costs on property owners or renters. The measure just reaffirms the municipality's established commitment that fire prevention and public safety as current building codes and enforcement practice practices already meet or exceed standards outlined in 26I. The Chiefs report, the adoption of 26I will be an affirmation of our commitment to life safety but its adoption will have no material impact on life safety outcomes or economic conditions in the municipality due to the following. full alignment between the fire department and building commissioner on enforcement of existing building codes. No existing buildings in Worcester will be affected by its adoption. The adoption of 26i will not trigger any new construction or retrofitting requirements. Therefore, there will be no costs passed on to property owners or renters. Further, a review of building permits and occupancy certificates issued over the past 20 years 20 years confirms that all qualifying buildings have been constructed under codes that already required sprinkler systems. There are no examples of existing buildings that would be newly impacted by the adoption of 26I. Based on the Mass State Building Code, sprinkler systems are already mandated in new residential buildings with four or more units. This requirement has been consistently enforced in Worcester, and the adoption of 26I would not alter the practice. The adoption of MGL Chapter 148, Section 26I will have no economic impact, no effect on existing buildings, and no new measurable improvement in life safety outcomes in Worcester. Again, adoption will be symbolic, which I've brought forward a resolution to make sure that the citizens of Worcester know that we support the fire department and fire safety. That's symbolic. It's not adding an extra layer. It's not confusing what's already there. The Chief has said very clearly that it supersedes the... Sorry. Let me just find the actual thing. The requirement. and Unmeasurable Life Safety. OK, I'm sorry. And the manager's statement. The measure reaffirms the municipality's established commitment to fire prevention and public safety as current building codes and enforcement practices already meet or exceed The stand is outlined in 26I. So again, I guess I want to ask just for a clarification. Passing to the Chief, and I'm sorry to ask you to come back up again, but will this statute will not have literal material benefits to our housing stock, our residents' lives, or those of our firefighters, correct? It will not have any literal material benefits.

Chief? through the chair to the counselor. Adoption of this, again, the building code, as I've stated in my communications, the building code Let's go back a little bit, right? When 26I was adopted, the building codes were not where they are today. Correct. In the intervening years, and that made the adoption of 26I really important, right, and impactful. In the ensuing years, the building code has been updated. It caught up to 26I and has since surpassed 26I. If the building code is being applied appropriately, it should not have an impact.

OK. So this adopting 26i will not save any lives. Current codes supersede, correct?

Through the Chair to the Councilor. That's a tough question. I don't think... I don't feel I'm qualified to answer that.

Okay. Okay. So I would say you couldn't say that it wouldn't. So at any rate, I'm just saying that this statute has No impact on the safety of our firefighters by not passing it. We have not put a single firefighter at risk.

Mr. Manager? Yeah, I just want to step in here real quick. I think the question that is being asked at this moment, it could potentially imply, right, that if we don't have a sprinkler system and the four units or more based on extensive renovations, substantial renovations. And the fires in this sprinkler system is not on or is not put into these units. there's a potential risk if there was a fire and firefighters would be exposed to that, could there be a potential life risk? I think that's the real question. And the question could be yes or no, depending on the actual fire itself. right and so there's been situations where they've been fired the fire department has done a great job their tactics as part of the strategic plan has shifted a lot of their tactics in the way they operate and manage fires and I think that's something that has been a model for Worcester that's been across the state and across the nation. But it's a what if. It's a what if, right? And I think that is the risk that we collectively as a city administration, the city's council, need to understand and then make a decision based on that risk. Is this something that we want to mitigate that risk? Is it not? And that's a collective decision that we have to make.

the current building codes meet and or exceed what 26I would bring. So I feel very comfortable with the current building codes and the city, the state and city building codes. And again, as I said, we definitely affirm support for the fire department. And I think that we need to focus on those things and move forward. And I want to thank the chief for all of his work.

Thank you. Councillor Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to ask the Chief a question before I speak on the subject through the Chair to the Chief. If I understand correctly, please correct me if I'm wrong, the International Building Code does not have the language that's being sought here in section 26I, is that correct? It has different language, similar language, but different language.

Through the Chair of the Council, that is correct.

And the International Building Code, if I'm correct, through the Chair, is something that's adopted pretty much by every city and town in America and, because it's called international, I'm assuming beyond America. Is that correct?

Through the Chair of the Councilor, it is widely adopted. Many states, including Massachusetts, make state amendments to the code.

And many countries. Is that correct as well, through the Chair?

Thank you. Through the Chair of the Council, that is correct.

Okay. So, thank you. Through the Chair of the Chief. You know, so many times, difficult subjects are framed in a way that I think it's not fair, and this is one of those issues. There's nobody here that wants to minimize the risk to individuals from fire. Worcester has suffered more than any city I can think of when it comes to fire tragedies. It's certainly not because of a lack of an excellent fire department. It's just an unfortunate set of circumstances that Worcester has suffered so many tragedies. That doesn't mean we can't try to prevent the tragedies. and we should. But we also have to weigh are we really preventing something versus just saying we're preventing something and at the end of the day we really haven't changed anything. Now I listened carefully and it was important to hear some of the comments made by other colleagues. Yes, the Fire Marshal has issued a letter. The Fire Marshal of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, yet despite that letter, 193 communities have signed on. But then always, whenever we hear these numbers, it's always worthwhile to remind everyone that there's 351 communities in Massachusetts. That's barely 50%. even though the fire marshal says it's something to do. Yet the chief will tell you, and he just did, that pretty much every city and town in America has what we already have. has what we already have. 50% more or less, it's actually 46%, we'll round it up to 50, of the communities of Massachusetts are doing exactly what we are doing up until now, which is using the International Building Code. Now, when we talk about safety nets and filling in gaps, this doesn't address duplexes. There's a lot of renters that live in duplexes. This doesn't address single family homes. There's a lot of people that rent single family homes. It doesn't even address ADA units, which is something that is more and more likely to be more and more relevant going forward. It addresses certain construction that we've heard has already been addressed under the existing codes. Now, I heard somebody, I believe it was a member of the audience say, well, we can't worry about what might happen down the road, what landlords might or might not do. Yeah, yeah, we can. because our job is to, my job at least, and I think many of my colleagues would agree, not all, is to think about the unintended consequences. We're trying to help vulnerable populations. Now, I didn't hear it said, but I'm going to suggest that I feel confident in saying this, that If a tragedy happens and a building gets severely damaged, oftentimes the insurance doesn't cover the upgrades. So what does that mean? Does it mean I'm feeling bad for the landlord? No. What it means is I'm thinking, about the unintended consequences of the owner of that building having to decide whether they're going to rebuild the building with their own money because the insurance doesn't cover it, which potentially makes vulnerable people have less opportunity for units. and the other consequence which is if this gets adopted and people realize that in order to make improvements they're going to have to put a sprinkler system in What are they going to do? Well, human nature being what it is, it's no gas. It's common sense. A lot of, unfortunately, people are going to try to do the work without the permits. And when you do the work without the permits, you get exactly the tragedies we've had in Worcester, when people are doing work without pulling out permits. So yes, it's a tough call. But it's not about who cares about people and who doesn't care about people. It's weighing whether or not this really improves anything, whether it fills all the gaps, or whether it just sounds like it does, and also whether or not it's going to cause the unintended consequences of people not having the funds or trying to avoid spending the money in doing things without permits, which to me is every bit and perhaps even more dangerous than the status quo we're in now, which by the way, it's the status quo that's been adopted by almost half of the cities and towns of Massachusetts and the International Building Code, which covers virtually every city in town, I believe, in America. So I will vote as I did in committee. I understood what the question was. Not because I don't believe we should be trying to protect every life. We should. but because I believe the unintended consequences are going to outweigh the benefits that are being suggested, which again, we have so many gaps we can't fill them all we can only do what's reasonable and if half the cities and towns of Massachusetts think what we're doing currently is reasonable and if the international building code says what we're doing is reasonable I think it's reasonable to keep it the way it is. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I appreciate you recognizing me for a second time. A lot has been said tonight. I want to deeply apologize to my residents in District 5. I want to deeply apologize to the Chief for being put in an awkward, very weird position tonight. I want to apologize to future people who end up being in those buildings with substantial renovations that will not be required to have fire sprinklers because we may have a disagreement between building codes and fire chiefs in the future. And I want to apologize to the residents of Worcester on behalf of the city council, or at least the folks that are going to vote against this resolution. I want to apologize to you, the residents of Worcester, because even a symbolic gesture, which I don't believe this is, but even a symbolic gesture that poses absolutely zero consequence that simply affirms our commitment to fire safety that members of the City Council could not bear to bring to fruition. If people want to punish me for my ideas or for bringing things forward, that's totally fine. Please find ways to do that. But to take a vote against something that this fire chief has said, to have him sit here among Awkward questions and being put in an awful position, I feel obligated to apologize to the hundreds of residents after the Washington fires who begged me who begged me to do whatever I could. That's why they elected me, who were the inspiration for this. And I want to apologize to Captain Bull of the Fire Department for taking the time to talk to me, to educate me, to tell me all about this law. The person who does this work in the front lines along with the fire chiefs, I want to apologize because the one time that this city council could have come together on such a simple measure, even if it's symbolic, to affirm our commitment to Worcester residents and firefighter lives, we decided that we didn't wanna do it.

Okay, Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To the administration, I just want to hear from the city manager as to whether or not he remains in support of this measure through the chair. Mr. Mayor?

Yeah, through the chairs of the council, I stand by my chief and the recommendations of my chief and what the chief has articulated here today. There is extremely important that there's a lot of nuance in terms of what we've discussed and what we've presented before the council in both reports. The one in February and also the one in August. There is a lot of information here but there's also a lot of like I said, nuance and intricacies that we would have to sit here and explain every single code, the comparison versus the clearance and what the role of the fire chief plays in a situation where the building code is not applicable or is not applied in the way it should be. And the Chief has said it here, if the building code is applied the way it should be, then this 26 would not come into play.

And to the chair, if you could speak to section 261. I'm trying to understand where it would be harmful or how it would be harmful. I'm assuming you don't think it would be to an owner of a four unit or the folks that are living there. If you can kind of explain to me Any concerns, if you have any concerns about a negative impact this would have on our city?

Mr. Manager?

through the Chair to the Council. Like I've said, we've said in the reports, it wouldn't have a negative impact. I think what it does is though, and again, it all comes down to the applicability of the building code. and the interpretation of the commissioner of that building code and comparing it to the clearance. If there is any disagreement there, that's when 26I steps in where the chief has then the ability to come in and authorize his recommendation. If that is applied correctly, there's no issue here. I guess for lack of better terms, the only impact that I think it could potentially have, and it has been communicated here before, is that if there is a requirement for you for substantial renovations and there's a requirement through the building code, that is applied correctly, it would require any building over four units to install sprinklers. And so that's a cost. to the actual property owner that has to install this, but it's only for the substantial. Now, there's been questions about, am I changing the bathroom? Do I have to, am I renovating the kitchen? Am I renovating? you know, a small section of my property, does that then trigger the sprinkler and it doesn't. Right? And if the building code is applied correctly, those moments would not apply. However, substantial renovations, when you look at that or the categories that are required within the building code, it lays out what triggers the opportunity to have a sprinkler system.

Thank you. This is clearly an additional safety threshold that could be brought in play if necessary. you know our fire department I think is distinguished and I stand by those professionals I will say for the record Mr. Chairman I have spoken to a number of property owners, general contractors, and what they asked me was, what is the council arguing about? a lot of this as mentioned even by the chair of the committee is potentially already covered. So if there's an opportunity to have an additional threshold of safety applied if there is some sort of discrepancy, it certainly makes sense to move forward, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, and thank you for the clarification, Mr. Manager.

Thank you. Council Russell?

Mr. Chairman, when this item was first presented to us, I had private conversations with the Chief, with the Manager. I had conversations or items or requests on the Council floor. I at that time asked about the gaps. I asked our building code today. that we're enforcing and doing a pretty good job at enforcing it, versus this 26I. and if it was adopted, what would be different? I asked for a chart or a spreadsheet that shows exactly what the differences would be. I even asked the City Council staff person today to go back and make sure, look through all the paperwork we've received on this item because I thought maybe I had missed it. And I haven't seen it. And neither did he. I asked for a definition of the word substantial. A definition of the word substantial. We have a reasonable chief of the fire department. We have a reasonable staff and new commissioner at the code department and the assistant commissioner that did such a good job filling in. and I trust all of those professionals to be reasonable. But down the road, that word substantial, I thought really needed to be defined. I still haven't seen an actual definition of that. Mr. Chairman, this letter that was circulated today by the clerk's office and the staff from the office about the The Fire Marshal refers to this item not only including four families and above, but also including things like dormitories, hotels, other kinds of properties that I didn't realize were included until I read that letter today. Mr. Chairman, my understanding is if you have a two-family today, and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Manager, or anyone, I don't see the Code Commission here, but My understanding is you have a two family and you added a unit, you make it into a three family, you have to put sprinklers in now, even for a three family. This item is only dealing with four units and above. So right now, my perception of what we're doing as a city as far as enforcing and mandating sprinklers is actually tougher than what this 26i is, because that's only dealing with four units and above, and we're imposing it on three units and above, which I think is a great thing. but it begins to come, you know, like confusion too, so that if we put out that we're enforcing this new rule for four units and above, does that mean those that have three, all of a sudden they don't have to do that? because right now the code department and the fire department is being strict and telling them that they have to put sprinklers in. and the substantial in that case from I've heard from property owners and from people in the real estate industry has been down to the studs kind of thing you know like if you're doing the like the manager use the example of a bathroom renovation or our or Kitchen Renovation, that kind of thing. That would be like if you had a bad fire and you stripped the house down to the actual studs and you had to rebuild the whole thing. I actually did that myself in my business for a single family house. And I know that's harder than building a new house. And those rules, all those new rules kick in, including the sprinklers for three units and above. So I have no problem supporting the committee's suggestion, their recommendation of filing this. I think that the city staff, the fire department, and the code department is doing a very good job now. And the way I'm reading it, it's actually a stricter interpretation because of the lower units. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I'm misunderstanding it. If I am, we can take it up again at some other time in the future. But I'm ready to support Councilor Toomey's recommendation. And I hope.

Mr. Manager.

Just quickly, April 1st of this year, 2025, we submitted a memo to Council where it gave our current policies, the impact of adopting Section 26I. It talked about what substantially rehabilitated units are. versus substantial renovations and the difference between both, and then also the application of the McLaren standard as well. So we've tried to be as forthcoming and give as much information as we can to the council and the public and understanding because like I said earlier, there's a lot of new ones when it comes to Council, the building code, but I do agree with Councilor Russell in terms of his interpretation of the current building codes and the requirements of the building codes which are pretty stringent.

Just as a follow up to the manager, aren't we doing sprinklers for three units now? If somebody builds a new three unit or if they rehab down to the studs? isn't that? Yes, yes. We are, so we're actually doing more than just the four units, we're doing four units. Correct, that's correct. All right, thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Bergman.

Again, I don't like comparing whose side people are taking because I think we're all on the side of of every resident in the city of Worcester, whether they're a tenant or whether they're a property owner. But a statement was made earlier. I know there's some snickers over there, but I'll ignore that because we're trying to have a mature conversation. So if I may have the chief back in the seat. Chief. So through the Chair to the Chief, could you explain as best as you can what the Sprinkler Review Board is, which meets, I believe, in Boston?

Chief?

through the chair to the counselor. So it's a board that hears appeals to orders to file or orders from a fire chief to install sprinklers based off of whichever maybe 26G, 26G and a half applied, they could appeal that to that board.

And through the chair, is it fair to say that sometimes the board, first of all the board's made of professionals, is that fair to say?

Through the Chair of the Councilor, in my opinion, yes.

and through the Chair, sometimes the Board sides with keeping the order of the type of sprinkler system that has to be put in. Sometimes they modify it and sometimes they turn the decision on its heels. Is that fair to say?

Through the Chair of the Council, that is fair.

And is it fair to say that under 26I, the opportunity under the other sections of that statute to appeal to the Sprinkler Review Board is eliminated? Is that fair to say?

Through the chair, that is correct.

Thank you. So let me just follow up. There was a conversation made about speaking to property owners saying, well, I don't see any problem with this. Maybe they didn't. I don't know how many were spoken to. But if they were made aware of the fact that there was no longer an appeal, and whatever decision is made, you have to live with that. I think there'll be a lot more concern. I mean, I think there's an opportunity with the other sections of the statute the way it currently exists to have a neutral expert body make decisions on whether or not the decisions of what types of sprinklers, the extent of the sprinklers are make sense, and it's fair. Now you're eliminating that altogether. I only bring that up because the comment was made that Developers don't seem to care. Well, the ones I speak to seem to. And they may or may not know about the Sprinkler Review Board and the opportunity or lack of opportunity to appeal something there. I do think eliminating that is something significant and shouldn't be overlooked because sometimes the decision is to uphold the sprinkler decision so it's not a pro-landlord or anti-tenant Board. It's a fair, neutral board that gives people another opportunity to weigh whether or not and what type of sprinkler systems make sense. So that's something that's eliminated by 26 as well. I think it's important to note, especially when it's been brought up, that this doesn't seem to have any impact on anyone because it does.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman. I'm going. Are you coming out? Mayor Petty.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think the intent of everybody in this council is good. Everybody wants to see the safety of our citizens. Everybody wants to see the safety of our firefighters. and I've been listening back and forth for the last hour and trying to figure this out. I go back one way, go back the other way. I think Councilor Russell probably put a good perspective for me that the current law, the current building code is even stronger than 26I. I think the Chief agrees with that. The City Manager agrees with that. It involves three units or more, if you want to add an addition. So the law is there, the protection is there to make sure that anybody who builds or rehabs completely, they have to put sprinkles in. Correct?

Mr. Manager.

Yep, that's correct. So, let me be very clear here.

I'm sorry, Mr. Mayor, was that a question?

No, he should have said yes.

Okay.

I do agree it comes with Russell in that 26, the statute is now the building code is stronger than 26i. So people have to put sprinkler systems in and that will continue. Unfortunately now we have this disagreement here but I think the intent here is good for everybody that these sprinklers will go in if someone comes in in front of the fire department or the building code department is to make sure that people are safe here in the city of Worcester. And no matter what we do here tonight, we will continue to be safe and make sure that the code is implemented correctly and that sprinklers are put in. Thank you.

Point of order Mr. Chairman. Yes, I do. Just for clarification, I think some folks might be a little confused. Two questions procedurally. Question number one. the motion to file is that accurate that it's only on filing a piece of paper an item that's included a lot of stuff including a recommendation but that's the motion. Question number two, procedural. Is there any motion on the floor that's being voted on that recommends adoption of MGL Chapter 148, Section 26, 261, sorry.

Right now there's a motion from the subcommittee of public safety to file the 26 I. Just the item. Correct? No, they recommended against implementing 26 I's, my understanding. Let's ask them to the Clerk.

To the Chair, to the Councilors. Basically, the recommendation of the committee was to file the item. And usually, procedurally, it's either adopt or file, because if you're not taking any action, you're filing with the clerk. You're gonna adopt an item? So what the recommendation of the manager was, and let's manage to correct me if I'm wrong, your recommendation to council was to adopt MGL. So if council votes to adopt MGO, that's a vote to adopt. Or the Councilor King, in this case, file the item.

Voting not to file does not adopt. does not adopt Mass General Law Section 261, correct?

Correct. Correct.

Sure. Mr. Manager.

I just want to jump in really quickly.

Chapter 148.

The item that the committee has voted on is the item that we submitted to the council recommending the adoption, and that was February 4th, 2025. that actually has the order of the, if the order, if one of the councilors to vote for it, that's the item in itself.

Thank you. Again, I thought we had established procedurally that there was no action taken on adoption in committee. Is that accurate to the chair, procedurally? There was no action or motion to adopt. I just want to make sure. People are confused. People that are watching are confused. We need a clear answer so people understand why they're taking a vote to file an item. or we're taking a vote to vote against adopting this section 261 chapter 148.

So through the chair to the council. So basically what happened in committee was that they recommended to file the item and the order inside the item. So they took no action whatsoever in terms of adopting. So that was the recommendation before council. So if the council affirms the recommendation of the committee, which is before you right now, that means the item goes back to the manager and it's moved.

Thank you. Motion to adopt, Mr. Chairman.

Councillor Ojeda.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Through the chairman to the administration, obviously we've been working with the Registry. Do we have an idea of how many three-deckers we have in our city? How many three-deckers? Yep. How many three-deckers do we have in idea, ballpark pickers? How many three-deckers do we have? Right. Anybody want to throw a number out there?

To the Chair, to the Council, that's where we feel strongly that the Rental Registry will provide a lot of that information. Currently, right now, we don't have, it'd be tough for us to be able to provide that kind of data to you.

So there's no policy in place though, right? to have them, for them to have any sprinklers as of right now. Any one that are, there's no new ones, so any three-decker that's in our city now.

So any current existing three-deckers? will not be required to put sprinklers. That's real.

It's important for people to know.

Unless there's substantial renovations, whether you want to gut the entire units or building renovate the entire, or there's a fire and you have to do a substantial renovations, or if you're building a new, that's when the sprinkler system will be required.

I just wanted to make sure we all understood that. I think we did, but I just wanted to make sure. So therefore, not many people will probably rush to get a sprinkler system in because of the cost. Unless there's something else as a city, we're going to be helping all the three deckers put in new sprinklers. and some people have already reached out to me asking what can they do to add another apartment at their dwelling. So when that happens, they're going to have to have a sprinkler system. So therefore, they're going to pull away from that. So we're not helping with the housing stock that we have. I could be wrong, but kind of contradicts what we're trying to do if this policy, if we're not pushing this forward to help, but at the same time, the city's filled with three-diggers at the end of the day. So we need to understand that going forward, we need to make sure we're protecting our residents. And that's why I believe in this 26 I. you know people are probably gonna push away and then we're gonna have a lot of three-deckers and my point is we're gonna have a lot of three-deckers in our city that probably aren't gonna be safe because of this is back and forth. So, you know, it's unfortunate we're here. I think this kind of makes sense, but that's just me and everybody else may feel a different way. But we do have a lot of three-deckers and there's no policy in place. So we need to you know we don't push this forward or whatever it may be we need to you know come back to the table with this and try to figure out what we're going to do thank you Mr. Chairman

Chairman, Councilor King is absolutely right. This is gonna confuse the heck out of the public. And I apologize to my colleague, Councilor O'Hare, for getting up and correcting them. This item has nothing, the item that was presented by the administration had absolutely nothing to do with Triodecas. Nothing at all. and the code that's enforced right now by the code department that deals with adding a unit like to a two-family or building a new three-decker, which I think you need a variance for anyway. If you were going to build a three-decker today, it wouldn't fit in any of our zoning classifications unless you went for a variance. they would have to put the code department away from this item that's before us is currently requesting or currently mandating that they put in sprinklers. If there's a fire at a three-decker and they go through and gut it out and rebuild the whole thing, the city right now is currently mandating that those new units or rebuilt units have sprinklers, which is all a good thing. but there was never a proposal, and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Manager, but there was never a proposal before us to go around and mandate to every three-decker to put sprinklers in because I think it's important that You know, people in the community know that, that that was not even on the table. You were all grandfathered in and that's it. So, Mr. Chairman, I move the question and I think we should move this to a vote. I think we should be clear, though, of what a yes vote is and what a no vote is. I thought it was, you know, a yes vote would have been to agree with the committee and file it.

So the committee has looked at the ordinance and has rejected the ordinance that was proposed by the city manager. so they asked to file this item.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman. There was no action taken on to adopt. We had a council that stood up and made that point at the beginning of the meeting, was part of that committee.

I think we just had a discussion with the clerk that the item was part of the committee's report. they filed it, which means that they don't wanna go forth. So if that fails, so if that fails, do they wanna take a vote on the adoption of the item?

Mr. Chairman, is that your ruling? Yeah. Okay, Mr. Chairman, I don't know what the process is, but I contest the rule of the chair. It's very clear. There was no action taken in committee relative to adopt. As the counselor stated, his understanding was that there was an action taken to file the item to bring it to committee. The motion to file came on the council floor. Mr. Clerk, this is the item, correct?

So through you, Chair, to the council, correct. So the item was in committee. There was a hearing earlier before this meeting tonight. The committee voted three to zero to file this, to report back to the council to file the item. There was not a vote to adopt. It was a vote to bring back to council and the negative. And when you usually file an item, it goes in the clerk's wastebasket.

Okay, so to catch the vote. That's not accurate, that's not accurate.

need eight votes, right?

I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. If you're looking for the point of order to contest the rule of the chair, I can read you the rule. But I think you need six votes or five councils to buy in. So rule 14, chair to conduct meeting, challenge of the rules.

Yeah, what's it say?

So basically, the Chair shall preserve decorum and order, may speak to points of order in the presence of the members, shall decide all questions or orders, shall interpret the rules as necessary to conduct the business of the City Council. Any ruling of the chair shall be subject to an appeal to the city council made by a motion of any council. So in this case, Councilor King. And then no other business shall be in order until the question of the appeal shall have been decided.

Thank you, folks.

So the roll call shall be decided in the affirmative unless the majority of the votes are the contrary. So you need six votes.

Six votes. Mr. Chairman, I withdraw that motion. We don't have the votes here. but again just for clarification for the public there was no action taken on the recommendation to adopt and my objection is that it continues to be presented as such and I also have a motion on the floor to adopt

Okay, if that will be mute, if this passes, we'll go over to that. Okay. It's a separate item. I've been doing this for a number of years. Mr. Chairman, there's not an order to not adopt. They made a motion to file the item, correct? Which is the adoption to say no.

They didn't even vote on an adoption in committee. There's no motion to adopt in committee. Well, the clerk disagrees. Okay, fine, that's fine. Let's just move the question, that's fine.

Okay, so a yes vote would agree with the committee's recommendation, and a no vote would not. Does anybody understand that? Okay, so a yes vote would agree with the committee's recommendation and a no vote would not, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio? Yes. Councilor Haxhiaj? No. Councilor King?

No.

Councilor Mero-Carlson? Yes. Councilor Nguyen? No. Councilor Ojeda?

No.

Councilor Pacillo? No. Councilor Russell? Yes. Councilor Toomey? Yes.

Yes. So that makes the other one mute.

Motion to reconsider the first one so we don't have to do this again.

Okay, motion to reconsider, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? No. Councilor Councilor Colorio? No. Councilor Haxhiaj? No. Councilor King? No. Councilor Mero-Carlson? No. Councilor Nguyen? No. Councilor Ojeda? No. Councilor Pacillo? No. Councilor Russell? No. Councilor Toomey? No.

and Mayor Petty? No.

And so the motion we have from the committee, we have the order request that you may have to provide counsel with a report concerning incentives that you can implement to encourage individuals to install sprinklers Properties. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Then we have the resolution. We need a roll call on that.

Mr. Chairman, point of water, the one that you just said, all those in favor, can you tell us what that was again?

I can't hear you.

The last item that you said, all those in favor, polls have voted. Can you repeat that, please? Oh, sure. Just for Colorio.

This was handed out, I think, to everybody, wasn't it?

Yeah, Mr. Chairman, so that was the Chairman's Order Audit Committee, which we handed to the Council. I think that was the first rule, and now the Mayor's asking for a roll call on the resolution.

Thank you. Thank you. Okay, request that you make a roll call on that then? Okay, so now the resolution, we need a 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

Yes, and I guess we can file 16A. All those in favor? Opposed? So ordered. And that was the second report by the Chief.

So a motion is to file, you said? Yeah. Opposed?

Okay, so we should do a roll call? Roll call.

Mr. Chairman, I apologize, point of order. Which item are you addressing?

We are on the 16A, which is the second report by the chief.

for the motion to file.

Yes. Okay, thank you. And roll call.

Councillor Bergman? Yes. Councillor Colorio? Yes. Councillor Haxhiaj? No. Councillor King? No. Councillor Mero-Carlson? Yes. Councilor Nguyen, Councilman Ojeda? No. Councilman Pacillo?

No.

Councilman Russell? Yes. Councilman Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes. Okay, we have First I'm a business. First I'm a business, okay. Let me go through, before we go economic development, let's go through the petitions first, okay? 9A was referred to the Department of Public Works and Parks. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. 9B, referred to the Planning Board. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. 9C to 9A for the Public Works Committee.

Mr. Chairman, C and D to the administration. Those are just repairs.

Okay, as amended the CND to the administration, and before doing that, I'd like to speak on G, if that's okay, and my author guide.

You wanna take the two?

Yeah.

Nico, 12 A and G? Nine A. Nine A? Nine G. Nine G. Okay. Yeah, okay.

9G and 12A. Thank you. Here we go.

Okay, we're gonna take concurrently the petition filed by Mayor Joseph M. Petty, 9G, and Councilor Louis Ojeda to request Gardner Street from Main Street to Hollis Street be given the honorary name of William S. Coleman III Way. We will take concurrently an order filed by Mayor Joseph Petty 12A, that the City Council of the City of Worcester does hereby declare that William S. Coleman III be made an Honorary City Councilor for a day on October 20, 2025. in honor of his passing and contributions to the city. Mayor Petty.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I want to thank Russell Ojeda for signing on to these items. And, you know, I've known Bill Coleman for 25 years, and people in this community probably know him a lot longer. than I've known them. And we had Cheryl came in and spoke, Cheryl Rosen spoke, one of his best friends. And I misspelled this election cycle. I think this is the first time with all of them, if I have to think about it. and one year he did come in seventh, seventh place in the council a few years back. He worked pretty hard. And he always wanted to be a city councilor, but he also loved the city. and to participate. When I talked to the family about whether it'd be a nice honor, they had mentioned Guy on the Street because he did a lot of cleanups then, there. but as I heard tonight he went to church in that area too and was part of that community but in his whole career he did a lot of neighborhood cleanups on that guy in the street area. Not just there, but he's been all over the city of Worcester. And he went on the campaign trail for longer than I have campaigned. But I think it would be a nice honor, this family with the street naming, honorary street naming of Gardner Street. and also to make, on his birthday, we put a resolution we can plan this somehow if the council are all involved in the family. Maybe we can do both the street, we can get the street done. quick enough in that timeframe, the subcommittee, we can make it one nice event on the 20th of October with the city council and the community, come out and honor Bill Coleman, because he loved this city of Worcester. he loved it. He was always proud that he was Senator Brooks used to work for was his first political foray back in the 70s I believe so so he's politics was part of his life He was a member of WCCATV on a regular basis. And he's just part of this community. He was really part of the community. Everybody knew him and respected him and liked him. So I think this is important. So thank you.

Councilor at large, Donna Colorio.

Thank you. I've known Bill for, I'm trying to, I was trying to think back when our kids were like two and four and his kids were a little bit older. He rented an apartment for my family and we became friends, him and his wife, ex-wife and the kids used to play together and I remember we had a really you know we had a nice friendship going there and then when I get involved with politics Bill was right there wanting to you know kind of coach me and talk to me about it and understand where my views were coming from and we always remained friends whether we disagreed or agreed on issues and our recent bonding and the last 10 years was at the Goodwill. Every time I turn around I see Bill at the Goodwill and we would bond there and we'd talk about what we're buying and what we're not buying and then we'd talk a little politics there and we always remained very civil, very friends, and he will be truly missed. Thank you.

So, Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to begin by thanking you for this measure, these orders and petition, and Councilor Ojeda. I know at the funeral, I think someone was talking about, doing exactly this for Mr. Coleman and his family and friends and community. I just wanna say, I've said a lot about Mr. Coleman. but it was always an honor any time that I had the opportunity to remind him that he was one of the shoulders that I stood on. And as a young person who only looked at the paper in high school, and Councilor Hayden might be able to was at the box scores to see who did what in basketball games here in the city, who scored what, what was going on in central mass basketball. There was one man who was constantly in the newspaper, working for the community who look like me. And that resonated. And then as I came onto council, was aware of the many attempts that he's made and some of the ideas that came to fruition a lot of stuff was filed sometimes but ultimately those things would come to fruition so this is a good step in the right direction. And I couldn't think of anything more befitting than city council for a day. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, so we'll take the order on 12 Avery for that. Right for that, too.

Council, someone raising, Council Russell.

Mr. Chairman, you're filing, I mean, you're sending to the administration 9C and 9D, and the rest of them are going to Public Works, with the exception of 91, which should be filed.

Okay, so we'll do those petitions first. All those in favor? I'm sorry, we're gonna file which one?

91, that was the gentleman that came to the microphone.

Okay, so motion is to file that item on?

Nine, excuse me, Nine-I. Okay, I forgot about that.

Okay, all those in favor? Opposed, so ordered. And Nine-A was sent to the clerk. and those in favor, opposed or ordered. I mean 12, 12-A, yeah.

Councilor Mero-Carlson?

Yeah. I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman. 9-Y, did we do 9-Y because that's an item that... Yeah, we filed that, yeah. Pardon me?

We just filed it.

Okay, so that's dead.

Yep.

Yeah, it should be dead.

You know, 9-Y, so yeah, 9-Y.

9-Y.

Councilor Russell asked to file that.

9-I.

He asked for 9-I.

No, he said 9-I.

Oh, I get the wrong line, okay.

Okay, so can we pull 9-Y out separately, please?

Okay, so take 9-Y out and...

We have to reconsider 9i, Mr. Chairman. Motion to reconsider 9i if we already filed it. OK.

We're going to reconsider. Mr. Chairman, just provide some clarification. We're going to reconsider 9C9 to 9I and 9J to, no, we just saw that one so far. So, okay. Reconsideration, roll call.

What are we reconsidering?

The one we filed. 9C to 9I, refer to the Public Works Committee. We're going to reconsider that. Oh, okay. Okay. Because you want to talk about 9I, correct?

No. So we've talked about nine why.

So Mr. Chairman, if I can provide some clarification.

The individuals are here who live on the street who spoke about this item are all being filed. They had no knowledge of this item being filed, Mr. Chairman, and they asked for us basically to file it. I just want to make sure that that's what we're doing.

Okay, so we already voted from that to, okay. Okay, we haven't got there yet. We're on 19 to 99, we voted out.

That's all I was asking for, did we get there yet?

No, we're gonna get there now, so we're gonna go 9J to 9Z, with the exception of 9Y.

Thank you.

All those in favor? Opposed, so awarded. 9Y.

Can I speak on that?

Councilor Colorio.

Okay, I just want to say that I support the filing of this item. I live not maybe a couple streets over and as long as I've known you know this the Westland Street, Germain Street, and Haviland Street have all had a significant impact with the Doherty High so I totally support filing this item leaving the restrictions in place in the residential parking. Thank you.

Well, he deserved it. He probably stayed all night for this. Thank you. So the motion right now on nine Y is to file. All those in favor? Opposed, so awarded. Okay, we are on tent A to tent N, refer the traffic and parking. Those in favor, opposed, so ordered. We are going to go back now to E.D., I guess is the first. Okay. We're going to go out of order here a little bit because, sorry, Mr. Dunn, but you've been here long enough, but someone has been here a lot longer. That's Mr. Stearns. and from the last two meetings. So I think, Bob, we owe you one. So we have, Councilor King had asked we hold this item for this meeting. So let's go to that item, which is 16B, I believe. which is... 16B. 16B was the audit transmitting information, communication, auditing the construction progress reports, completed or not completed information related to street selections. Okay. Public Works. And we'll go to Public Works. Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly thank the auditor for the work that's been done here and the recommendations. If we could just, since you've been sitting here, There's a couple of questions through the chair to the auditor. This particular Matter was an audit of construction and progress reports that had not, well, progress reports including affirming the fact that there was a extended period of time Five years where during that five years, 60 months, only eight monthly reports were received here. In 2023, it moved over to an online system. And those progress reports, 60 that should have came to the council over five years only came eight times. The new system, that has been done does not include small street projects that were included in the past reports, such as sidewalks, private streets, conversions, guardrails, bridges, drainage, streetlights, signals, patches, et cetera, that are outlined in the summary of the audit of DPW construction progress reports. This indicates that there are some steps that could be made. One of the conclusions that was interesting to me was that It indicates the conclusion here that new preventative measures being implemented should cost the city $16 million annually to run the pavement management program, for example. If you could share through the chair that conclusion as it relates to the current annual cost that the city projects in its budget for that work.

Thank you. Through the Chair, to the Councillor, the department or departments of GTM and DPW came out with a report in March with the program or the pavement management program. and in the report they estimated an annual cost to either keep the current with the current process of repairing streets and what it would cost to maintain the current conditions of the streets, what that would be. They estimated, I think, $30 million. They had described the various preventative maintenance and so on. So, um, measures that they're wanting to implement and have started to, and it should reduce the costs and extend the life of the streets. they estimated 16 million to keep the same condition in five years. I think it was a 70 PCI of the current condition, which is fair. I believe that they want to increase and allocate 19 million a year to try to increase that index to a higher level.

Thank you. Mr. Manager, could you speak to that projected savings that your new efficiencies will achieve, the 31 million versus the 16, through the Chair?

To the Chair, to the Council, part of the Pavement Management Program, we try to understand the levels of PCI the current city is in and what we could project out over a number of years. If we were to replace every street within the current practice, which is wait till the street deteriorates. We basically mill the street over and then replace it and resurface it. to its entirety brand new state, it would cost us on an annual basis an average of about $30 million. The pavement management program is to create preservation mechanisms and new technologies in which we can Prolong the actual roads to try to minimize the actual cost, but also at the same time preserve our roads a little longer. and so we've started some of those efforts this year and a part of those efforts and to be able to also increase at the a level of PCI we recommend that as part of this budget process the the max which is the 19 million dollars and that $19 million is monies that we currently, within our current infrastructure, the way we spend our dollars, we've been able to move around to be able to fulfill that recommendation from the Pavement Management Program.

Thank you. And could someone speak to the audit's findings of projected and selected repairs and projects that were not completed? So in here, there's a number of and other prioritization had occurred and there was and those things didn't occur. I know some do delays and et cetera. If you could speak to that discrepancy so the public can understand to what degree we are meeting the expectations. If someone's following along, if you could share the page that you're referencing.

Sure. So there were two measurements against the actuals. So the actuals are a compilation of the accounting of of the Streets and Sidewalk Capital Project Fund. The DPW does a really good job coding and recording the bills for payment. This is a compilation of the streets and the exhibit of all of the work done in the five years, or the bills paid. I used that report or I created that report from the accounting system of the bills attached. One of the recommendations was looking into creating the data live with each bill so this could be generated relatively easy and efficiently. I use this to cross-check to the approved district residential council Streets, just to see if there were any that were not completed in the FY21-22 program. I believe there were some streets that were not completed. within the period, the FY21 and 22, and even to this date due to underground utility holds. and then in the 23-24 program there were also some streets that were approved by council after coming from the committee that were not completed as of March when I was looking at this data. and then the and then the other information I was using the accounting by year there was a five year and so forth. And then the third compilation of the fund was to compare the total spending on the street resurfacing to the benchmark set in the they had spent 11 million when the benchmark was at least 15 or 16 million.

So we've spent $5 million less. Is that what you're saying to the Chair?

$5 or $6 million less. For what? And they had commented in the report that it was due to some delays in, I believe, some bidding and they expect to and so forth. And then roll that over into FY26, complete the projects and carry the funds forward.

So for the public, you could just reiterate, we had 15 million or so that we were expected to expend based on the projects and we expended 11. Is that correct? That's correct. If you could speak to on page two, the top paragraph in two bullets indicates that in fiscal 21-22 there were several citizen petitions that were very old. and not selected. And 68 petitions still were on the list, some of which were approved 10 or more years earlier. if you could speak to that as well as fiscal 21-22 and fiscal 23-24 those two bullets and lastly on page five at the bottom and D.P.W. Response. That indicates that street resurfacing selection is in fiscal 25. that they were not received until the summer of 2024 and what that impact was.

Through the Chair. This was based off of the report issued by the DPW Commissioner in Early 2020, I was going through the various reports where they had listed all of the streets and included on the report was a column with a petition I noticed there were several old petitions still on the report. And the street, this was a report of streets with low indexes like zero to 40 or 41 to 45. They were in poor condition. and that was just an observation and a comment I made here that they had not been selected and they were still out on that report.

Is that the 10 years or more? Is that what you're referencing?

Correct. Correct. The district selected streets, residential streets in 21 and 22. there were six streets that didn't have any costs when I went through the list of bills and they were also due to underground utility holds that were and so forth, causing delays even through today. 23 and 24 are similar. They had 21 streets that had not yet started. the response from the department did indicate that in 25-26 coordinating between DTM and TPW and with utilities that they filtered out the streets that they, on the list that they would provide to district counselors have come down from having utility holds and they expect those, the 25-26 program to be, to hit more of the targets. and paving all of those streets.

And through the chair to the administration, can you share what portions of this work is privatized and what impact that may have?

Mr. Alta?

Whoever.

Mr. Manager?

all resourcing projects in the city are bidded out for private contractors who do the work. So a lot of them, we in the city, our staff, Municipal staff do a lot of the maintenance, whether it's filling potholes or patching, et cetera. But any extensive work of repairs to major roads or Main arterials or resurfacing of those main roads or the actual neighborhood streets are done by private contractors through a bidding process.

Thank you. Through the chair, it indicates in this report on page five that there's four main contractors who've been on those streets, private contractors. Could you share through the chair to the administration what the audit found in that section entitled street resurfacing contract expenditures?

There weren't any findings with regard to the contractors. They all go out to bid and the winner is awarded the bid and then and so forth. And then we have contracts with lists of streets are written up and signed and then the department moves forward with

Thank you. Lastly, what is the plan for reporting back to the council as previously and as intended I know we went to an online reporting system but prior to that there was the expectation that that there be monthly reports to the council. And it indicates here that that's perhaps a gap. So what's the current plan in addition to the online reporting for the council?

We've been reporting to the council consistently. I think what's at question here and what this reporting is talking about is is historically, there was a quarterly report with construction activity that was submitted by DPW on a quarterly basis. That is what has lacked. Progress report, correct. But we've done in any, any resurfacing projects that we do as a city or any selection of streets or anything that happens comes before the council for approvals and for communication on that work. the progress report on the construction activity is what that question here.

Yes.

And that is something that I've committed on this floor to do consistently. We first reported on that. I want to say August, a few weeks back, we first submitted our first construction activity report and we're committed to submitting that to the council on a consistent basis.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There's a number of recommendations in here. I look forward to this to go into the appropriate committee. I do have a concern that the online system is limited, as mentioned in this audit. and that it doesn't include small street projects or other projects that were included in past construction reports like sidewalks, private street conversion, et cetera. I'd like to make a motion that we get a report back on how we are going to be more inclusive in that regard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.

Council Russell, followed by Council Hygiac.

Mr. Chairman, I'd just like to ask the auditor through you, Mr. Auditor, we're talking about all these Street picks going back how many years, first of all? I think you mentioned up to like five years, six years? Five years. Like 2020 or thereabouts? Fiscal year 21, so it started with July 1st, 2020. All right, so through you, Mr. Chairman, did this report audit your research show any of the streets that were chosen by previous city manager, Red Augustus, under the federal COVID money program because there was a large chunk of money that he decided that he was going to utilize and pick the worst streets that kept getting bypassed mostly because they were in districts where there were more miles of streets that they were being skipped because there wasn't the money there. So the previous manager picked those. But is that information in your report too?

on page four through the chair to the counselor is the resources part of the of the program for the year. It didn't separate, identify the exact street that was used with COVID money, but 6.4 million of ARPA money, COVID money, was used in FY22 for the

So that was not the main artery work that was done. That was the side streets. Okay. And... Mr.

Manager? Yeah, through Chief Zingale, that's correct. And the 6.4 was CARES Act dollars, ARPA dollars that was for... we couldn't use them for resurfacing. Our dollars were strictly for water and sewer infrastructure. These dollars, the 6.4 was the CARES Act dollars, and it was exactly for what you stated.

I think it's good that this report came back, and I think moving forward it would be helpful, I think, for the new commissioner and new councilors in the next term to probably take a look not only at what is available to spend, but what has actually been used. We've never gotten that information. in a formal report before us. We know just because the streets that we have picked that just couldn't get done, we'll say, hey, what happened with that? But you have to be a detective as a district counselor, and I think that you shouldn't have to be a detective you should be able to get that information back and if the streets are being held indefinitely maybe the money should be reallocated to other streets might be helpful going forward thank you

Council Hy-G-I.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Very quickly, I just want to start by thanking Councillor King for motioning for this report, and Mr. Stearns, I appreciate it super, super Helpful new information that I didn't know I just want to ask the city manager about the recommendation on page 9 which is that the recommendation of the auditor is that if a street is selected with a utility hold that the district counselors receive a list of all the streets that have utility holds so that we don't go back to our residents when we make the picks, then go back and say, I'm sorry, but there was a utility hold. Is that something, Mr. Manager, that you and the commissioner are ready to move forward?

To the council, to the chair, to the council, yes, absolutely. I think that's informative. And as part of the communication, again, when you as the councilors are making selections on some of these, it's important to know that information. So we're going to try to provide as much communication as possible.

Great, thank you. Thank you, Mr. Stearns.

Thank you, so we'll send that to Public Works. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. We are on 11.1A, Transforming Information Communication. We're over to the appointment of Hazeb Ahmed to the Worcester Arts Council. I do want to thank them for their service and we'll place the item on file. Those in favor, post so ordered. Now on the Executive Office of Economic Development. First item is transmitting information and communication relevant to the semi-annual tax increment, financing tax increment, Exemption report for the period ending June 3rd, 2025 is sent to E.D. Mr. Chair.

Council Hyjai. Thank you Mr. Chair. I just want to say a few words about this report and I have a couple of orders to make as well. But first I just want to say that the semi-annual report on the tips and ties is really well done. A lot of information there. that I have been sharing with residents. I do wanna place, I wanna give Mr. Dunn some compliments about the increased effort that his office has done to provide oversight and increase transparency. We went from plans to improve real-time public access to workforce information on each project to actually providing that to council. One of the things that I know Mr. Dunn and the manager are working on and certainly a concern of mine is that I want to make sure that your office has the staffing and resources to continue this strong workforce diversity, things that our organized labor worked really hard on, local hiring and responsible development requirements in the TIF ordinance. I do want to say that for me specifically but I'm sure for the rest of the council it's important that we stay on top of this especially because we have five taxpayer finance project listed under construction are about to begin. So 274 Franklin Street, 1 Chestnut, 204 Main Street, 17 Pearl, and 57 Exchange Street. Again, these are taxpayer funded projects. Mr. Manager, I want to thank you and the office completely for their commitment to responsible development ordinance, we know. that is one way that we have to protect taxpayers from the investment that they're making. and certainly creating jobs for the Worcester residents. But what I like about this ordinance and the report that you're providing is that you're also monitoring contractors and some contractors. It's my understanding, Mr. Dunn and Mr. Manager, that because of your compliance work on this, for the first time under our new ordinance, the city has issued a $5,000 fine to the Mankiti Group for failing to follow the Responsible Development Ordinance. and I believe since the last report that we received, one contractor was removed from the Synergy project on Chestnut Street. and furthermore, Mr. Dunn has determined that two other drywall subcontractors should not be working on future taxpayer finance projects. Mr. Dunn, thank you so much for that. I do believe that the mantra of the City Council and of the office has always been to monitor taxpayer dollars and I believe the DED office is doing that very clearly and transparently with these decisions. I would like to get in the future through you Mr. Chair to the Manager and Mr. Dunn if we can get back a report to all the details about these findings. For example, my motion number one would be I'd like to ask for the report from the city manager on the city's compliance work including details about any citations and fines against TIF and TIDE developers over the past six months or since our last report. Any explanations of determinations made by the city against contractors and subcontractors working on any of this project? And secondarily, As a second motion to that, I would like to request the City Manager and the D-Office also update the semiannual reports to City Council to respond to the requirements of the Responsible Development Ordinance, so including any information on citations, I will close with this that I have heard often the phrase community economic development should be community development and based on the current citations on the subcontractors and the letters that the city has sent, I believe that we are well on our path. And adding this additional information on this economic development and our actual oversight, I believe will benefit the city, the taxpayers to keep informing them how we're protecting their interests. So kudos to both of you and thank you, Mr. Dunn.

Council Member Carlson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just want to stand up and really recognize all of the work that's been done in this city and certainly for Mr. Dunn and to the entire administration. And I really want to say thank you to the council as well. If you recall when we adopted this responsible development ordinance, Mr. Chairman, something that I brought forward and really proud to say working with Mr. Dunn and the administration and certainly with you, Mr. Mayor. And as we know, the first time in history as was just talked about, the individual getting fined the $5,000. Again, I want to say thank you to Mr. Dunn the City Manager and Mr. Mayor with all of us working together to making for us making sure that that happens. and I will say that with all of these projects and all you need to do is look at the amount of projects and in the report as it states, there's currently 13 active post-construction TIFs. And the Economic Development Department and all those who work quite frankly under Mr. Dunn They do a phenomenal job because there's an awful lot that they actually do on a daily basis. and I know firsthand, quite frankly, as you do, Mr. Mayor, about the compliance piece of this. This is something that we've been working with the building trades on with the compliance of all these projects and again we've worked with all of the trades. to make sure that people in Worcester are working and we're making sure that we're doing the right thing by all of the residents in the city of Worcester, but it's... I'm always amazed when it's put in writing the amount of projects that we in the City of Worcester are working on and just want to congratulate Mr. Dunn. and all of his hard work. And again, I know we really it was a milestone for us with for the first time basically finding somebody no differently than as we talk for the first time pulling back on a TIF if we think back just not too long ago. So there's certainly, in my mind, there's no question about how these are monitored. I think that the Economic Development Department in this administration and certainly under the leadership of you Mr. Mayor and quite honestly I work with the building trades on a regular basis in terms of the projects that are Thank you Mr. Chairman.

and Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, this is important for folks that are watching who don't understand maybe some of the language that's being used here. Of course, the labor professionals Brothers and sisters out there know what we're talking about, some developers. But I want folks to understand, it was a $5,000 fine to a company with a lot of money. and the point I wanna make, Mr. Chairman, is that it's not about the $5,000 per se, it's the fact that the city of Worcester has developed a standard that requires responsible development by ordinance. I was honored to have supported that. I know it takes us back probably four or five years when we got our first compliance officer to come to work and have that oversight. That's work that went to the prior administration until now. So that's also important. So we appreciate economic development and the work that you're doing. For folks that don't have an understanding, my understanding that there's no ability for any sort of clawback or anything like that with this ordinance. Is that correct through the chair? You can share it to the public. you know what the Mr. Dunn legal prohibition or legal things that prevent that and also we could explain what clawback means to our citizens that are watching you may not understand

Sure, through the Chair to the Councillor, both in the Responsible Development Ordinance and in our TIF and TIE agreements, there are provisions for early termination and so forth. We don't have any of those tax benefits. We don't have, I wouldn't call it clawback where, you know, if you use the example that Councillor Carlson mentioned from a few years ago with the TIF that I can recall that we terminated that TIF agreement early because of the breach of that agreement. But it's not like we looked back for the years prior when they were in compliance and tried to recap to capture those tax benefits that were provided up to that date. So we do have remedies in what was more recently adopted in the Responsible Development Ordinance are these kind of early steps or early penalties where if somebody's falling out of compliance, particularly with the construction activity, we can issue those letters of non-compliance, look for the corrective action plan to get them back on track, and then issue those fines so that there's real sort of teeth behind it. And then if those, you know deficiencies continue in the ordinance there is the ability for a revocation or that early termination of and so forth, we would review those tax benefits as well, and we would review the merits of that kind of an action based on the severity of those deficiencies or the breach of the ordinance.

Okay, so two questions. if you could share in your professional experience and opinion because there were concerns of this some years ago that this sort of ordinance would quell and would chill Development here in the City of Worcester. Do you have any indication that that's the case? And then secondly, if you could share what this means for the landscape of Worcester in terms of what we're trying to do for the city, what we're trying to make sure is occurring, the diversity monitoring aspects, et cetera. Because I think it's a big deal. We've come a long way. this council, the labor folks in kind of pushing this forward as a united team through the chair.

Sure. Through the Chair to the Councillor, I guess my first response to that is that, as was mentioned in terms of the post-construction, like the active TIFs that we have, commercial TIFs in the city, we have 13 that are active. I think sometimes certainly TIFS and the residential tie program gets a lot of attention and a lot of scrutiny and I think that that is warranted but I do think there's sometimes a perception that there are Far more of these agreements out there than there really are. You know, we have thousands of tax paying parcels in the city and we have 13 active commercial TIFs and about the same on the residential tie program. So it is a very small segment. So to your point on does this quell development, I would say it definitely does not quell development. It is a tool that's very necessary because when we do evaluate these projects and we get inquiries fairly often, it's not like we and so forth. We do our own vetting of what is the need, is this project you know in jeopardy in terms of its feasibility moving forward so that we're using this tool when it's necessary for project feasibility. That reality still exists and we still need to leverage this tool when it makes sense and I think there is a significantly high bar on the expectations for the projects that participate in the program because what you see on this program and the reporting involved, you're talking about thousands of pages of certified payroll records. that also in the case of like public records requests our team in our records access division needs to go through and review all of those to make sure that we're making the necessary redactions when needed for those public records so it is very involved and it's and a level of expectation that you wouldn't see on any other privately financed project. So there is sort of a playing field that we've established, a level of expectation. I'd say it's probably, if not the highest bar, one of the highest bars in the state. I'd probably say it's the highest bar that we've set in the state for this and I did share I think we had shared it with the council. There's a nationwide organization called Good Jobs First that did an analysis of transparency on TIF projects across the nation as well as the level of follow-up and follow-through for those active projects on what were their commitments to the municipality, the level of job creation, the level of investment, and how is that reported back to the legislative bodies in the communities and Worcester was ranked essentially top 10 nationwide in terms of that level of information sharing, the level of transparency, the level of community engagement. and reporting that's involved in this. So it is a very high bar, a very, I'd say, a leader across the nation in that. But I think it's a bar that is reasonable because when these projects receive these benefits, it should have a level of expectations that's not the same as any other privately financed project. Thank you.

And workforce diversity goals are broken down. So the last item here. that you have gridded out. And those workforce diversity goals are for Worcester residents, women, local jobs, apprenticeships, people of color. and in looking at that, apprenticeships is something that I push for across all trades. I think we still need to do it and I think it's important for our young folks and people coming into the workforce That being said, when I look at the workforce diversity goals for women, there's a couple here that have 0% women on the job with a goal of 10%. and when I look at the developers, going down the list of the six developers that are here in this snapshot, 8%, Women on the job, 5%, 6%, 5%, 44% women on the job. And then we have 0%. and so I'm just wondering what happens in that aspect. Additionally, apprenticeships, we have some where it's not applicable the Daugherty Project, looks like Curtis Apartments, but then we look again, the same ones that have 0% women, have 0% in apprenticeships. We have another developer, 0% of Worcester residents. People of color looks like those, are being meter exceeds. There's some areas where it's less than. But areas below are very concerning. So if you could speak to that. as relates to those groups. Local jobs, it looks like there's some low marks there for two of those folks particularly concerned that that's below goal on it looks like the Doherty project so if you could speak to some of that and you know how do you address that and navigate through all that in your capacity?

Sure. Through the chair to the counselor, you know, when we established these goals across the board, whether it be for Worcester residents, people of color, women, as well as apprenticeships, we established goals to be just that, where we want to be, not minimum thresholds or quotas of where we are today. As we know, there are historical and so it takes years to dismantle that. and there are several workforce development initiatives like the Building Pathways programs and several others that seek to remove those barriers and get that participation up. and it takes years. So I would say that where we do have a number of folks that fall short of the goal, it's because they are aggressive goals. So I think we'll see some of those numbers round out too as you get farther along in a project. So for some of the example that you referenced where it could be at 0% today, that's a project that's likely less than 20% complete. they could have only one, two, three contractors on the job. So if those one, two, three subcontractors don't have the and so on. So once you have a diverse representation, then you're going to see those very low numbers out of the gate. And then once all of the different subs go through the project and participate, you'll start to see and that's why we have this reporting structure in place because we one set the expectations and give them some guidance and best practices about how to be successful with this on the front end when we're going through the application process as well as the pre-construction phase before anybody gets onto the site, but then as the construction unfolds, we're getting that information in real time, monthly, and then getting information from them about how are you addressing this, are you being intentional about Your bidding practices, there's obviously a correlation between the goal for Worcester residents and using local companies, right? So if you want to just inherently get more Worcester residents participating, when you're putting some of those bid packages out, are you reaching out to Worcester companies companies in the area. Because when these projects happen, it's not like every subcontractor comes in and hires a whole new workforce for that project. They have an existing workforce. So we try to make sure that developers are taking those kinds of considerations into account when they're reaching out to companies for the bidding process and then in the evaluation too so that it shouldn't be just about all of these projects are price sensitive because they need the help to make them feasible to begin with so there's not always a lot of margin to be paying premiums but making sure that they're being intentional about that evaluation and selection of subcontractors so that they're positioning themselves well to perform in these goals. So we've seen a lot of success in that because we have a body of projects now with those reports. It's not our role to recommend a particular subcontractor, but what we can do is give them the reports from other projects and they can make some and so forth. So I think it's important to inform decisions about, oh, well, this project happened and they were very successful. Who did they use? Maybe we should consider reaching out to that sub for pricing. To your question on apprenticeships, the reason why there's a couple of projects with the non-applicable status is because the apprenticeship goal is very new. So there were some projects that were underway that don't have that goal associated with the project. So it's really the newer ones that have that. and that 15% workforce goal is again fairly aggressive because even when you look at a project that could have every subcontractor with an approved apprenticeship program, there's also requirements under the Division of Apprenticeship Standards for the amount of apprentices that you can have per journeyman on the job. So you can really only get, I think in maximum participation, you could maybe get close to 20%, but 15% is a very aggressive goal if you had all of the subs. that have an approved program that they're utilizing.

Thank you for the thorough answer. I'm all done. Thank you for the thorough answer. Just for, in all fairness for the public, this is a snapshot moment in time. statistical analysis on that last page. So thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you.

Okay. Can you refer that to E.D.? All those in favor, I'm going to show audit.

Get back on the page.

Okay. We're now on 11-4-B. to the Housing and Neighborhood Development Activities.

I'll speak about this for a quick minute.

Mayor Petty.

Thank you Mr. Chairman and again I want to thank you for the report and your staff on both of these reports and I thought this report was excellent. It gives a good perspective of what we've done. Sometimes it gets lost, what we've done, because we see the people, you know, who are on the streets here in the city of Worcester, and some people don't think we're doing anything. But it's a good perspective. People want to look at this report. It's 11-4-B. And if you look at this, some of the highlights, over 1,414 affordable housing units created or preserved since 2015. Over 1,600 affordable units in the pipeline to be created or preserved. 72 ADA accessible units recently created, and 25.7 million recently invested through the Housing Division Program, averaging 380 million of other investment. And it goes on. then they haven't broken down. Significant affordable rental properties recently completed. 332 Main Street, 55 units. And you look at the AMIs, they're all over the different levels, whether it be 30%, 50%, 60, or 80%. So we're implementing what the council wanted. It's part of the good negotiations. To Main Street, 117 units. 126 Chandler Street, 31. 92 Grand Street, there were 48. and affordable rental projects in the pipeline. You're gonna get Carissa Apartments, you're gonna have 32 net new, 129 units being done. Carissa Apartments phase two is gonna be 116. And on it goes, 11 Seaver Street, 49 units. and Lakeside Departments, gonna be 335 total with 116 new. 274 Franklin Street has 364 total units, 36 affordable. then also supportive housing projects. We have a number of those here in the city. We need more. I know some of these reports overlap and some information in some of the other reports, but Oriole Drive, I think Oriole Drive's been sort of put on hold, Mr. Dunn, is that correct? Or still in negotiations? Mr. Dunn? Or being looked at, I should say. I read it in one, probably the other report.

Mr. Dunn?

Yes, through the Chair to the Mayor. So WCHR, who is the project proponent there for the Oriole Drive, which is the conversion of the former hotel, they do have ownership of the property, which was an important milestone. there has been some challenges in assembling the various sources of funding to create the 90 units that's been proposed all as permanent supportive housing because of some of those challenges and some barriers that we don't think will be and so forth. We have not alleviated in the short term, most notably the amount of vouchers that are available as well as the depth of subsidy needed for permanent supportive housing. and so on. We anticipate that the 90 units there could have more of a mix of different area median income and affordability, certainly still having a significant portion permanent supportive housing, but could include a mix of other affordable housing as well to and so forth. So we're going to kind of round that out and make sure that the project can proceed, but that's where that stands right now. There has been a real challenge in the availability of project-based vouchers.

Okay, thank you. You're moving on that, and hopefully that will come to fruition. Homeownership is a habitat of humanity. We've done several of those in several different neighborhoods here in the city of Worcester. And we've done, I think, 35 over the last several years, units in Worcester. And they have a few more. If I were on the report, it talks about a few more that they're doing, Habitat for Humanity. then they have three more lots that they're trying to find and to build. So we're trying to build all types of housing here in the city of Worcester. So I just want to thank Jim Brooks and your whole team. It's a small group of people but you seem to get it done. And unfortunately, I think we're what, 10,000 units behind and 10 to 12,000 units behind. We need to build 1,000 units each year. So it was the goal. And it seems to be on that goal for the next coming year, so in the pipeline anyways. And hopefully that comes all to fruition because that's what we're talking about is the housing, all types of housing, affordable housing is very important here in the city of Worcester. It seems like you've completed some of your goals here. So I just wanted to congratulate you and your team. You're really trying to make this work. These are complicated projects, as you know. We lost, I think it's in the report, one of these reports, the tiny home project on Stafford Street because of funding issues. And this is why you overdrive, so I have a point, too, if you have to change the project a little bit to make it happen. because funding is a key issue to all these projects. And sometimes a lot of these projects are delayed. Even though they're in the pipeline, doesn't mean it's gonna be done. There could be some funding issues, and especially maybe if the interest rates come down, it'll be very helpful in the development here in the City of Worcester. So thank you, Mr. Dunn. Thank you for your team. And the city of Worcester appreciates this. Thank you. We'll send that to, okay. You want to say something? Mr. Manager, I want to thank you and your team for putting this stuff together.

Thank you to the councilors. I just want to give kudos to Peter and his team. housing is a major crisis not only in the city of Worcester but also across the entire nation and you can see from the impact of the work that this municipality this city council this administration is doing to try to not only preserve housing, but also build housing as quickly as possible. We've built a lot of housing. There's a lot more housing coming in the pipeline. but just to put this into perspective, we've had over 25,000 people come into this city over the past 10 years. We haven't built over 25,000 units in the past 10 years. We're doing a great job. The department is doing an awesome job. We're building affordable units. We're building affordable housing. We're building home ownership. We're building Permanent Supportive Housing, you name it, this department is achieving that. And I just want to give kudos to the work that they're doing because, again, you can see by the evidence of the reports here that you have in front of you.

Thank you, so we'll send that to ED. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. We are on C, recommend adoption of the resolution to amend the... the Urban Center Housing Tax Increment Financing Plan an agreement by Lakeside Phase 4 LLC and Lakeside Phase 1 9 LLC for the proposed affordable housing project located at 34 to 46 Lakeside Motions to a roll call for approval. Roll call.

Councillor Bergman? Yes. Councillor Colorio? Yes. Councillor Haxhiaj? Yes. Councillor King? Yes. Councillor Mero-Carlson? Council Nguyen, Council Ojeda? Yes. Council Pacillo?

Yes.

Council Russell? Yes. Council Toomey?

Yes.

Mayor Petty?

Yes. Transmitting Information and Communication to the billboard regulations, refer that to ED. Economic Development, all those in favor, opposed, so ordered. E, Transmitting Information and Communication for the Economic Development Initiatives. I'm going to send that to E.D. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. I missed something. Okay, Ronda. Fire Department, Transmitting Information, Communication Relative to the Worcester Fire Department's Strategic Plans Related to the Emergency Services Consulting International Report. We'll send that to Public Safety. All those in favor, oppose, so ordered. We are on the law department. Recommend the adoption of the proposed home rule petition authorizing the municipality to adopt the zoning ordinance requiring institutional master plans. Councilor Mero-Carlson, and the motion is to adopt on the roll call. Go ahead, you can speak.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Actually, a year ago, I had brought this motion forward with you, Mr. Chairman. and again you know 24 months ago residents and the City officials had no idea whatsoever that back in May of 2024, Mass College of Pharmacy announced that they were acquiring acquiring three properties valued at over 10 million and then moved on to Holy Cross College which then bought the Rotman's Furniture Building for $7.95 million. And then we had WPI, who had purchased the two hotels. So at that point in time, we came forward with an item. And we knew then that we needed to do a home rule and I just want to thank the law department for doing the work on this home rule petition. again this is asking for a master plan folks like Boston already have something like this in place places like Cambridge also have something like this in place. And I just want to reiterate to people that this doesn't stop any of these colleges, universities from building, all it does is say that they would have a conversation with us, meaning the city. And I really think that for us, as we learned when the two college, sorry, the two hotels were taken, and so forth. It was a major blow to the city's income tax and certainly since then we do have some new information that one of the hotels will remain as a hotel, but again, I do think that for us as a city and certainly the second largest city, that this is something that is extremely important for us as we move forward in our planning for what we as a city need, what our needs are. So this is something that a year ago This passed unanimously and I'm hoping that we have the same results for this tonight. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to commend Councilor Mero-Carlson on this, for initiating this. This is extremely important. I've been in communication with folks in other municipalities that have this, and as the Councilor stated, This doesn't prevent development from occurring, but what it does is very important. It sets a standard. sets a standard here in the city of Worcester, requiring that these institutions come to the table, have a dialogue, and that by special permit, once this gets up and running, will have an idea of their future plans, what their parking, requirements would be, what the improvements will look like, what the traffic impact and management strategies will be, and of course, community engagement activities. We have to continue to set the standard, Mr. Chairman. There's no doubt about it. the positive impact of these institutions here in the city and the folks that they bring in as faculty, as staff, as laborers. as students, as people. But this right here is important and I'm looking forward to this. I hope in the future there's ways that we can streamline and many more such acts and as we move forward, perhaps we'll do exactly that. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Okay, so adopting the roll call? 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. Mayor Petty.

Yes. Transmitting information and communication relevant to the rental agreements for all municipal properties, including by the limit to the churches renting Worcester Public Schools' properties. Mr. Chair. Councilor Russell.

Mr. Chairman, quickly, I'd just like to send this back to the administration to ask them to include properties in it like the Technical High School was not on that list. That was the reason why I... I know that they, from what the solicitor sent me on an email, that it was some kind of a temporary arrangement, but I'd like to include that in any similar item in it, just to be clear. Do you want to send it back now? Yeah, please.

I asked for an update with the other schools. The technical school, all those in favor. Postal audit. Finance items, we have 11.35A through F, 11.36A through, what's this say? B, and 11.37A through F. The motion is to adopt is on a roll call.

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. Mayor Petty.

yes 12b request to manage request uh commissioner of transportation mobility conduct a traffic study in Bellevue Street from Pleasant to Chandler Councilor Ojeda thank you Mr. Chairman um

I know some of these traffic studies take a while. And I guess a question through the Chair to the administration. Is there anything we can do? in the meantime to help with some common measures. I know sometimes the WPD puts up the I forget what it's called, but it reads the speed of the cars. If there's something that we can do in the meantime while we wait for the traffic setting, Met with a bunch of residents there and that's a concern that they have. Around the corner is, I believe it's 425 Pleasant Street. So they come around the corner pretty fast as well and you have some you know, older people trying to cross the street. So there's been some issues over there. I've been experiencing, I've seen it myself. So in the meantime, as we wait for this traffic study to be conducted, is there any ideas or anything that we can do?

Yeah, through Chiefs of Council, we'd be willing to explore any potential short-term kind of activities that we can do to try to prevent or limit the speeds in that area. OK, thank you.

Thank you, so we'll send that out to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Request the manager to request the Commissioner of Transportation and Mobility to conduct a traffic study on Malden Street to determine appropriate speed calming measures that can be installed throughout the street. Councilor Pacillo. As it reads. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Next item is D, request to see a man provide the City Council's report concerning the safety protocols required for Morris using e-bikes and scooters, including information concerning where, said Morris, are required to drive, as well as whether, said Morris, are required to wear helmets when operating their vehicles. Further request to the manager to consider an education campaign around such requirements to ensure safe roadways for all road users. Councilor

Thank you. I think it's a little confusing because now we have more motorized scooters, motorized bikes, and a motorized bike can go pretty fast, can go, you know, and I find that when I'm driving I see people on the sidewalks in the bike lane in front of cars no helmets and it would be really advantageous if we just had A comprehensive report to say what is legal, what isn't legal. And I know there's some municipalities that require Thank you. Thank you. Look over this and maybe make a decision to how we can protect some of our drivers on the street. Thank you

Thank you, send that to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Next item is a request to be amended by council to report listing all vacant lots in the city that are city-owned. Councilor Hagiak.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd just like to expand and amend the order to be a little bit more specific what I'm looking for. What I'm looking for is a full list of city-owned, city-controlled sites, including land owned by Worcester Public Schools, any empty parking lots that the city owns, and any other city lease parcels. The reason and the genesis for this report is I met with the folks at WCHR today to talk about the pivoting of the previous project on Stafford Street to something else. We talked about the project on Claremont Street. Obviously in District 5, we just welcomed 19 units on Winfield Street. Part of the work that I have done doing national research and writing briefs on these kind of projects is that we We don't have, as you said, not just an obstacle regarding finances but we also struggle with finding appropriate sites. that are small-scale developments that the neighborhood won't feel threatened by and that most importantly can replicate what we did on Winfield Street on Claremont and other places where we've had small scale units. So what I intend to do with this list is I want to have this list available for the non-profits for the CDCs but I would also like to have an idea of what are the potential sites that the city owns or leases or controls that we can potentially use to expand our replication of the projects that we saw on Winfield Street and on Claremont. Thank you.

Senator, the manager has amended. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. That the council see which of those hereby amend the meeting schedule to cancel its meeting on November 11th, 2022. 5, an observance of the Veterans Day holiday, and make November 6, 18, 2025, agenda adjoint between the City Council and the City Manager's agenda. All those in favor? Opposed, so ordered. Okay. Of course, the City of Manning will conduct a staffing analysis of the city's inspectors to determine whether additional best practices used in other municipalities could benefit the city in ensuring proper coverage that allows the city to keep up with the construction and permitting associated with the growth of the city, Council Pacillo.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. So I want to start by saying, you know, DPW does a really great job. And from our clean water to our trash pickup in the streets, I know that they're working really hard. but Worcester is growing. We've gained 25,000 new residents since 2010. The projected population for 2030 is 235,000 people or more. And this really puts a stress on infrastructure demand. So roads, sidewalks, ADA ramps, utility work. We have 437 miles of public roads. There are 525 miles of sidewalks. We also have the 50-year integrated water resources management plan because there are 593 miles and so on. There's a lot of water mains underneath the city that all need to be, not all, but need to be maintained and updated. You know, we saw in the assessor's audit, which was great, most of the roads are in fair condition based off the PCI, but the maintenance backlog is estimated at 2.86 million. All of this is to say the inspectors in our city inspecting horizontal construction projects have a lot on their plate. At our last meeting, Commissioner Westerling said there were four inspectors for utility work, overseeing about 2,500 permits and four inspectors for the horizontal construction. So every construction project throughout the city. This is Eversource. opening roads, coming back onto Burncoat Street, cutting in to get their gas valves. I know that everyone is working hard, and I appreciate it. but I just feel like if we could better support the inspectors, maybe there would be a way to get these projects moving quicker. So for example, I spoke to the Jermaine Street residents, and they told me that everything on their street has stopped for three weeks. No one's been there. They have no idea what's happening. And it's just, you know, it's really frustrating when residents don't know what's happening. And I appreciate that the council is going to be getting the quarterly reports from DPW. I think that's great. but I just feel like one solution to this problem would be to have inspectors out checking these projects at every level, making sure they're moving quickly, they're being courteous to the neighbors, people know what's happening. and so for this you know I just want to make sure that they have what they need and that there's enough support for them to do their job and make things a little bit easier and smoother when there's construction in the city. Thank you.

Thank you.

Mr. Chair, can I sign on that?

You'll sign on? Yeah. People wanna sign on? Everybody wants, okay. Everybody wants to sign on as amended. I'm gonna send that to the manager. All those in favor, oppose, so ordered. Requesting Manager review the existing playground equipment at Duffy Field to determine any upgrades that can be made to said equipment that could be made to the location safer for young children. Councilor Pacillo?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Really quick, I had a few residents reach out about this, about Duffy Field. There's a rock wall. It's kind of dicey. It seems really high for little kids. You know, a little boy broke his arm back in May on one of the equipment, some of the equipment in Duffy Field. So basically Duffy Park, bless you. If there's any way to just see if there's any safety improvements that can be made for smaller kids, thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Manager, all those in favor of a postal audit, request the Manager of the Commission of Transportation and Mobility provide City with a presentation regarding plans to create a rotary at the intersection of May Street and Chandler Street in the vicinity of Worcester State University, Councilor Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Every so often we sit on this council and these projects seem to come out of nowhere and then there's always a response, well, we had meetings, we had notifications. Check with the Clerk's Office and I checked elsewhere and I know that the plans are in place at the 75% level to have a rotary with the intersection of Pleasant and I'm sorry Chandler and May, Cross and Worcester State University. The plans not only would create a rotary but would eliminate dozens and dozens of parking spaces in an area where parking, we've had issues in front of Worcester State Park for years that I've been on this council. It's been quiet lately, but if this goes through the way it's played without further discussion, will see those complaints, I would imagine, again. So I don't know, I know we're not gonna resolve this today, because there's nobody here from Transportation and Mobility, but I don't know how we can get to the 75% level with nobody on this council having a serious discussion about the ramifications of what a rotary is going to do in a heavily congested area that's been problematic for years, that's next to a college with parking problems. I don't know how we get to the 75% level without having a conversation about that. And what I fear is the answer is going to be, when we do get the answer back, well, we're already so far beyond at the 75% level to do anything about it that we're just going to go through and get it done. Now maybe I missed some notifications. I looked long and hard, talked to the clerk's office, consulted with some neighbors. and nobody recalls ever having a meeting about this, at least not in the last two or three years. And I understand COVID happened, but it happened long enough ago to make me really puzzled how we've gotten this far with a plan that will have major impact on the west side without having a discussion about it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Can I speak on that?

Council Hygiac.

Yeah, so we did have a meeting. We had two meetings, actually. Councilor Colorio was present with the MassDOT folks. For clarity, this is a MassDOT funded project. Correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Manager.

Through you, Chair, to the Council, that is correct. This is a MassDOT Project TIP program that has been funded. We've been working with Worcester State State, and the community. We've done neighborhood meetings. We've had a number of conversations with Worcester State. The city right now is at about a 75% design phase. once that design phase is completed then there's my understanding is there's another conversation that happens with community but right now we're currently where we're at. There is elimination of some parking, but there's also an addition of parking that's added to not only in front of actual Worcester State, but also within the vicinity. but right now there's further conversation with Worcester State because there's potential considerations of shifting one of the rotaries which could potentially add further parking into the area so again there's still discussions in the actual design just as recent as two weeks ago that I was involved with with directly with Worcester State on the perspective of potentially changing some of the Reason Designs. Again, these designs happen with the engineers, DOT, they come forward to us, then we then come and present them to the council floor.

Yeah, thank you, Mr. Manager. I've also spoken with Worcester State and have had conversations with Mr. Herron on the changes that are going to be there. I just want to remind council that this project actually originated back in 2017 when then District Councilor Wally recommended this as one of the TIP projects. that gets funded by the state. It's taken a pretty long time. I actually posted the presentation and transcribed the meeting for residents who weren't able to attend. I have answered questions. Worcester State is involved. You clearly are involved. I do want to say that MassDOT is actually responsible for doing a lot of these meetings. Same issue is happening on Pleasant Street. They come at 25%. They should have another meeting when it gets closer. and so forth. So I think it's their responsibility and certainly I have been able to work with you, Mr. Manager, to push them to actually hold those meetings. But I just want to remind Council this goes back to 2017, then Councilor Wally picked this one project or push for it so that we could get it funded through state monies.

Councilor King, followed by Councilor Bergman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think Councilor Haxhiaj asked a question as it relates to where I was going. So I'm just gonna ask this. I do recall this in the early times when I got on the council and I just wanna clarify, is this like the same thing with the double rotary through the chair and where are those, if so, where are those little gaitics? I know that we had a lot of discussion about that back in the day, as they say.

To the chair, to the council, yes, this project is about a potential double rotary in the front of Worcester State. One rotary would be located by the Chandler Street, Flag Street area, South Flag, I think it is, South Flag? and then the other one would be by the connection point between May Street and Chandler Street.

Okay, and to the Chair, any discussion with the Worcester Public Schools over there?

Yes, just recently I spoke with Brian Allen, the superintendent, talked to him about the project and some potential impacts to the front of Main Street School.

Okay. Thank you. If you could just please keep us appraised as an at-large council, that would be appreciated. Full transparency, my daughter goes to one of the schools over there, so I'm over there frequently, and I know there's a lot of challenges, so if you could please keep us in the loop. and the last question as relates to the intersection with MassDOT the state you know how often are you meeting with them like what is the process who's the point person from the city for this particular thing is it is it Raleigh, is it someone else?

Who is it?

To the Chair, to the Council. Right now, the particular person is Steve Raleigh, who manages the design work and is the interface between the city and MassDOT. Also, Commissioner Westerling is involved because there's some significant utility work that will be involved as part of this project. One of the main water piping, it's over 40 inches, is in that location. As we know, years ago there was a and the massive water break that shut down the entire city. So DPW Westphaling is very involved in the potential impacts of the water and sewer system in that area as well.

and lastly you know I know there was again way back when I remember this issue I think Council Rosen had spoke a lot about back then but Are we reinventing the wheel? Is it the same sort of planning that they do? They spend a bunch of money and do more work there on kind of what it'll look like. and the impact, et cetera? Or is this just based on the old stuff?

To the chair, to the council, it's exactly the same as what's been presented multiple times to the community and to this body. The, what right now is for discussion is that we've gotten two to 75%, the project has gotten two to 75% design. and at this point right now there's some conversations with Worcester State about potential changes to that current design which then may impact the ability for us to start the project but again it's something that it's it's part of the process of looking through the design and seeing if something is feasible for the area.

All right, thank you for the clarification. We can just get a timeline for folks that weren't on the council as by way of report of this project. Thank you.

Thank you, Councillor Bergman.

To go back to what I had said earlier, Mr. Chairman, This council, I recall no meeting of this council to discuss this. There could have been a district council meeting with folks, could have been online, could have been done in a location near there. I checked with a clerk. The Clerk can correct me if I'm wrong. There's nothing entered in the system for a meeting about this project. Now, my concern is this should be discussed amongst all the Councillors, not one Councillor. and that one particular meeting that they set up with who they want to set up. This reminds me of another situation on the west side where there was finger pointing, and this is not a city project, it's a state project, but no, it's a state project. City Project, to the point where, oh, we did have a meeting. We didn't have a meeting. And there were a lot of people left unhappy on Mill Street. and I'm just suggesting this has the potential to be a lot more problematic without there being a real discussion on the council level about whether or not this does or doesn't make sense. But of course it's almost too late now because it's 75% done. and I'm again, I'm not challenging who had a private meeting or even a public meeting on their own. What I'm saying is major projects that impact parts of the city should be discussed not just by that district councilor, but by all of us, because all of us drive through the whole city all the time. It doesn't just have to be a meeting with a district councilor and some constituents. So if there was a public meeting in front of this council to discuss this that I omitted and the clerk's office didn't pick up, I apologize. but if there hasn't, we're going down the same path again we've done before where we don't talk about things until they're completed and then we have a lot of unhappy people and then when the discussion comes back to why didn't we have a discussion, somebody says, oh, I did have a discussion. I'm talking about discussion amongst all the councils. Mr.

Chair, can I respond to that?

He's talking, please. I'd like to know if there was a public discussion amongst all the councils. Because if there wasn't, there should be before this project is completed. And I'd like to have Commissioner Raleigh respond to that, hopefully sooner than later, so that we can have a further discussion before the 75% goes to the 100%.

Thank you. Councilor Haxhiaj, for a second time.

Clearly, Mill Street has to come up here because the two projects are actually quite similar. They're not. Mill Street is not a state funded project. The project that's happening on Pleasant Street is a state funded project. By the way, Councilor Bergman, through the chair, I insisted, I went door to door to make sure that, so did Council Colorio when that project first came to by MassDOT to make sure that the residents knew the project was happening. Those are projects coordinated by MassDOT. That is the same thing that happened with the Main Street. Councilor Colorio was there, a meeting was sent to everybody. I did not have any private meetings with anybody, okay? So Councilor Bergman, please take that back. I did not have any secret meetings with anybody. What I did is show up to the meeting that was arranged by MassDOT in collaboration with DTM, where Councilor Colorio was present, ask questions, answer residents' questions, transcribe the meeting, make sure that I actually post it online. You can go back on my Facebook page and see it. It is frustrating. It is frustrating that insinuations are being made. that somehow we had these secret meetings and making a comparison with Mill Street, which is absolutely a very different project. Again, MassDOT coordinates these meetings. I went out of my way because I realized that they don't have the reach that I have to make sure the residents were informed on social media and by door knocking.

Council Russell.

Mr. Chairman, you know, this is my worst nightmare for Massoy Road. because I've been asking for a plan for Massalia Road all summer long. And former Commissioner Moylan has told me that Trucks are coming, money's in the budget, it's getting done, the manager's told me, the new commissioner's told me, and the same thing there. But I'm not gonna go down that road on Astley Road. But what I am going to do is give a little historical perspective here. Counselor King said back in the day. Well, he's right. It was back in the day. and the last time this street and this area was reconstructed, it came to this council floor, it was sent to the Public Works Committee, Myself, as Chairman of Public Works at that time, went and met with Worcester State College, set up a meeting. We had members of the public come here into this room as we did with Hamilton Street, and Grafton Street, which is also a state project, the state highway that was done in this conjunction project. And that came before Public Works Committee. So what it comes down to is this. and going forward, I would just suggest to my colleagues, we need to make a decision here and give the manager some direction or the manager needs to tell us what his plans are and then we can either vote it up or vote it down. but the reality is is that this manager and his team do things in a different way than they were done in the past. the last time that area was done, it came into the council, it was an item, it was referred to committee, there was discussion off the board, You know, one-on-one conversations with people at Worcester State by me and the district counselor at the time. and it went to hearing. So I think moving forward, we need to make a decision. Maybe one of us should put an item on just to have a directive of these kinds of major arteries and what the, are they going to be worked on behind the scenes and nobody's going to present the plan to this council and have the input here or is it something on another platform in a neighborhood group or something else. It's up to this council and it's up to this administration. But whatever it is, it needs to be consistent. And in the past, as Councilor King said, it came to this council and it came to committee, the Public Works Committee.

Okay, Mr. Manager?

I will be happy to come back with a report on what has transpired over the past seven or not eight years regarding this project because my understanding I was not the city manager at the time I or DBO commission or anything, from that point in time, even the selection of the TIP program, this council body has been notified. I will do everything that I can to find out as much information and then bring it back as a formal report. But I do want to state something that's extremely important because it continues to be this narrative. It's been one project where we messed up in communicating to this council body a redesign of the street, and that was Mill Street, and I confess to that here, and I'm confessing again, one project, but somehow it seems to be that I'm always blamed that every damn project we don't communicate. One project and I confess to that.

Okay.

Thanks for the confession. I guess if that was directed to me because I made the comment, I'll respond to it. Is it, with all due respect, Mr. Manager, that's the job. It all ends up at your desk. and if there's a lack of communication? you know, we pat you on the back, we pat the staff on the back. Again, when this was built out on the Worcester State College, when this whole, The traffic patent and parking patent that's there now, it came to the council and it came to committee. if the council and the manager wants to continue that process or if your administration and this council has changed that way of planning, then so be it. Then let us all know and we'll just stick with it.

Thank you, Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Believe it or not, I appreciate the conversation. What I heard was the manager indicate that he would make every effort to ensure that this body is informed. I appreciate you reiterating and understanding what this body wants and what you intend to do. as relates to these projects. I'm not sure why we're conflating Mill Street with this. What I do know is that, as indicated, It wasn't the district counselor that didn't communicate. Manager took ownership of that. I want to also say that in this particular issue as I requested I think it's helpful to keep us informed that's also not and the District Council. What I recall previously, there's been a number of things that our District Councilors do in one, two, three, four and five that's specific to their district. because they are so in tune with it and they're so involved and we find out as at-large counselors after the fact. Sometimes we know as it's going on depending and sometimes that's relational, Mr. Chairman, but What I will say is that as we continue to grow as a city and we have challenges with congestion, with road safety, with vulnerable user safety, pedestrian safety in this instance institutional and school safety as all that intersects the best thing we can do is be as communicative as possible and there's a number of projects that we're waiting on for this intersection with Mass the State. I know one of the things that we had talked about previously was the order I filed over and I think Councillor Pacillo, I think that's her district, also approved it. was the intersection over there on Grove Street where there's a high number of accidents. I just hope that the state's doing their part. and what I would ask the city managers to make sure the state's doing their part to inform the community. They also have an accountability here. So whoever their liaison is, their governmental person, their commissioner, please let them know that the City Council also has expectations of them as well. Thank you.

Thank you, so I'll send that out to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Of course, the manager will provide counsel to the report concerning any plans to eradicate invasive plants in the city, Councilor Toomey.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Cities have unique sociological challenges with higher levels of environmental disturbance and greater risk of reinfestation. And certainly, you and Councilor Carlson have been working very closely with our blue spaces and trying to make sure that we're addressing that there. But there are other parts of the city where there has been an incredible overgrowth of this invasive plants that's impacting our trees and our communities. and a neighbor of mine came up to me quite some time ago and asked if we would do something about it. I did talk to the commissioner and He was waiting on something and then he became the actual commissioner and I'm waiting to hear back again. So I'm hoping that we can actually get a report in addition to that for some of the things in here that I'd like the report to come back with was what we're going to do for prevention education and public outreach all going to do for early Detection and Rapid Response, allowing residents to use apps to report sightings of the invasive species. and outline control methods and proper disposal and include community-based volunteerism. I think everybody hands on deck certainly will help Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member Carlson.

Yes, Mr. Chairman. As Councilor Toomey mentioned, there's been a lot of discussion about this. There's a gentleman by the name of Joe Johnson, which already serves on one of the commissions and he had come by and we had a long discussion about is this something that we should think about maybe having some sort of task force or a committee to look at all of these invasive species that I wonder if my colleague would take a friendly amendment and just would ask for the manager to take a look at it. and again maybe it's not a task force but what is what does that something look like but it's very obvious and you know for me um obviously it's about what's happening around the lakes and ponds because you know with having Quincyg and Belmont and Indian Lake obviously there's lots of discussion about that so just, you know, a friendly amendment for the manager to take a look at this. Is there something that we could be doing?

Thank you, Council Passullo.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This is a really great item. There's a ton of Japanese knotweed in District 1, and it's something residents have reached out to me about. The administration's been great. I know quality of life. I've worked with Assumption College to help get rid of a bunch of it along Chester Street because what happens is it gets in the waterways and it just goes all downstream and you really, it's hard to get rid of. So there is one resident in District 1, Joe Johnson, who does a ton of work with invasive plants and invasive species. Did you really? No, I've been kind of like over here. I'm so sorry. So to echo my colleague, Councillor Carlson, Joe Johnson is great. Did you talk about Dodge Park? Where was I? So anyway, yes, I would love to sign on to this. It would be super helpful. And I actually, Mr. Johnson had sent me an email a while ago with some of his ideas for a master plan, so I'll send it around. Thank you so much, I'm so sorry.

And we'll send that to the manager as amended. All those in favor, a postal audit. request the CMN to provide counsel with a report concerning the status of changes to the station's alerting in a way of quiet stations which would reduce the negative physical and mental health impacts on firefighters. said efforts should include progressive tones, preannounced soft messages, graduated lighting, and zoned alerting. Councilor Toomey.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I have been concerned about this for a long time. If any of you have spent any time in a fire station, the noise level is crazy. there's actually last year there was a report that came out a pretty extensive one that was identifying that in many firefighters that are in stations where they're announcing every Call over the loudspeaker and bells and all this other stuff that there's even PTSD. it's impacting people physically and mentally and so I think it's important to take a look at it I know it's something that in Firefighter Magazine there have been a number of columns I've talked to Firefighters about the issue. I've talked to the Chief and I think that's something that could potentially improve the physical and mental well-being of our firefighters. Thank you.

Okay, I'll send that to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. I request that the manager provide the city council report concerning any plans around crosswalk enforcement in the city, as it reads.

Very briefly, over the past two weeks, I have almost been hit three times crossing Main Street at the intersection of Foster and Main. All three times I was in the crosswalk with at least 12 to 14 seconds left. Yesterday, the woman barely stopped, just missed me by this much, honked the horn at me, told me to hurry up, as I'm walking along with my cane. I have 12 seconds left, by the way. And then gave me a non-verbal gesture as she walked by, as if I was doing something wrong. All the students coming back and all of that. I think it's really important, especially in Main Street. People just aren't paying attention. and they're driving right through. For some people, they think that a yellow light means go, not to slow down. So I think this would be helpful, not only on Main Street, but on our main arteries. And hopefully I'm not being targeted. But I'm just unlucky. Thank you.

Okay, so that's the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Requests of the manager by council to report concerning the status of PFAS-free turnout gear in light of the recent report regarding the effectiveness and safety of the gear currently being used by the Worcester and other municipalities. Further requests to support include information on whether there is any legislation that could support the city's effort to purchase and increase the amount of PFAS-free turnout available to Worcester Fire Department, firefighters, as well as additional fire suppression equipment that may be helpful in supporting that department. As agreed. Counselor Toomey. Okay, all those in favor, I'll send that to the manager. Next item, request the manager to provide accounts of the report concerning the effectiveness of fire blankets and any recommendations for use by residents. As it reads. Those in favor, opposed, so ordered. I request the Manager of the Vite Council to report concerning the current condition of the city's Worcester Police Department. Fleet, said report should include information concerning what is needed to ensure that the city is able to maintain maximum performance of the fleet, Councilor Toomey.

Mr. Chair, we did recently get delivery of, I'm not sure exactly how many, but maybe 10 or 12 cruisers. but I believe that they were delayed in the delayed delivery. These vehicles are being used practically 24 hours and We really need to focus on trying to make sure that we're maintaining them and that we're also turning over the equipment so that we can have good fleet management. I think it's really important that when an officer gets in to their cruiser that they know that they can rely on that vehicle for safe transportation and I think it's important that we move forward with this. Thank you.

Thank you. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Request manager work to ensure all construction projects occurring in the city have an assigned community liaison tasked with the communicating to residents and businesses. in the area of the pertinent information regarding construction. Council Member Carlson.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Councilor Pacillo alluded to this a little bit tonight, but Mr. Chairman, all of these construction projects, certainly we need some communication. you know currently right now we have a business corridor that's going through a major construction project and there we need to A few years back we had a Phil Nidry who would knock on the businesses' doors and knock on the residents' doors to let people know what was happening that day, as a matter of fact. but the amount of or lack of communication and the Shrewsbury Street area has really been extremely tough on all of the businesses. There has been lost revenue down there. and quite frankly, the odors that are for whatever reason being transmitted down there is horrific. People cannot even any longer eat outside. Never mind, you can't eat inside. and there is many a businesses on that street. But it's not just that street, somebody talked Tonight about it's been three weeks and I've spoken to the manager about this. I mean Vincent Street at the top of Stanton and Olga They're going into five months. Five months of construction of which nobody's been notified of anything and at times on a regular basis I have to call to open the streets so people can get home. And again, if you know Olga Ave and Stanton Street, those are pretty significant steep hills in this city. and I just think that it would be great if we could have a call whatever, whether it's an inspector. I know in the Phil Nidry days, he wasn't the inspector. But quite honestly, I just think that we need to do something about this because it is becoming several times a day occurrence because whether it's happening on Vincent Street or whether it's happening on Shrewsbury Street or whether it's happening on Frank Street between the mail carriers not being able to deliver the mail or UPS not being able to deliver. We need to do a better job. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, so we'll send that to the manager. Oh, Councilor Colorio? Can I sign on? Sure, okay. Can I sign on? Okay, everybody wanna sign on? As amended, we'll send that to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Request the same manager, Public Works and Parks review. the area around the Lake Gap pumping station to show that the foul oil is at the location can be alleviated. Council Member Carlson.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, there's been a significant amount of work that's been done through some of the challenges that we faced on Lake Ave. People now that live inside of 65 Lake Ave, the odors coming off of that pumping station are worse now than they ever have been. And they have been told over and over and when Senator Moore and myself worked to get the $5 million for the pumping station. We were told that the smells basically would be gone. and now those smells are back tenfold and every time they say something they feel as if it's being dismissed. We need to look at that. Why is it that that pumping station is putting off the odors that it is? because I know this year when people were down on the lake on their boats, they also talked about the odors coming off of that pumping station. So whatever's happening there, and before I close, I also have 12Q on here.

I know, we're going back to that.

Okay, thank you.

So I'll send that out to the manager. All those in favor, oppose, audit. Audit 12-Q. City Manager requests the Assistant Commissioner of Public Works and Parks to ensure any master plan associated with Poet Hill include work to be done with the neighborhood stakeholders to install a plaque listing all the poets associated with the location. Council Member Carlson.

Yes, Mr. Chairman, one of the gentlemen from the poet historians, I met with him this past week, and Poet Hill, which is where this massive project is taking place right now. There's many people who don't know, but in the north end of North Street, Edgeworth Street, Signey, Byron and all of those streets those were all named after famous poets and yet there's nothing in that neighborhood that marks that it is a neighborhood of streets named after poets. So what we were looking to do is putting some type of plaque or what does that something look like recognizing all of the poets. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Senator Manger, all those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Next item of request is to be amended by the council through a proper legislation that will allow the city to opt into the local option, Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 59, Section 5, Cause 54 for the purpose of establishing a minimum value of personal property subject to taxation threshold of under $10,000. for a request to see Manager Kuhn instead of report information concerning additional strategies and follow up on the potential unreported business tracking for Newey Incorporated Business Entities and Comprehensive Business Tracking Systems that are currently in play in the city for the request of that report including information concerning the city's personnel and the property team performance metrics with confirmation of $2 to $2 to $14 million in the untaxed personal property tax account. Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. May I recuse myself?

Okay, Council Russell has recused himself for the record.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This particular item is a proposal that this council once we receive a report from the city manager, I'd like this to go to the manager, that we will consider will be targeted property tax exemption to support local businesses, which will also, at the same time, enhance municipal efficiency. This is an opportunity, Mr. Chairman, to give our smallest businesses tax break, an opportunity to get smarter about our small businesses. Mr. Chairman, if approved and when approved, this particular exemption will impact three-fourths three fourths of the personal property accounts in Worcester. A huge number. This would eliminate administrative work of city government. eliminating that headache. This will result in more business growth. This is an opportunity for us to reinvest in small business, not just talking about it, but actually doing it. This initiative supports local business, but it also is a community matter. It aligns with Mass General Laws. There's certainly a modest savings here, but it is annual. I've spoken to small businesses in the Canal District. North Worcester, South Worcester, the East Side, the West Side, and what I hear from all of them, that any little bit helps. This particular proposal, Mr. Chairman, asks that we exempt Personal Property Accounts valued under $10,000. and the reason why is because that request would align with Massachusetts general law. Now, we don't have to exempt the threshold of $10,000. It could be anywhere up to. My proposal is that we exempt to the max, Mr. Chairman. Currently the resources that are used to identify companies that don't pay their fair share. that are not paying their personal property tax in excess of $10,000 happens often here in the city of Worcester. We have a great team. that identifies those folks that aren't meeting their tax obligations and eliminating this requirement of our city government will increase efficiency by redirecting resources to identify those untaxed properties and have an even more robust tax collection. Now the taxes that we collect, the majority of them come from our large utility companies. that will offset by its new growth this exemption. This will not come from and Mendoza. I like part of that report back to specify the aspects of this. Again, the new tax growth from identifying personal property taxes for our three major utility companies, Mass Electric, New England Power, and Instar. will pay for this itself. Mr. Chairman, this will demonstrate a commitment to our local economic growth. Smart governance, it's thoughtful policy making. and it will project savings of close to $500,000, a half a billion over the next 10 years, streamlining a supportive environment for our business folks. Mr. Chairman, I have received a number of responses from small businesses. I'm going to share just one of them. This is from one of our small businesses. I strongly agree with this, says this business owner. After the city spends a number of dollars to calculate and collect, I have to pay my bookkeeper, she says, to deal with all of this. and there's a number of surveys and things of that nature. I'd like as part of that report the savings that the city will experience as a result of eliminating this. My understanding and my ask through the chair to the city manager is do we have a timeframe within which we can get a report back for council consideration?

Mr. Manager.

Through to the council, I know this is something that has been brought to the council floor previously, and so this is something that the assessor and the current chief financial officer have been reviewing. and analyzing. We are prepared to bring it forward as soon as possible, hopefully next council meeting.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. This will give tax release to close to 3,000 business accounts. 3,000. This will also help folks who have triple net leases. Triple net leases are those leases that include taxes and insurance, et cetera, from folks who are renting Small businesses that are renting from a landlord. So that's often an additional barrier. So those people who are paying the triple net leases will also experience a tax break annually. Mr. Chairman, and I've had discussion with members of our delegation of elected officials and exploring increasing that exemption, but based on the information We know that the City of Worcester identifies yearly over $2 million in unidentified taxes of personal property exemption. of big businesses. So it's time for our small businesses to get their fair share. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Council Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's an interesting question that Councillor King, item, I should say, that Councillor King is presenting, but I'm going to try to ask an interesting question that it touches upon it but not directly and that is that not too long ago we got a legal opinion from our city solicitor regarding conflict of interest and I personally have in my own business recall receiving a form requesting information on personal property. Now, if I recall that opinion, If there was a spouse or a parent or a child or a media relative that is affected by something that the general public isn't, then we have to accuse ourselves now I suspect I know why my colleague council Russell left the room but I need some guidance myself and there may be others here too that need that type of guidance can we sit in on this and vote on this or do we have to recuse ourselves? This decision that we were told through our law department about conflict of interest and how wide it is, last time we had the discussion, leads me to be concerned about participating. So I'm happy to vote on this when the time comes if I'm allowed to vote on it. But I don't want to get drawn into something that myself or perhaps some of my colleagues shouldn't be participating in. So perhaps the Chair of the Law Department could give me some, some of us, an answer, I guess.

Madam Solicitor?

Through the Chair to the Councillor. So this, the financial conflict analysis would be the same as in the previous one. but the financial interest might be a little bit too remote in this one. If someone in your immediate family, mother, sister, and so forth. If your father, brother, child has a financial benefit then you may not be able to This is a little bit different than the one that we discussed a couple of weeks ago so I would suggest that if anyone thinks they have a conflict they should reach out to the State Ethics Commission.

As far as where I am right now, should I leave the room or should I continue to, because I do think since I've received an application for a personal property tax in the past that my concern is that I do have a conflict.

through the chair that you would be the one to decide if you have a conflict. So if you are under the $10,000 threshold, then you may have a conflict.

Mr. Chairman, I'm gonna recuse myself. Okay. Thank you, Madam.

Thank you, so we'll send that to the Manager, Council King.

Mr. Chairman, I'm not sure where that report is. I don't know if that went into committee. The chairman of that committee just recused himself if that's been discussed conflict of interest thing or if it was simply filed. What I do know is that conflict of interest for elected officials is applied differently. This is not to dispute our astute solicitor, but the fact of the matter is We all pay taxes here in the city of Worcester. We all use the parks in the city of Worcester. Are we not to vote on anything? We use the water, we use the sewer. We use the schools. I'm not quite sure what we don't use if we live here. So there's perhaps degrees to this. What I do know from legal consultations that I've had all the way up to the level of judge is that there is a different application here. And I'm concerned that folks are interpreting some of the reports that came back in perhaps a very constricted way. Again, I'm not quite sure how we would vote on anything. I don't know how we vote on these things pertaining to operations, streets, et cetera. And I understand there's a financial component here. I certainly think there's need for recusal. We have folks that recuse themselves often. I can remember Councilor Wiley, when he was here, he must have the record for recusals. However, we're talking about We do an exemption. We do raises. We do commercial versus residential tax increases. Perhaps we should all recuse ourselves from that as well. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Council Pacillo.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a quick question through you, maybe to the City Manager. You guys might not have an answer, but most of these taxes are paid by utilities and large industrial companies. so Verizon Wires or N-Star Gas Lines. How often are these assessed?

Hi, Mr. Manager.

To the council right now, we are going through the FY26 budget. We have put some resources to engage in a recertification. it's a five-year cycle recertification of all the assessed properties that's something that we're going through right now that's why you see a lot of like Councillor Bergman just mentioned a lot of small businesses are probably receiving these forms because it's on a five-year cycle that we try to do the recertification of understanding all of the assessed property values in the city.

Thank you. And through the Chair of the City Manager, so whenever they put like a new gas line in or they update, they fix a gas line, does that count towards the assessment that the utilities have to pay?

Through you, Chair, to the council, yes, that is correct. Okay, thank you. I'm giving you an example of Verizon. In the past three or four years, they've been developing a lot of fiber in the city. That's an unassessed personal property that we can tax that didn't exist before, and now we can tax it.

Thank you.

Thank you. You wanna double it? If anybody feels they have a conflict of interest, they should call state ethics. You can sign on it. And there's a difference and Meryl Streep. So if anybody's doing that, we should please contact State Ethics. That's the best way to get the good answer. Okay, so we're gonna send that to the manager. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. We have some resolutions. First resolution is that City Council of the City of Worcester hereby recognize the week of September 14, 2025 through September 2025 as Paint the Town Green Week in the City of Worcester. You want me to go down there or do you want me to just do it from here?

Mr. Mayor.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Paint the Town Green is really an advocacy and awareness campaign dedicated to highlighting the mission of the Big Brothers and Big Sisters here in the City of Worcester and Central Massachusetts. and create and support one-on-one mentoring relationships to ignite the power of promise of the youth. So they asked to put this on that we proclaim this week coming up. and that the City Council of the City of Worcester hereby recognize the week of September 14th, 2025 through September 2025 as the Paint the Town Green week here in the City of Worcester. So, we'll do a roll call.

Okay, so the motion will be to approve Resolution 13A, City Council, City of Worcester does hereby recognize the Week of September 14, 2025 through September 20, 2025 is Painted Town Green Week in the City of Worcester, filed by Mayor Petty, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Councilor Colorio? and Vice-Chairman and Council Chair.

Yes, item 13B, that the City Council of the City of Worcester does hereby recognize and celebrate all neighborhood leaders who host monthly neighborhood meetings in partnership with the Worcester Police Department and other city service departments in appreciation of their dedication, hard work, and ongoing commitment to safety and quality of life in the city's neighborhood. Mayor Petty.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I thought this would be... I talked to a number of people. You go to the neighborhood meetings. All the district councils are there. Some district councils probably go to nine or ten of them a month, if not more sometimes. and the people there work pretty hard. And I thought something this is the council could get around this. Maybe we have some work with the manager. So let's have a, so maybe here at the council meeting or somewhere in this council chamber. and some Knight, just to recognize all the people, the hard work that they do, the leaders of each neighborhood group, because a lot gets done in those meetings, and the district councils work pretty hard at working with them, making sure that the neighborhood issues are addressed, and the police there are every single meeting giving statistics depending on the issue you know have other departments that come in and go over the issues of the district council at Lash Council requests. So I think this would be great if the council could come around, work together as a team to do this and recognize all the people that we go to every week. A lot of councils go more than other councils. but just to recognize the people doing the hard work to make the city a better place. Thank you.

Moe Bergman, Morris Bergman, Councilor at Large.

Thank you, Mr. Vice Chair. Through the, I guess through the Vice Chair to the Chairman, I would like to sign on. Well, it's a resolution, so I'm certainly gonna support it. I don't need to sign on to it, but I wonder if, Mr. Chairman, if you would consider some sort of posthumous recognition of some of the neighborhood leaders that we've lost over the last couple of years. I can think of Gary Vecchio being one, Lorraine Laurie. and maybe Bill Breaux being another. So perhaps we can incorporate all those folks into that. And I just want to make another comment too. At a committee meeting prior to the council meeting tonight, there was some discussion about residents' feelings towards certain items on the public safety agenda. and I made a comment which I'm going to stick to and I want to bring it up now because I think it's again an appropriate time that we got a nice cross-section of people that come to those neighborhood meetings and you know there's any sort of belief that the people that show up at those meetings are only of one type whether it's political or racial or gender or otherwise, you haven't been to enough neighborhood meetings because we get a great cross-section of people who give us their opinions and I think it's very worthwhile for all of us that go as often as we can to get the input of the people in the neighborhoods because that's really, it's not just in this chamber, oftentimes it's quite the opposite. Oftentimes it's opinions outside this chamber that are really the mainstream opinions of the people that live in the city. So I find it very worthwhile to engage with a cross section of people and I appreciate Mr. Chairman the resolution. Thank you.

Councilor, was it Pacillo? Jenny Pacillo, District 1, City Councilor.

Thank you. I just want to say really quickly, thank you to the Mayor for this. I think it's great. You know, I've been going to burn coat meetings for about eight years consistently, and We initially had Kathy Napoli, and she did pass away, so it would be great to include her with Councilor Bergman's idea. I really like that. I do just want to say we have Maureen McNamara is great and she kind of took over Kathy's role. So the people do work really hard at the neighborhood meetings and it's definitely appreciated. Thank you.

Okay, I think that's all. So the resolution 13B that the City Council of the City of Worcester does hereby recognize and celebrate all the leaders in appreciation of their dedication, hard work, and ongoing commitment to safety and quality of life in the city's neighborhoods. And I think there was a friendly amendment to also recognize post, how do you say it? posthumously, the folks that have done that very work, roll call.

and Vice-Chairman. Yes, motion to chair.

Okay, we have 14A to 14C, refer the Economic Development Committee. All those in favor, proposal ordered. 14D, refer the Public Works Committee. All those in favor, proposal ordered. 15A to 15C, ordained on a roll call. Roll call.

Councillor Bergman. Yes. Councillor Colorio. Yes. Councillor Haxhiaj. Yes. Councillor King. Yes. Councillor Mero-Carlson. Yes. Councillor Nguyen, Councillor Ojeda. Yes. Councillor Pacillo. Yes. Councillor Russell. Yes.

Mr. Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty? Yes. That brings us to the end of the meeting. Councilor Russell?

Mr. Chairman, under suspension because next week we have a manager's agenda and the week after that we don't have a meeting.

We'll take a roll call to go under suspension. Oh, excuse me, yes. Okay, roll call, a little under suspension, roll call.

Councillor Bergman? Yes. Councillor Colorio? Yes. Councillor Haxhiaj? Yes. Councillor King? Yes. Councillor Mero-Carlson? Yes. Councillor Nguyen, Councillor Ojeda? Yes. Councillor Pacillo? Yes. Councillor Russell?

I just request that the Council ask the Standing Committee on Public Works to hold a meeting to have a discussion about zero waste and the results of the study, the trash study. That's all.

Okay.

Thank you.

All those in favor, opposed, so ordered. Motion to adjourn. All those in favor, opposed, so ordered.