City Council 04/28/2026

Good evening, everyone. Welcome to the Worcester City Council meeting. If you can, stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, followed by the South Spangled Banner. Aye.

Oh, say can you see by the dawn's early light what so proudly we hailed At the twilight's last gleaming Whose broad stripes and bright stars Through the perilous fight O'er the ramparts we watched 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.

Roll call. Councilors Bergman? Here. Bilotta?

Here.

Economou? Here. Fresolo?

Here.

King? Mitra?

Here.

Ojeda. Here. Rivera. Here. Rosen. Here. Toomey and Mayor Petty.

Here.

Do we have, can anybody on the line? What's going on?

Toomey, Toomey, no? Okay. Next is the City Council. City of Wesley does approve the match of the City Council meeting of March 31st, 2026. All those in favor? Opposed, so ordered. Public participation, the person may speak for no more than two minutes on any item appearing on the agenda. So, Mr. Clerk.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Rule 39, items of public interest. At every meeting of the city council under the public participation portion of the agenda, the chair shall recognize any person seeking such recognition for the purpose of addressing the council on any eligible item on the agenda for that meeting both in person and remotely. Any person who wishes to speak on more than one agenda item shall combine their testimony on all items to one appearance at the microphone. The time for speaking shall not exceed two minutes for any one speaker or 30 minutes for all speakers. on the first occasion any petition appears on a City Council agenda, the primary petitioner may address the City Council for no more than three minutes on the subject of their petition.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. So is this your name, City of Residence, and item number?

Yes, Idella has it, City of Worcester. I'd like to speak on 7A. in regards to them finding new stakeholders for the Central Mass Health Links. I think they'd better do it Damn fast, pardon my language. In the past two and a half weeks, I came across two ODs. I was able to get the ambulance for one. and that's just in a location of Coral Street and Grafton Street. That's pretty scary. and that's just when I was going to catch a bus during the day between 1 o'clock and 3.30. that is very scary.

I think what the city council needs to do is get in touch with the ambulance, UMass and St. V's and find out how many ODs have come in. because this is absolutely ridiculous. This is pandemic. Human lives we're talking about. Yes, they're drug addicts, but drug addicts are human beings and pandemic is pandemic. And while we're waiting for stakeholders, we are losing people. Thank you.

You're welcome. Next speaker, just name, steer, residence, and item number.

Hello, my name's Gary Hunter, and the first thing I would like to talk about is 7A, I'm strongly in support of getting the people together and these people in the back of me to come up with a solution because they're being treated poorly and their union is being treated poorly. I would like the City Council to back them up 100%. I would like to say 18A. They're asking you to be against the ballot question to do away with recreational marijuana. I personally really don't smoke, but I don't think you can go backwards. go forward and it's not causing much of a problem. So we should keep it the way it is. I want to talk rent stabilization. There are many candidates that are sitting here during the campaign said they were in favor.

And you know who you are. of rent stabilization and then turn to, now you have a different programs. I don't think extra apartments are gonna stabilize the rent. I think you gotta get the rent stabilized and then you still need more apartments. I would also like to talk about the process of getting stuff on the agenda. You pulled back that most people can't put stuff on the agenda, they go through the city council. It's closing up people's opportunity to speak. If you look at a city like New York City, people are afraid of the democratic socialist. Look how much he's gotten done in the time he's been elected. I know it's a different form of government, but we're not getting anything done.

They're getting rent stabilization and they're getting...

Okay, thank you.

And...

Thank you.

I'm not finished.

No, the time is up. Thank you.

We're still talking about chickens for two years. Thank you, Gary.

They're getting all their stuff done. I appreciate it.

Good afternoon, Mauro DiPasquale, WCCA-TV, Worcester, Massachusetts. Allocating and up here for 16 J. Allocating an increase of funding provisions to subsidize WCCATV public access community media provides numerous benefits that can enhance the community and promote civic engagement. There's several compelling reasons for this. Promoting local voices, we provide a platform for diverse voices, cultural expression, enhancing civic engagement, not just informing people about what's going on in the city, which we do a lot of, but lifting organizations, sharing ideas, putting the technology in the hands of the person so they can express and tell their own story. encouraging participation, supporting local economy, not just by sponsorships and getting people to talk and be interviewed, but we're creating a job pathway, a career pathway,

supporting public assets can lead to creation in production, editing, broadcasting, and film production jobs. Education Opportunity, Skill Development, Youth Engagement, Building Community Equity Connections. We have a network of people of all different backgrounds, opposite sides of the fence. They come together and they produce something. It's constructive dialogue. It enhances community identity. In conclusion, I want to say that sustaining the WCCA represents a unique investment in the community's cultural, social, and economic and so you're supporting a civic asset and it's important that we continue to do that and we appreciate the support that the city had given WCCA for the last 40 years and we're still going strong. There's more demand now than ever. I can tell you that right now. So thank you so much for giving me your ear and God bless these people behind me because I know they got a good fight. Take care.

What's your name, say your residence and item number?

The CHL resolution?

Yes.

Good evening. My name is Cara Goodyear and I am the treasurer of SEIU 509. I want to take a moment to talk about the Community Health Link and the critical role it plays in supporting thousands of individuals in the Worcester community each year. This program is not just a service, it's a lifeline. It connects people to care, stability, and hope, and often during the most difficult times in their life. The staff behind this work shows up every day with dedication, compassion, and unwavering commitment to the clients they serve. The time and energy they invest should inspire us all to do better and to fight harder for programs like this. We all know somebody who's needed a little extra help at some point in their life. Now imagine that person, someone you love and care about, finally building trust with the people supporting them only to have that support taken away. How would you feel?

This is what many are going through, the possibility of program disruptions. And without a clear plan in place to continue this work, we are putting both the workforce and the clients at risk. This is a disservice not only to the dedicated workers who have built trust and relationships in this community, but to the individuals who rely on these services to maintain their health and stability. Many of these clients served through Community Health Link live with dual diagnosis. Consistent ongoing treatment is not optional, it's essential. When the continuum is disrupted, it becomes significantly harder for individuals to reengage in care to stay healthy and on a stable path. We cannot afford to let that happen. We must come together to ensure that this workforce continues and that these services do not appear without solution. The stakes are simply too high.

Our community deserves better.

I'm also speaking on the resolution for CHL. Good evening, everybody. My name is Ariana Power. Today, I'm not just speaking as a former employee. I'm speaking as someone who gave my time, my energy, and my heart to the work we did at CHL. When we were told that our program was closing, we were also given reassurance. We were told there would be support. We were told there wouldn't be anyone left behind. But for many of us, that support never came. Instead, we were left navigating uncertainty on our own, without clear direction, without meaningful assistance, and without the stability we were promised. This closure is not just about one program or one organization. It's about people. It's about the hundreds of dedicated staff members who are now facing the reality of losing their jobs. Hundreds of people who showed up every day to care for others are now left wondering who will show up for them.

And the impact doesn't stop with us. The residents and the clients we served, some of the most vulnerable members of our community, are now at risk of losing not just services, but stability. For many, CHL wasn't just a provider, it was a lifeline. It was housing, it was treatment, it was safety. and now all of that is uncertain. Reports have already highlighted concerns that this closure could compromise critical care for vulnerable residents and disrupt essential services. When you take away behavioral health services, you don't just create a gap, you create a ripple effect. Emergency rooms become overwhelmed, shelters fill up, families struggle, communities feel it. This is bigger than job loss. This is about the well-being of an entire community. We as staff, where the people were there in people's hardest moments, we helped them rebuild their lives. And now we're asking,

Who is stepping in to make sure that work continues? Who's making sure no one falls through the cracks?

Good evening, my name is Thomasina Levake. I am a Worcester worker, not a resident. I'm here to speak about Community Health Link in a resolution for our workers and our programs. We cannot let UMass set back the families. Before becoming a CHL worker, I was a parent receiving services for my family. Without the support and the care, I wouldn't be here today. I brought the same care back to the community throughout my time working at CHL. We can't allow UMass to disrupt the system of care that has been part of the community since 1970s. We cannot not be a part of the planning to keep our programs up and running in full capacity. The only way to do that is keeping the long time experienced and established caregivers.

No deal should be approved without the caregivers staying in their positions, the programs in full operation during this transition in open sky, does the only responsible thing for our clients is to keep the workers in their positions. Thank you.

Thank you.

Hello, my name is Livia Keller. I'm an employee at CHL. I live in Northridge. I think right now we've been lacking a little bit of data when it comes to this issue. For example, I learned last week that our detox program which used to have a capacity of 26 beds when it reopened is now at 12 beds. and there's no letter of intent from Open Sky about when they're going to take over. So yes, there is some kind of plan for a new organization to take over, Meanwhile, the programs are actively shrinking. It's 26 to 12 beds have over half of the beds are already gone because the staff are already leaving because they don't know if they'll have a job in the future. They have to worry about Feeding their children, covering insurance.

So staff are put in a place where they either look for a new job which may not even be in the same field or stay on and do not know what will be happening to their future. So this has seemed like a future issue. It's not. It's a present issue. Again, these programs are already shrinking. The detox programs already shrunk. The CSS, the TSS, those are part of the continuum. have already shrunk. The mental health program has already shrunk. I'm in the mobile crisis intervention program. We see people out anywhere in the community in the Worcester area that is already shrinking because staff don't know what's going to happen to them. So this is not talking about a future plan. This is talking about the present. There's already a shortage of services here.

Thank you.

Fred Nathan Worcester. So whenever UMass Memorial pleads poverty, it really means, hey, if you think you can find the money, go for it. same thing with UMass Medical School. You think you can find it? Go, try to find it. I just want you to think about something right here today. they might claim poverty but yet two of their big clinics that are on UMass Memorial Hospital Guess what? They're moving to White City. Two of them. Two clinics. That takes money. They'll have to pay rent over to White City. Kinda makes me wonder where the money comes from. Did they take it from this thing here we're talking about today? Who knows, but the public knows now.

Anybody else? What's your name, city residents, and item number?

My name is Fiona Jatan Singh. I am a resident of the city of Worcester. I'm here to speak on a couple of items on the agenda. First of all, the same one that everybody else has spoken on. and the closing of Community Health Link does not benefit the community. I know there's a few other items talking about the mental health of the city residents, the children in the city. the one main service that we have for the mental health of the the community is not going to benefit the community especially the workers that are being not told what their future is going to be whether they would have a job or not that's not helpful to the citizens of the Community, or the people that are working in our community. Also, I don't know the number of item, but for the stretch code, I heard that there was a motion to repeal that makes absolutely no sense. You guys already voted to approve it last or two years ago. It's not even been three years to have it in place. So there's not even enough data to say that it's not working. So that makes absolutely no sense. And that's all for now. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Anybody online?

Mr. Cook? Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The first person I can identify is Tracy Novick. Just sent a request to unmute Tracy now.

Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Good evening, Mr. Chair, members of the Council. My name is Tracy Novick. I live here in Worcester. I'm speaking to you tonight on items 16C and 20A. That's the trains at Union Station and then the WRRB report. First of all, Mr. Chair, I wanted to thank you and the manager for putting together the task force that you did on the commuter rail line. I think that I speak for those on it that it has been informative and useful. I will report however that we have not received a rush hour heart to hub back yet so that is still something that's happening and in another surprising turn of events we discovered that and so on. Access to the platform from the station itself has been fenced off at the back. That's a revision to the plan that was not shared. So there's still improvements to be made in terms of the partner aspect.

I did want to note that unless and until we actually see trip length closer to driving length, we won't be competing in terms of traffic. We do still need your advocacy on that. I did also want to echo a couple of things from the Worcester Research Bureau report. By the way, they've been an excellent partner in this work. We do really need continued advocacy on improvements to the line. That's part of what will actually give us speed. And then we also need to be looking at both directions. The Alston project, which involves the West Station project, is something that very much is going to have a lot to do with our access to continued service. Mr. Dunn serving on that committee is very, very important. and then also I want to encourage you all to be looking at the West Rail project as well, the Compass Rail going out through Springfield. Springfield's been getting a lot of attention lately, partly because they've got trains that go down into Connecticut and we need to make sure that we're not left out of that conversation either. So partly I just wanted to mark your cards and put that back on the agenda.

I was not able to be there in person tonight, but I did also bring you back schedules for those who are wondering how many trains come into Worcester Every day I can drop those off at City Hall.

Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The next person I can identify with their hand raised is Tom. If we could just have you please provide your full name and city of residence, please.

Yeah, Tom Marino, Worcester, 8.4B, the stretch code. Wow. Wow. You would think that understanding how you could opt out of this program when you opted into it would have been a good idea. Don't you think? I mean, I don't know what, I don't recall what committee this went to, but what the hell were they doing? So, thoroughly embarrassing, congratulations. This is the product of, you know, voting for the political whim of the moment. This felt really good to vote for, and then, well, developers said, so we rushed to run out of it, not even knowing how to get out of it. Absolutely stunning incompetence. Stunning. I don't understand why we can't just do work instead of play politics all the time. How about we work? How about we have committee meetings that are substantive, that actually do something? Otherwise, don't have them.

Stop wasting the electricity. and the other item, 20F, we're about two weeks away from two years that this report can't be produced. You know, the godlessness to not be able to articulate What in the report they agree with and what they don't is really stunning. I know that we're just going to wash this away. We have some councilors who are lying to the people of this city about the role of the Post Commission, outright lying to the people of the city. and we can't produce a report in two years. In light of the stretch code, it's probably possible that we can't produce a report in two years. I mean, just embarrassing all around.

Next speaker.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. The next person with their hand raised is David Webb. Just sent your request to unmute David.

Yes, hello, are you able to hear me?

Yes, we can.

Great, cool. David Webb, Olympia. I'm in support of 7A, supporting CHL and the incredible people who work there and make an actual difference and actually improve the city of Worcester. Disrupting the community's continuity of care is violent and a demonstration of this administration's values, especially in consideration of 13A, the chair of the so-called Safety Committee, asking for a report on how poorly her police department handles mental health cases. Maybe the city would actually have public safety if its councillors actually cared about safety instead of their own comfort. So on the same note, 9a. Shot spotter was pushed onto Worcester by Councilor Toomey and Chief Saucier despite the science explaining how it was harmful. Ignoring reports and investigations completed elsewhere in the country, they doubled down on the techno-fascist state with predictive policing through ShotSpot or Connect. now I think called Soundthink, which amplified and automated harm to Worcester's redlined neighborhoods.

As far as 27C, I think it's almost comical how often the lawyer on the council brings forward ideas that turn out to be illegal, but I'm really glad that this administration checked with other people. I think a real estate attorney asking to suspend the safety standards and the stretch code is exactly what's wrong with this council and I'm really really really really really really really really really appreciative that after a significant amount of public pressure The city administration checked with a competent legal team at the state instead of relying on its landlord counselors and or incompetent law department. So thank you very much for getting a qualified opinion, and I strongly encourage you to do the same thing with public records. In regards to the item about the discrepancy between the Department of Justice's investigation and the City of Worcester's report, I think that the public would understand what was going on if the public records department actually did their jobs in accordance with the law. Thank you.

Mr. Mayor, there's another person online. Looks like initials AS. If you could just provide your full name, please, prior to testimony.

Hi, this is Ashley Spring. Can you hear me?

We can.

Perfect. Ashley Spring, Palm Harbor, Florida. I just wanted to call in and voice my support for 7A. As somebody who has had to call on crisis intervention For my child in the past and they were not available because there wasn't enough people to respond in this emergent situation, I can attest to the need for services like this. So in support of 7a also in support of was it Let me one second here. Yes, 13A, Councilor Toomey's request for a report concerning the WPD process. Concerning mental health related emergencies clearly with the lawsuit that Worcester is dealing with that is going to be necessary.

I also wanted to support 18A, Councilor Rosen's King's motion for the recreational marijuana facilities. 27A, Councilor King's request of the City Manager to provide a report concerning the status of the designated union representative seat on the Worcester Housing Authority. We should not have any empty seats. I don't know why there is an empty seat for so long. you know an issue with the committee's left and right so in support of that and I believe it was the 27 C as well, although I'm not sure. And that's it. Thank you.

Can I speak? I was intending to come tonight to speak on the code. I understand that that's not an active item tonight. I will say something right at the end. But I want to say something about 7A. I was listening on the phone as I was driving and walking here, and then I got here, so I'm glad you're letting me speak. This city has treated the population that Community Health Link serves like trash. they are human beings. And their lifeline has been Community Health Link. I think it's really important that community people speak up. I was hearing really eloquent things from the workers. Listen to them. having a plan to come together to keep the workforce and keep the workforce unionized is the thing that can serve this population. This city can do better and it can take a leadership role in this.

I want to say a personal note that I was planning to say In relation to the code, I want to say just that this is a tough day for me because 15 years ago today, my mother passed away. Very suddenly, she was a fierce advocate for affordable housing. and an equally fierce advocate for environmental sustainability. And she wrote a dissertation in 1993 about how these two could go hand in hand. And a lot of what's happened between now and then has shown that that's possible. So as you go forward with implementing, building codes that provide for affordability and sustainability. Remember that these two things go hand in hand.

Thank you. With that, we are gonna go and continue the meeting. I'm sorry, is your name and say your residence?

Hello, my name's Jenny Papagni. I'm a resident of 16 Kelly Square here in Worcester. I do have two petitions, 14I and 14J. I'm requesting the installation of additional streetlights in the vicinity of my residence. there are two streetlights that have been knocked over that were knocked over during the winter storm of 2025 that still have not been replaced. Those are directly in front of 16 Kelly Square as well as I would like to see if we could install additional street lighting in the vicinity of 4 Milbury to 18 Milbury Street. There are two bars in that vicinity. There's a barbershop and two restaurants and a bakery. There is not enough adequate lighting for after 8 p.m. It is severely dark over there.

and I think that the installation of additional street lights would make our residents feel safer as well as I have about six to eight elderly people that live in my building that don't like to go outside after dark Thank you. Thank you.

Okay, we'll close that part of the meeting. We'll go to the first item of business. That the City Councilor, City of Whistler does hereby go to support the UMass Memorial Health Immediately Convening Stakeholders of Memorial and Municipal and State Government. King, and the community SEIU union representation to discuss the transition plan for the community health link, mental health, and substance abuse services to new providers in uninterrupted manner. Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can you hear me? Yes. Okay. It's an honor to bring forth this particular item. as a former vice president of SCIU Local 509 and Transparency. This is important. This intersects with the next item that we have coming up as relates to co-responsing with police. CHL actually and the mobile crisis unit and the youth crisis, mobile crisis unit are also co-deployed. With the police, they were a part and parcel to the pilot program as well, Mr. Chairman. And we've heard today the public safety and public health impacts that losing this will have. We've had a number of challenges as we heard today in the public testimony from 509 and Worcester residents.

seen a reduction in substance abuse treatment beds. We have a number of, you know, slowdowns or shutdowns. We had a freeze over at CHL for a period of time. In addition to that, 2023, we had the three substance abuse programs. that were shutting down or pausing. In 2021, Mir, which is, a youth detox was the last one in the state that has shut down. And those are having real live consequences. I mean, many of us will remember that we had the Plumlee Village Health Center shut down. We had Grace House, which is also a UMass program that was shut down for teen girls. you know a number of challenges and This is important.

There's an intersection as it relates to comorbidity, dual diagnosis, folks who have mental health challenges having substance use challenges and medical challenges. And as that lays before us, Mr. Chairman, we have open skies stepping to the plate. I can tell you as an update that I've been in communication with them. They have initiated some communication with Mr. Mayor, your office. and at my request, we are convening. The governmental affairs of UMass has been very responsive. We're looking forward to a meeting in days. that will involve SEIU, that will involve community stakeholders, that will involve our state elected officials and Mayor Petty and myself, the Vice Chairman of the City Council. So those things are moving forward, Mr. Chairman.

However, we are seeing a significant crisis as it relates to mental health and substance abuse services in our city. One of the major facts of this matter is that in order to continue effectively and competently with these service provision, it requires a workforce. And you've seen the last couple of meetings testimony from not just a competent and committed workforce that was working at CHL. But in addition to that, they are passionate and they're knowledgeable. and we need to make sure we can do everything we can, Mr. Chairman, to move that forward. I'm looking forward to the meetings coming up, but time is of the essence. When we saw the reduction in the pause in substance use services We saw an uptick in that particular neighborhood and in the neighborhoods that are surrounding.

Some of these programs allow for people to bring their children into treatment that are being reduced. Some of them are focused on geriatric you know, geriatric mental health challenges while those folks are actually in nursing It doesn't matter how large each specific program is. They save lives. They connect people. They help lift folks up, Mr. Chairman. And anything that this body can do, is, you know, we'll move forward. I want to thank the Chair of Public Health, Councilor Rosen, who has have been really eager to hold some hearings on this. And again, there's a work in progress and I'm looking forward

to where we go with that, Mr. Chairman. That being said, I really hope and anticipate a unanimous vote on this resolution, Mr. Chairman. But it's a tall task. And, you know, I'll comment on this again. You know, our human health HHS division is our that deals with some of these social ills is the lowest funded department in the city, Mr. Chairman. And we gotta put more value where we put our dollars. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. I just want to thank everybody for coming out tonight, Councilor King, and appreciate you being here. You do good work, Councilor Rosen. No, go ahead.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, as you know, I just finished, before we started this term of the City Council, four years on the Worcester Board of Health. where we had the pleasure of talking about different agencies dealing with health issues throughout our community. And one of those certainly, few times during those four years, was the Community Health Link. and being new during that time to the Board of Health, I was very, very impressed, as I still am, with the work that this fine agency does. and if you just go online and read about Community Health Link, there's so many programs involved dealing with homelessness, mental health issues or addiction. A lot of these issues we certainly talk about at the city council. and we'll continue to talk about in our public health committee which I chair. But the agency has done such a good job over the years.

We knew at times it was challenging for UMass Memorial, the money that was put in, the money that they said they lost, I don't know. But it really wasn't money lost at all because the work that these fine people have done and all through Community Health Link has helped so many residents of our community. Community Health Link. So many residents of the city of Worcester. So, I support this resolution by Councilor King and I look forward as the Chair of our Public Health Committee to meet with the stakeholders, the agencies especially that hope to absorb these programs. I want to meet with UMass Memorial, the folks there, and make sure that their heart is in this, that we continue to provide the services to the people who are being served now so well by Community Health Link. I'm concerned that

in washing its hands of Community Health Link that the university of Mass, University of Memorial, they will kind of wash their hands and stop thinking about the people in need that this agency has been serving for so many years. I don't want to see that happen. I can say this. I don't trust UMass. I can say that. I don't trust them. To trust them, they should have come forward and said, we need some help financially. but our goal is to help the people in the community, help the people in the city of Worcester and to keep Community Health Link going. We're starting at the point of, we're starting, Mr. Chairman, starting at the point of what do we do without Community Health Link? Gee, something passed us by.

No, where was our efforts to keep the agency open? and to keep the agency going in serving the needs of the people in the city of Worcester. So I don't like what I've seen so far and I don't mind saying I don't trust UMass Memorial on this particular issue, and that's why I want to be part of these discussions with members of the union, workers, with the hospital, with the agencies that are gonna take over, many stakeholders, and with some of the people we've heard tonight and a few weeks ago, some of the people who have availed themselves of the services, and their opinion really counts with me, because so many people say the services they've gained and gotten at the Community Health Link have been so good. So if they're that good, and I know they are that good, then why are we closing it? Let's start with UMass Memorial with that question. Why are we closing it?

What can we do first to keep it open? If there's nothing we can do to keep it open, then we'll go to their position on it. But it's not my position that we close this agency. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, so we'll take a roll call vote on this.

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman.

Who's that, Councilor King?

Yes sir, if I could just for two minutes. Second time, go ahead. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just wanna state that I certainly have advocated over the years with respect to the closing of many of these programs. Burncoat Family Center was one that I didn't mention. I did mention Motivating Youth Recovery. And these are family matters, Mr. Chairman. The one thing I've learned here in the city of Worcester that we are a family. Family of Neighborhoods, a family that has concerns for the greater good. And as I stated, I've certainly challenged UMass. And I want to state also for the record that UMass has been working with the state I've become aware to transition for this transition that there's a board appointed to do that. Again, we will be meeting with stakeholders. But the key to this, Mr. Chairman, is that we need to keep

90% of staff in order to have those programs function effectively. When we reduce the substance use beds, those weren't replaced. Mr. Chairman, all you have to do is go down to UMass or any hospital's emergency room. that's where folks end up. And that comes at a high cost for us as a Commonwealth, as a municipality. and it also creates a treatment process that is not So, you know, again, Open Sky is a local community connected and strong agency, and I have the utmost intention to work with all stakeholders to realize not just maintaining these services, but expanding them. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. We'll take a roll call vote. No set. Roll call.

Councilors Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou?

Yes.

Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra?

Yes.

Ojeda?

Yes.

Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes. Okay, we have committee items next. We have 8A, motions that Thank you for coming out tonight and see you soon. So we have... I'm sorry, so take some of these collectively unless anybody has an issue. 8A.

Mr. Chairman, did we take the other item that was held last week on the co-response?

The what? Which one was that, what number? Hang on.

It was supposed to be first order of business. Was that one, was CHL, and then the Worcester PD co-response?

9-8, you said? Request. Yeah, we're coming up to that, I think.

Did I miss it?

I'm not sure. No, is it next? Okay, my apologies, Mr. Chairman.

We have a bunch of first items of business. We have about 30 of them. So if I go by it, we'll go back to it. Okay. Okay, so 8A, motion to accept and adopt, 9A, motion to accept. What?

What, 8A? I wanna say 2.

What's that? Okay, go ahead, Councilor Rosen. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman, I know this came out of committee, and it's unusual for the Councillors to speak on their committee reports, and as the Chair of Public Health working with Councilor King and Councilor Toomey, we had a very long and excellent hearing about legislation that's going to help us find more doctors who are primary care physicians here in Massachusetts and especially in the city of Worcester. I think what we heard in the last two years out of all the medical school graduates, 5% only, only 5% go into primary care. And we wonder why people in Worcester can't find physicians Many are retiring. The primary care physicians get paid so much less than those who specialize. So 5% is nothing because 95% of medical school graduates recently in the Massachusetts have gone into specialties.

They don't want to go into primary care. here. There's bills like these three all across the country. These three bills have been supported by many health agencies, by a couple of cities and towns, and they've come to us and they asked Worcester if we could support them. I'm not gonna go through all of them. You all have the backup, I think, for the third time. It must be about 50 pages long on the legislation. But at our meeting, we had Dr. Wayne Altman speak. He's from Tufts Medical. We had Dr. Hirsch, who used to be our medical director. We had our new commissioner of public health, Dr. Seema Dixit. And we had Fran Anthees. She's the chair of the Board of Health. and they did educate us about these three legislative bills and I just would like the Worcester City Council tonight to support them because it's going to help

find more physicians in the city, City of Western and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts who will specialize in primary care and that's so, so necessary. So your support is needed on this, and I think it's going to go through the legislature, and it's going to be good for the people and the city of Worcester. Thank you for the time.

Thank you, Councilor. Councilman Berman?

Just want to recuse myself.

Okay, just for the record, Council, Byrne has accused himself on 8A, so the motion is accepted to adopt. Mr. Chairman? Yes, Council King?

Thank you. I want to thank Councilor Rosen for his leadership in this particular matter. And I want to encourage the press that's covering this and I want to encourage folks to go to that public subcommittee meeting. That particular meeting had a host of professionals and experts on this subject matter. and, you know, there was some good comments and questions from Councilor Toomey, myself and Councilor Rosen and some related orders that came out. This is, again, you know as a frontline social worker I know exactly what the impacts are and you know some really good work went on there and you know I just encourage folks to take a look at it by the eye test. We can certainly see what the challenges are for people receiving care.

We know the challenges that we've had of experience with the hospitals reducing the service provision and the health care from Lemonster to Clinton to Marlboro, and Worcester becomes a hub. and it becomes challenging and often delayed treatment, delayed medical, mental health care can have life-consequencing This is very important and I encourage the press and I encourage the public to please go to that meeting. that was expertly chaired by Councilor Rosen to gather further information. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Bergman. Motion accepted to adopt. Roll call. Councilor Bergman's recused. Councilor Bilotta? Yes. Councilor Economou? Yes. Fasolo, yes, Councilor King, yes, Councilor Mitra, yes, Councilor Ojeda, yes, Councilor Rivera, yes, Councilor Rosen, yes, Councilor Toomey, yes, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, so I'll take some of these collectively unless anybody wants to put one up. A 9A motion to accept.

I'd like to speak on 9A, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This crisis response, the co-response team was initiated via a million dollars that was invested.

Councilor King, I think you were referring to 13A? Oh, I thought we were on 9A, you know? Have I got the wrong thing here? 9A is on public safety, short spotter. 13A, I think you're referring to 13A, request management by the Council with a report concerning the current process. Okay, go ahead, 13A.

You wanna go to 13A?

Yeah, go ahead, yeah, since you're on it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, again, this came out of City Manager's executive order. in response to matters that I filed and the council supported relative to a differential response for the Worcester PD. for Mental Health Calls. I've continually asked for metrics and data as relates to this, and I don't believe we've quite received that yet. So I appreciate the spirit of this particular order, Mr. Chairman, I do. I want to state that I have met with a number of folks at CHL, crisis Response folks, Crisis Service folks, and more regarding this over the years and it came to my surprise when I heard that it was being sunsetted and transitioned into another form particularly because that pilot program that lasted for a year we had allocated a million dollars for

that they were just at the point where things were kind of coming together and they were looking for some more funding, some more staffing, some increased hours, et cetera. it ended up operating at a loss. My understanding is that the city manager pivoted and, you know, the services. Initially, there was a two-person response team dedicated to 911 calls only. We were using CRT vans with very clearly identifying uniforms and logos on the van. That's all gone, Mr. Chairman. These folks were dispatched by 911 seven days a week, only from 3 to 11 p.m.

and there was consults, clinical consultation that was used. I'm not sure. I know it's kind of morphed over into a management oversight with the current you know structure of it and you know I know there was a number of informational gathering sessions with other towns and cities with the Springfield Police Department, Brookline, Braintree, Police Department. And they had individuals from CHL. Once again, this all intersects. There was questions about how this came forward. it's all connected Mr. Chairman. CHL was representing and working hard to be present at community meetings, meetings throughout the city. and there was also a number of training that went on with Worcester PD.

They attended regular roll call attendance and developed in connections between the CRT members and the police departments. And I can tell you this, Mr. Chairman, What's been reported by those folks is that they developed a great working relationship with 15 police officers that they worked with specifically regularly, often being requested on the scene when they're on. And there was some data that being tracked. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion that we get that data. with respect to the percentages that folks that went inpatient or able to remain in the community, diversion from arrests, how many times those folks came in contact with the team, Mr. Chairman. I know that as they're transitioning, as they transitioned, I had a number of questions.

And again, going back to CHL, going back to the critical services that they provide, Mr. Chairman, the mobile crisis intervention service has the youth mobile crisis and an adult team for folks under 21 for youth and above 21. But there's still a wait list for that. There's always a need. for more services, Mr. Chairman. You know, I want to again state that, you know, Some of those calls by the Wikipedia were designated high priority. And even though the things were transitioned, they did the best that they could. You know, and again, there was a firehouse component to the CRT response versus the MCI response that had someone go out within 60 minutes, Mr. Chairman.

And once again, as I stated previously-

Yeah, I'm wrapping up. I'm wrapping up.

Just be careful more when you say, I know this is in litigation, so.

Well, I don't know what's in litigation. Mr. Chairman, I haven't seen any litigation. I'll make a motion that we go into executive session to see what our litigation strategy is. I did have some concerns about this bring board forward, but I'm sure that the chair of public safety took all that into consideration. Therefore, I'm comfortable speaking upon it. Mr. Chairman, I will also say I'm hopeful that we can make sure that this is a priority of this administration and I would like some more data brought forward. And if the fact is that if we're going to try to hide behind a lawsuit when we're looking to provide services, we can't do that, Mr. Chairman. With regards to strategy and what have you, that's fine. but it's time for transparency. It's trying to do a public service in the interest of public health. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Okay, Councilor Toomey.

Mr. Chair, since we're on this out of order, I'd like to speak on my order so that it's separate from all of this other discussion. This order is about understanding where we are today and where we need to go to continue to better respond to mental health emergencies as a city. I'm asking for a clear picture of what is currently in place. What are we doing today? This has nothing to do with past practices or issues or whatever. It's like what are we doing today? What protocols are being used by the police department in emergency communications when a mental health call comes in? How often are clinicians and mental health professionals involved in those responses today? I do know for a fact that we've got about 80 hours worth of clinicians that are working with our police department. I want to know what training is being provided to officers and dispatchers around crisis intervention currently. Understanding effectiveness. What data do we have on outcomes?

Are we seeing reductions in repeat calls and hospitalizations and arrests? Where are we seeing success? Where are the gaps? And focus on coordination. How integrated is the response? and from all of the anecdotal information that I've gotten from people that the crisis intervention team is doing a great job out there in the community. What systems are in place for real-time coordination between police, dispatch, and mental health? And looking ahead for expansion opportunities, I'd like to ask a report to include recommendations for continued expansion including increasing the co-response teams, our clinician availability, enhancing dispatch triage, strengthening partnerships with local providers and exploring alternative response models where appropriate. And what resources, staffing, funding, or partnership are needed to expand are the state and federal opportunities that we should be leveraging.

And the goal here is simple, to ensure that every resident experiencing mental health crisis has met the most appropriate, effective, and compassionate response safely. and that's the important thing. And understanding that our current efforts and identifying opportunities to grow them is the first step in getting there. and the reality of all of this is is that we need to state the facts of what's actually happening now so that we can continue to improve. That's my order and that's what it was about.

Thank you.

Thank you, so we'll send that to the manager. Mr. Chairman.

I'd like to speak.

Councilor Bilotta.

Thank you. I want to thank Councilor Toomey for this order. And we talked about the need for more data. And I think we can glean some data from Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, an analysis of police response data from 2024 and 2025. And in that, there was an analysis of the clinical co-response model. And I think the data really clearly shows that we need to invest more in the clinical co-response model. There are about I don't know if people recall from that report the city was kind of broken down into different grids into grids there were about Councilor, there were 39 full squares when the city was 39 full squares when the city was 39 full squares when the city was cutting the grids, and about 28 of cutting the grids, and about 28 of cutting the grids, and about 28 of those grid squares had more than 22 those grid squares had more than 22 those grid squares had more than 22 calls for co-response. calls for co-response.

I'm glad that Chief Saucier is in there doing more to implement crisis training for the recruits and for WPD, but I think obviously we can't expect WPD to be everything. and I think it's important that we invest more in the clinical co-response to help WPD manage these calls and also to help those in need that might not be need police intervention. So I think I would like to urge the administration to continue to grow this program. And I have one question to the chair of the city manager. clinical co-response is happening right now with this just to clarify is that with with WPD is is there a program happening or did that sunset I just unclear

Mr.

Manager? Yeah, through the chairs of the council, there is some level of work that's happening with the PD. And again, we're working through a report to be able to bring to the council. we just want to be sensitive to some of the details that are provided in that report as we go through the process of the litigation issue that we have that we were served and we were sued as a city for this purpose. and so we want to be mindful to that we have some meetings coming up to address some of those issues and the litigation as well but again we look forward to bringing forward and being transparent with this information to the council.

Thank you, so I'll send that to the manager. Councilor Rosen.

You gotta be fast around here, Mr. Mayor. I just wanna say I support this 100%. Six or seven years ago when My last time on the city council, I filed an order very similar, and I mentioned what was called the CAHOOTS program. It's been for decades in Eugene, Oregon. Probably some remember that. Now, what we're doing now, I think some of that did come out of that, so I'm glad that happened, but I've lost track. I was off the council for four years. I lost track. I'm looking forward to your reports Mr. Manager on this. I think it's a great item and I'll compliment Councilor Toomey and even Councilor King, many of the comments he said are certainly important as are Councilor Bilotta. So look forward to hearing more. And if anyone wants to read a little bit good stuff about things like this, people going out and working with the police, not taking over for the police, not interfering with the police, but just adding another layer of help for people who are suffering mental health crises

the Coutts program is an excellent example because it's been going there in Eugene, Oregon for decades. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I just have a point of clarification.

Councilor King.

Just through the chair to the administration, with respect to the mobile crisis response and CHL, are they currently involved with co-response with police? Are they not involved?

Mr. Manager? Through you, Chair, to the Council, CHO currently is not involved in any co-response with police right now.

And what agency is, through the Chair?

To the chair, to the council, my understanding is right now we have staff that works in the department and there's some clinicians and CIT officers that help in that. So again, those are the details that we look to bring forward as part of the report.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. So the CHL, there was not a pivot to a different agency or to CHL to assume different duties once that pilot closed. I thought that pilot closed in January of 2025.

Yeah, through the chair to the council. So one of the challenges of the CHL has to do with the ability to how do you fee for service and how do you bill for this product? and so there's a certain certification that an agency needs to have to be able to do this work and that's what's been at kind of in the discussion between UMass, between CHL, the state entities, et cetera. That is what we've been trying to kind of put together in a report that we can submit to council. so we can articulate with specificity some of the challenges and some of the issues that we would have to face moving forward. A lot of that may be addressed as part of this effort that's happening with THL and their transition with the actual programs that they're going through. and so again it's related to a particular certification it's basically called CBHC in which they are able to bill for these types of services.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. It's my understanding that you know there was a deficit of a few hundred thousand dollars during the pilot program and that in order to effectively do the work we need three times the amount, three times the one million that we put in to have some increased efficacy with regards to co-response, Mr. Chairman. So again, I just want to be clear. This report, it's written kind of funny. I'm assuming that it's not just going to be process, that we're going to get an idea of what was in what encompassed the pilot co-response model that we had and what's not being replicated by CIT? and what have you. Because we need to make sure that we're filling those gaps. We know that the community needs it.

It's a public health and public safety issue, Mr. Chairman. If that's not included in this report, in this order, I would make an order, a motion to make sure that the gaps are outlined and identified, not the gaps, but the structure of the pilot. and everything that it pertained and any documentation and what's currently going on and what's not currently going on. as a comparative analysis, Mr. Chairman. That would be in motion because I'm not sure if that's in the order. If that's encompassed in the order, I withdraw my motion. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr.

Manager?

Yeah, just quickly, there's been multiple orders submitted over a number of months and probably over a year related to this matter. So my intent in this report is to provide a comprehensive I'm trying to be mindful to the fact that we're also as part of a litigation process as well which we're trying to address but this report is trying to be it's trying to provide a comprehensive outlook including some of the data points that have been requested in previous because that we've had a number of orders from multiple counselors for a period of time and so we want to be make sure that we provide a comprehensive report

Mr. Chairman, that's good. So I'll leave my motion on the floor as stated given the fact that he's going to do that anyway. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor Toomey.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. To be very clear, this motion that I filed here is about where we are right now and what we need to do moving forward. and not discussing about all of this other stuff. It's like, let's move on and create a great program here within the department, including, excuse me?

I'm sorry, I thought my mute was on. I said flying blind, my bad. I thought my mute was on.

so it's it's basically moving forward how do we continue to by the way I did say with what we currently have we've got over 80 hours of crisis intervention clinicians that are on the streets with our police officers and responding themselves as well. So that's what I want is the facts of what we're doing now and how we can improve for the future.

Send that to the manager. Roll call.

Councilor Bergman, yes, Bilotta, yes, Economou, yes, Fresolo, yes, King, yes, Mitra, yes, Ojeda? Yes. Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty?

Yes. So we'll take a few items collectively here. 9A, motions to accept. 10A through Z, motions to accept. 11A through 11Z, motions to accept. And 12A to 12H, motion is to accept, roll call.

Yes. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. Yes, yes. Mitra?

Yes.

Ojeda?

Yes.

Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty?

Yes. 13B, request the Standing Committee on Education to invite the Chief Financial Officer of the Worcester Public Schools and Chief Financial and Operational Officer to the upcoming meeting for the purpose of the administration providing a presentation relative to the Worcester Public Schools budget. for fiscal year 27. Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is not a necessary, I'm gonna say it for the record, this is not a necessary Order. The reason that the order was filed is that we historically get together with the school side just before budget and kind of go through things. We've had an issue a few years ago where it was brought to the council that we weren't quite doing enough. And the council had not been approached by any stakeholders from the city side. So this is an attempt to circumvent that and make sure there's transparency and communication. Mr. Chairman, I only filed this as sort of a double notice. It's not necessary to file it. It was just there so that we can kind of let the public know this is what we're doing in addition to when it's posted for the actual committee meeting. Mr. Chairman, we've had some challenges working with the school side.

I'm looking forward to um we're actually we're going to schedule something soon we've we've tried probably six seven eight different dates that haven't worked out and time is running dang Mr. Chairman I'm wondering if item 15.26 can be um added as a motion, maybe as an amendment to this order. That particular item is the most recent financial report update from Tim McCarthy, the Chief Financial Officer, in this particular report. It's noted that we were looking at a decrease of approximately $2.7 million in budgeted state aid with impacts on the municipality and Worcester Public Schools, Mr. Chairman. It goes on to talk about the $10 million that we've paid from the Sewer Reserve, the $10.5 million in new debt services, et cetera. Talks about intergovernmental state aid.

et cetera, all of these in local receipts, all those things impact our discussions, Mr. Chairman, in the Education Committee that I chair. Mr. Chairman, I would ask that, I'm not sure if it's by way of a motion that we attach, a motion that this be attached, to this order so that we can move forward and get that into committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, that usually goes to MO. Let's talk to Mitra.

Mr. Chairman, well then, can I have the first page? I like the documentation indicating how it affects the school budget.

Okay, so send that to, Dr. Mitra will send that to your committee, but the Councilor?

Yeah, that should be fine.

Okay, it'll be fine to send the first page to Councilor's Committee. All those in favor, I'm sorry, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Mr. Chairman, point of order. Is that still going to municipal operations?

Yeah, the report, but we asked for the one page that you asked for.

He's getting it though, I wasn't trying to block it, I just want to make sure it's going there.

No, okay, we have 14A, the 14B, We're going to refer to Parks and Recs. We'll take these collectively unless somebody has something. 14C to 14J, refer to Public Works. and 14U to 14W, set of hearing from May 5th, 2026 for National Grid and Verizon, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Okay, we have 15.2 appointments. Recommending a reappointment of John DiCicco and Paul Frankel to the Elections Commission. Roll call.

Councilors Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra. Yes. Ojeda. Yes. Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey. Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes. Next item is 15.3A, recommend the pass of the proposed safety ordinance, salary ordinance to enable the regrade of the medical director job classification. The motion is to advertise the proposed ordinance. Roll call.

Yes. Councilors Bergman. Yes. Bilotta. Yes. Economou. Yes. Fresolo.

Yes.

King.

Yes.

Mitra.

Yes.

Ojeda.

Yes.

Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey.

Yes.

And Mayor Petty.

Yes, 15.4a, recommend the adoption of the order relative to the acquisition of the 15.0 Malia Road, FKA, Nelson Place, for conservation purposes, roll call.

Councilors Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou?

Yes.

Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty

Next item up is 15.78, Transmitting Information and Communication relative to 2526, Winter Operations. Councilor? Economou?

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to talk about potholes again. No, I'm just joking. I heard my colleague say it. I just want to commend the Public Works Department, the Commissioner, his staff for coming forward with this report. I think it addresses a lot of issues that we all faced this past winter when it came to snow removal, ice removal across the city. Looking at the work that's been done with the men and women of DPW, they've done all they can. It's incumbent upon us as a body

to make sure that we are providing the resources needed to keep up with some of the equipment, keep up with pay structures. And I do know this, over the last few years, we have had milder winters. and I know it forced a lot of contractors who have had equipment to decommission that equipment instead of paying the high insurance costs. Insurance costs are tremendous in this field right now. And I know it affected a lot of the smaller guys. It's like it just wasn't worth operating. So I appreciate the commissioner seeing that and forecasting. the need for more equipment, the need for a higher pay scale for our private contractors. The one thing I was most disappointed with actually

was maybe the lack of communication within the department during our snow season. But again, I'm happy with the action the commissioner has taken to address that. and I'll certainly be asking as we get into August September how we're looking for next season because I think it's going to be crucial. I certainly do not want a repeat of this winter. It was a tough winter, a tough winter for all of us on the council. And I'm not trying to be overly critical. but I do look forward to the action items that the Commissioner has brought forward and again, I just wanna say thank you Commissioner for bringing these all forward to better our city, thank you.

Thank you Councilor, Councilor Rivera followed by Councilor Bergman.

I also want to echo Councilor Economou's. This is great information for us to have. I guess I just have a question. First, I want to read because I think the conclusion states perfectly. collectively these recommendations provide a clear path forward in strengthening the municipality's winter operation program to better align performance with evolving service expectations and needs. The Department of Public Work is prioritizing these actions and will work throughout the coming year to implement improvements across operations, Staffing, Communication, Fleet Management, and Technology. And my question to Staffan is, I was made aware, or I was told, and I just want to ask a question for clarification purposes. I can ask City Manager or I can ask Commissioner Westerland, it doesn't matter, but to the Chair, to the administration,

How many jobs in a DPW does residents have to take a civil service test?

Mr. Manager?

To the Chair, to the Council, it's probably the majority of them. We're looking over 300 jobs, if not over 400 jobs that require civil service. that have to be taken, laborers, foremans, et cetera. But I have the commissioner here who could probably clean it up based on my, please.

Through the Chair, good evening, and I'm glad we're not talking about potholes, thank you very much. Although we are a civil service department, there are no tests required for any of the positions related to civil service, unlike the police department.

Mr. Manager? Through the chair to the council. They're all through civil service, but the civil service process does not require testing. Okay. What they do is they put their name on a list and they go through that process and they sit in that list until that list has gone through and they go through every single individual verifying their current status in regards to what their application status they look at backgrounds, etc. They do a full overview of the individual and then they have the opportunity to interview with the department that gets selected. Once that list is complete, then you can call the next list and the next list, etc. It's a whole civil service process. Again, this body here voted and supported a home rule petition requesting to be removed from civil service which gives us the ability to if we needed someone tomorrow and we posted the job today we can try to figure out a way to get that moving much quicker and not have to go through that list but be able to get people employed that civil service

Home Rule Petition that this body unanimously supported is currently held right now at the state level. It's under And so we've been working with the delegation to try to find ways out of that. But again, there's no test. It's just a civil service list that they get involved. But majority of the employer, over 300, 400 employers or so, they all go through that civil service kind of list.

Okay, I appreciate the clarification. Thank you very much. I look forward to a great year of fixing up roads and streets and stuff. Thank you.

Thank you. We have Councilor Bergman for our Councilor Bilotta and Mitra.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I guess I'm going to have more comments than questions, and I'll save the questions for the most part. to our budget hearings coming up. But I wouldn't know, and I do appreciate the report. It is a detailed report, as my colleagues have said. It's thorough, and it does answer a lot of questions. Toomey at least raises a few as well. In 2017, 2018, we had 91.9 inches of snow. Substantial winter. Actually one of the heavier winters on this list. We spent $5.5 million, almost $5.6 million. Leap forward to this year, we had 79.4 inches of snow, slightly less. but similar, and we spent almost twice that amount, over $10 million. Now, I understand costs have gone up in six years. I understand we pay a lot of the people that are doing the work more. I just have a hard time, we can again talk about this, More at the budget time.

I just have a hard time believing we spent twice as much money six years later for less amount of snow. Similar, but less snow. And the kicker to me in all that is I was on this council 2017, 2018. I don't recall every phone call I got, but I can tell you, I got a lot more phone calls this year for twice the money that was spent than I did six years ago for half the money that was spent. and three, that's the problem. Problem is I don't mind budgeting more and we'll talk about that during the budget time, but what I mind is budgeting more when there's more complaints. If there's less complaints, that's fine. But there's more complaints, so that's an issue for me. I would like, however, to make a suggestion, actually an ask, of the Commission. He doesn't have to respond now. But when we come back at the budget time, the one thing I don't see in this report that would be helpful to me is I do see a reference to center line mile, which I'm assuming is a way to measure

how many miles of roadways being plowed and treated. There are no breakdowns, to me at least, of the cities like Boston, Manchester, New Hampshire, Springfield that have similar amounts of central lane miles. There's no breakdown on what's their cost per center lane mile compared to Worcester's. I'd like to know that. I understand the terrain might be different. Situations aren't going to be apples to apples always. But how much are we spending per center lane mile versus Boston, Manchester, and Springfield. That would be one of my asks coming towards budget time, which hopefully it's about a month off, so you should have, commissioners should have plenty of time hopefully to get us that information. I look forward, again, more robust conversation in a few weeks down the road. Thank you.

Thank you. Councilor Buona.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner, for this report. It's good to know how we handled this winter, what the challenges were, and I really appreciate the clear roadmap of what we need to do to improve and certainly look forward to supporting that come budget season one thing that a question I just had related to sanding, because I know there were some real challenges with getting sanding after the first big storm up on Scrimgeour Tower Road. Tate, Merrill Road, up in the Indian Hill, Indian Lake neighborhood. And I noticed in the report from 2016 that the rate of pay for Sanders was one of the lowest ones like compared lower than uh where Worcester was remained pretty competitive for other equipment uh compared to other is is are we looking this year um and maybe this might be premature are we looking to increase the rate for sanding?

Because I feel like that was a bit of a challenge like this last winter.

through the chair that's certainly one of the things that we're going to be looking at the recommendation will come later towards the fall to this City Council for recommended rates and in my report what I did suggest is that we need to not only be competitive but we need to look at perhaps matching what MassDOT is paying for their larger pieces of equipment that's where we suffer most in this city is larger pieces of equipment and when we had a MassDOT that reached out for the two major storms and they brought in trucks that they were not using. They were large, large dump trucks with wing plows and with belly scrapers and with Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Mitra.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, to you, to Commissioner. Commissioner, thank you for the report. It's well written, very nicely presented, gives us a good idea about where you were and where you stand. I'm just going to touch base on a couple of things that you have written in your report and some of them I'd probably like to advise you that something could probably be done that might help. I like the SWOT analysis that you have done. which includes the strength, the weakness, the opportunities and threats that we have. We have consulted with many of your employees and other people. I just want to know if you have also consulted the Police Department, the School Department, the Road Transit Authorities, how they felt about this winter and where they stand, have you taken their opinion? That was one of the questions I had. I also want to touch base on another report that you have said about the progress This is progress since 2016.

What you are saying overall, the comparison of 2016 shows a program that continues to perform well and has met incremental improvements but still operating with many of the same structural challenges identified a decade ago. Again, same thing I echo with my councilor colleague that we have, you know, the budget has gone up, but we have the similar structural challenges. What needs to be done? Why is that because we have given so much extra money? I think that there should have been some improvement and then going to your last conclusion We were saying that collectively these recommendations provide a clear path forward in strengthening the Municipality's Winter Operations Program to better align performance with evolving services, expectations and needs. The Department of Public Works is prioritizing these actions

and we'll work throughout the coming year to implement improvements across operations, staffing, Communication, Fleet and Management, and Technology. I'm always of the opinion that this is good, that we need to improve these things. But I always advocate that let's have a goal. Let's have something called smart goal, where we have a specific, measurable, attainable, relevant, and time bound. If you say, I need staff. Can you tell me how many? What are they going to do? Cleaning the snow or potholes? What is their job? And is it attainable? Is it something that they can do? Is it relevant? Yes, it is. and it give me a time that by next October I need 50 more people. So it's like a smart goal, specific, you know, what you need them for. and it's measurable, the 50 people. It's attainable. Yes, I don't want 1,000 people.

You said, yeah, 50, that can be done. It's relevant. And give us a time bound. This conclusion tells me that, yes, we need it, but I don't think there is any end to when, how, how we are going to really get this, all these things that we need to improve. So it will be helpful probably if you think and give us some idea about for each item, technology, What can we do incorporating all these elements which I call the smart goals? So that probably would be helpful for us to Work on it and give you more. I think report is very good. Gives us where we stand. Gives us, you know, we had a harsh winter. But again, I echo with, you know, we're given also a lot more money to meet with the winter. We don't know how the winter will be in coming years, but I think we need to be ready for it because people expect that when given so much money, we are kind of... O'Hara. Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just have a few questions. So again, this information actually provides us with a lot of action steps. and then just starting off with workforce and staffing, establish a more sustainable staffing model. through the chair to the commissioner. It says, the second one on the actions, expand cross-training to increase flexibility across crews and assignments. This is interesting to me because When would that take place? And something like this obviously would mean if there's going to be training, we can't create snow to make it snow in the fall or even now. So how would this training take place?

Commissioner. Sorry, through the chair. That training will probably will take the three following major steps. The first is that we just started our first CDL training class. that is an in-house training that's administered through the HR department and we've got six people in the class that With the proper training, they will have obtained their CDL license before next winter. So that will be helpful. We always continue to cross-train not only through the CDL program but with new employees on how a plow operates, what the plow routes look like, what the expectations are. and the third part is the training of our inspectors. This past year we had new inspectors,

that what was brought out through the interviews is that we need to do a better job of helping the inspectors to understand what their role is during a storm and how to deploy the resources that they have available, the limited resources, to serve their areas.

Council.

Okay, thank you. So with this new trained staff, to the chair, to the commission, When they're sent out for the first time, will they be by themselves or they'll be there with someone? Obviously, they'll be trained leading up to it, but again, when the snow falls, it's very different from what they've been trained, right? It's just like everything else.

Through the chair, that is something that we will train in advance. And then for the first few storms, they would go out and partner with an experienced driver.

OK, great. Thank you. Moving on to two fleet and equipment. under the actions strengthen maintenance capacity to improve equipment readiness during storm events. Can you please explain to me what that actually means? What does that look like?

Sure. Through the chair, when I started last February, there were four mechanics in the central garage. Currently, we have five mechanics in the central garage. We've added one mechanic to the sewer garage and one mechanic to the water garage. So we need to continue to work with HR. As the city manager explained, we need to continue to pull those lists for MERs. So that we've got more personnel available to be able to accomplish those repairs during storms

Okay, and then during these storms, are all these mechanics available? Or are these, these are just full-time mechanics, right? They're not working in other departments. And are they available throughout these storms?

Through the chair, as with all other employees, overtime for the mechanics is voluntary. So they are available if they wish to work.

Okay. Do we see that as an issue during the winter season? Is that something that we run into where they're just not available?

Through the Chair, as with all employees, that was one of my recommendations is that we look at either requiring overtime or better incentivizing overtime for employees. Yes, it is a problem for us. When there is not a declared emergency, we have a swing from when it's a declared emergency, we have up to 72 city trucks on the road. When it's not a declared emergency, we could have as few as two dozen.

Okay, okay. Yeah, I just see that as something that's difficult and it definitely puts us behind. on being able to get those machines operating quickly and back on the road. So I'm not sure if this is something that, you know, scheduling wise, hours wise, or whatever it may be, being able to make sure that we actually have, like you mentioned, at least maybe two available at all times. So I'm hoping that that's something that we can make happen. So thank you for that one.

Mr. Manager, would you like to add to that?

Sure. Through you, Chair, I just want to add related to this. and the overtime situation. You know, one of the things that this council body did also last year, actually not this past one, so the winter before that, is we created a different incentive structure or stipend structure because historically, depending on the vehicle or depending on the size of the vehicle, you will receive a different stipend. This council body increased all the stipends. So no matter what vehicle you drove, you received the same stipend. So there was an effort by this council body to try to improve that stipend for our employees. But again, something that we still need to evaluate because the voluntary component related to overtime has become a little bit of a challenge.

Thank you. To the chair, to the commissioner, again, another question on the facilities. Essentially, I've replaced undersized and deteriorated salt storage facilities to ensure adequate capacity and reliable operations. I don't think that's something that's in the budget now, or maybe it is, but when do you see that taking place? Again, the reason why I'm asking all these questions is I don't want the winter to come any time sooner, but we need to make sure we're prepared if we have all these action items. And some of these action items I'm noticing are very important, obviously the mechanics. But if we had an issue with some of the salt storages, how are we gonna be able to address this before the next winter.

Through the Chair, we don't have yet the capital appropriations that will be recommended, but we did put in for a request to have all three salt sheds replaced. That would be a tall order for us, but we're committed to doing that because what we saw this winter was with back to back storms or long duration storms, Like many other communities, we were We were hard pressed to keep our salt sheds full. Fortunately, the folks that came before me, they saw the need to put up a fourth salt shed up off of Ballard Street. that was our are reserved for salt. So at the end of this winter, that reserve was empty.

So there's a definite need to not only increase the size of the existing salt sheds and replace them because they are falling over, frankly. But also, we're looking at the possibility of adding another SALT Salt Shed or Salt Storage Area over on the west side of the city because the time it takes to get from the airport, for example, back to the Salt Shed and back to the airport, by that time we've lost those roads. So we need to have a better source of salt on that side of the city.

OK, thank you. I think something that just comes to mind is you know I think we have already all heard about the closing of Vandemaria and just popped in my mind if there's an opportunity they may have a salt shed or some an opportunity or some space where We can use it. It's not too far from the airport. It's probably a closer ride. If that's an opportunity to look into, if there's something there that we can use. Again, just trying to get ahead of it while we're discussing it. and then when it comes to communication and coordination, there's a lot here on all these action items. Establish clear roles and responsibilities during storm operations, strengthen dispatch protocols real time, Enhance public communication strategies to provide consistent. Can you just give me an idea of how would you how do you plan on approaching this? Is this going to be more of a

Full department type training. Is this going to be including the drivers? Is this going to include any new drivers? I don't know the time frame of when you hire new drivers do the snow plowing. But obviously, this is one of probably the most important things. It's communication and coordination. This is where all the councils receive the calls throughout the winter months. How are we going to make sure that we are strengthening these communications during the snowstorms, especially when we have the new drivers that we're trying to reach out.

Through the Chair, this will be to your list of questions of who this will apply to. This will apply to everybody from me down through the newest, earliest, latest drive latest plow driver hired so the the big thing here under communication is the internal communication instead of going to the for the folks that are out inspecting. Instead of going to their supervisor or their root supervisor, they would go directly to the director So that communication really put the director under a lot of duress that didn't need to happen. There are plenty of other people that can be called before you get to the director level. So that will be clarified. The inspectors will also be clear on who they should call. Plow drivers will be clear on who they should call.

We're going to be working, we're working right now to ensure that we're ready, better prepared for next winter. So all of that will be happening between now and that first snowflake.

Is there, to the chair, to the commission, is there an orientation that happens for the new Plow Truck drivers? Or is it just more of the director would just explain to them expectations? Because every year just something new comes up, something road, an issue that you guys identify and you want to look forward to next year. I just want to know what type of conversation is had with these truck drivers, cloud truck drivers?

Through the Chair, it's not only an orientation when they first start, but if they're going to be selected to work a plow route, they are all trained so that they understand that, number one, what the expectations are. Number two, how to work and operate a plow. And number three, what their plow routes are that they're assigned to.

Okay, thank you. I appreciate it. I mean, like I said, there's a lot of action steps here and I think it's important for the residents to know that everybody sees it. You see it in your department and you're taking full responsibility on a lot of these things and you're passing it down to those that work in your department. I think it's important for them to hear how these things are going to be done in somewhat of a timeframe. So I appreciate the work and I look forward to the next steps. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to, you know, in wrapping up, I just want to say, which I've neglected to say earlier, was the one thing I really appreciate the most is that you spoke to other members of your team whether it be inspectors or the men and women out in the field to get an idea with their sense of things. And they brought clear items to the table that they felt needed to be addressed. Communication being one of them, equipment being another one. And I appreciate that you came forward with the report and the action plan that you came forward with. if anything, at least now for us on the council, it gives us a better understanding when we speak to the manager when we're at budget session to make sure that we're looking at these items to fulfill these items to make all of our lives a lot better not just here in this floor but the entire city so I just want to commend you for doing that.

I want to commend the men and women for being out there and being part of the process because I think that does make a big difference. Thank you.

Through the Chair, I appreciate the kind words from all the Councilors. I've got 40 years experience with plowing, managing, directing snow removal, but only one year in the city of Worcester. So it was important for me to interview those 12 employees who have a combined 222 years of experience in plowing the city of Worcester. So they came forward. They were very transparent. They were very forthcoming. And that's where a lot of these recommendations came from. So thank you.

Thank you. So send that to committee. Roll call. Thank you, Commissioner. I appreciate it and the efforts of everyone. And just make sure that report stays active, not like the 2016 report that seemed to have disappeared.

Councilors Bergman, Yes, Bilotta, Yes, Economou, Yes, Fresolo, Yes, King, yes, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, next item is 15.10A, Transmitting Information and Communication Road to the Review of Eight Conceptual Designs for the Elm Park Master Plan. I'll send that to Veterans, Memorial, and Parks. Those in, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, next item is B, Transmitting Information and Communication to the 2025 Tree City USA Awards. I'm going to place that on file and congratulations again to the Parks Department. Much appreciated. Roll call.

Councilors Bergman, yes, Bilotta, yes, Economou, yes, Fresolo, yes, King, Yes. Mitra.

Yes.

Ojeda.

Yes.

Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey.

Yes.

And Mayor Petty. Yes. C, Transmitting Information and Communication Relative to Changes to Consumption and Sale of Alcoholic Beverages on Municipal Park Policy for Special and Supporting Events. Send that to Parks, Councilor Rivera.

It's one nice question. Sure.

Councilor Rivera? Go ahead.

To the chair, to the commissioner, if you could, I notice on the report there's certain parks that were named here, Greenhill Park, Young Park, Institute Park, and Columbus East Park. are, just to clarification, are these the parks only that's gonna be allowed to get a permit to sell alcohol? If there's an event, are these the parks only that'd be allowed?

Commissioner? Mr. Mayorger? Commissioner?

Through the chairs of the councilor, yes. It's only those specific parks. And they'll be required to have a permit event permit application or application permit for use of that particular park. And then the License Commission would deal with the alcohol piece and all the requirements on the alcohol side.

Mr. Major.

Yeah, I just want to add to that. One of the reasons just to anticipate why we chose these parks. I think one of the reasons we chose these parks is because these are the parks where We've had a number of requests in the past related to these parks. And so we felt as though these will be an opportunity for us to start to explore that. We had a number of requests many years ago for the common. We expanded to the common. So now this is an addition of expanding additional parks. If we see that this continues to be a success and is something that's able to be managed, then we can then explore other parks and working with the council on what those areas that are needed.

Thank you very much.

Thank you. Councilor Economou.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Just real quick, I just want to thank the commissioner, the manager, the parks team. Everybody involved, it's finally time that this has come forward. I feel it opens more doors than it closes here in our city. I think it offers more opportunity for more events. everything you would look for in a medium to big size city to make it vibrant add to the quality of life and and I'm just happy that it came forward. And again, I just wanna say thank you to the commissioner, the parks commissioner and his team at the parks department for doing an outstanding job here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, we'll send that to Veterans and the Parks. Roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, we are on 15.16A, Transmitting Information and Communication Road to the Transition to a Risk-Based Food Permitting Inspection System for Establishment Serving Food.

Sent to Public Health, Mr. Chim.

Councilor Rivera. Rivera.

So my question is either to the chair, to the administration, or the commissioner. clarification on this. This is good, great, but I just, and I'll just move to the question. Right here it says, the move to a risk-based system will increase the safety of food serving establishments throughout the city and bring our community more in line with the federal and state food safety regulations. I guess the question would be is what were we following before then? Chair to the administration. Commissioner. The risk-based system is new, I guess, for me.

To the chair, to the council. We do follow the current food codes. The way that this brings us more in line and allows us to do a better job is the implementation for the way that we are enforcing the codes. A risk-based system concentrates on the methods and types of foods being served the current system that we have right now is based on number of seats how we do our permitting through the risk-based system also it allows us to move towards the restaurants or the establishments that do not follow the processes that they should be. And it also allows us to reward the establishments that are following those processes.

Thank you for the clarification.

Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman. Councilor Rosamond, followed by Councilor Toomey.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Question, do we still, through the chits of the commission, do we still have like an ABC type of system. I remember years ago, we used to kind of rate these food establishments, mainly restaurants, I guess, but food establishments with some type of a letter grade. Do we still do it that way for the chair?

Commissioner?

To the Chair, to the Council, I am unaware of any letter rating system that we've used. I wasn't presented with one when I was here. We have been asked by constituents and several outside groups to see about the possibility of instituting a grading system. right now we're still looking at the way our setup is and moving towards the risk base will put us in a better position if we do want to move forward to a grading system in the future so through the chair right now we

deal with any violations of the establishment? Do we let people know eventually online or some other way? I was gonna say the scores, but you just said we don't have scores, but the results of the visits to these establishments. If we have a restaurant where we see a lot of rodent activity, Do we post anywhere or let people know or is it just it's between the city of Worcester and the establishment? Is that the way it is, just between those two parties and no one else is privy to the information through the chair?

Through the Chair to the Council. No, that is incorrect. Everybody is privy to that information. All of our inspections are public record. We do not currently have the ability to post All of our inspections online due to some privacy issues and public record items with items that may need to be redacted. However, through a records request, we can provide any inspection record to anybody that asks. We are looking at a potential through this method too. to require all of the establishments to have their most recent inspection on file and be able to offer it to anybody that asks while in the establishment.

Through the Chair, so someone who wanted to know about what's going on at Worcester restaurants would have to make a public records request for each one of those to find out what's going on? Commissioner?

Through the chair to the council, yes. That's how it works for most addresses and complaints, inspections, permits that we have through ISD is that we would get a request for that address or that business and then we would go through, look at all the records and produce anything that we would have that complies with the law.

Mr. Chairman, you probably remember which city council of several years ago always brought this up about posting, I think we all know, right? Former mayor of Worcester. I always brought it up and so I was asking the questions because I thought of all those discussions we've had over the years and it's something that I'm not gonna make an order of motion here, but something the administration might wanna consider is if possible, since we're changing the system here, I'm not looking so much for the ice cream truck or the ice cream stand or something like that, but I'm looking more at the restaurants and what their reputations are health-wise. And I think it's something that the public should have access to. like the former mayor wanted years ago. But I won't make the motion. It's just something I want to plant the seed in the administration. Maybe in the future we could start looking at that because it's public information. But there's a process that kind of discourages the public from maybe looking for that information.

So I've always been for transparency and for information and easy access to it. Whatever the public is supposed to have or can have, then they should have. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Councillor Bergman?

I'll be quick.

I'm sorry, Councillor Burns, Councillor Toomey was next.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Where did you say this was gonna be going, this report?

It's under public safety.

Yeah, I was gonna ask that it come to public safety, and also, Commissioner, thank you very much for this very good report. When it comes to public safety, could we have a further discussion on the hazard analysis critical control point strategies, so that we can understand what that process is a little bit more.

Through the chair of the council, yes, absolutely. We can go through all of the different steps and items that we're gonna be implementing through the new process.

That's great. Thank you so much. I appreciate it. Good job.

Thank you. Council Borgman.

Have to be even quicker this time, Mr. Chairman. Two comments, actually. First, I want to thank the commissioner. I do believe this is a much more Sensible practical way of going about doing the inspection. So I want to commend you and your department for taking the initiative to kind of change paths and do this in a much more sensible way. As we're at spring season, everybody's planting seeds everywhere. I know Councilor Rosen planted a seed. So I want to plant kind of a different seed with all due respect to my colleague, Councilor Rosen. I remember those discussions. And one of the things I brought up and I just want to repeat it again as we're kind of throwing out the idea of the grading system. The reason why I opposed it before and I would oppose it again if it ever came back to the council is I can envision a scenario where a competing restaurant to another restaurant has somebody, call up. Board of Health saying, I got a bad stomach ache last night. I think that restaurant has salmonella.

Well, can you prove it to us? Hey, my medical records are confidential, but I'm just telling you something's wrong in that restaurant. All of a sudden, how does somebody at the code department know whether that's true or not? Let's say they give a bad grade. How do you undo that bad grade? And then once you undo that bad grade, even though we all know the bureaucracy of undoing that bad grade, Great is going to be probably difficult if not insurmountable. Everybody in the city knows that restaurants serve food that caused somebody to have salmonella. You can't unring the bell. And unless it's proven, I don't know how you can start designating a grading system. And I worry, I really, really worry about the competitive nature of the environment and how false information can cause financial ruin. to businesses. I think the system we have now is a good system. I think anybody who has concerns could find out through the Board of Health whether there are issues in a restaurant. I think word of mouth

spreads quickly as far as who's clean and who's not a clean establishment. And I think the system that's going to be initiated or started now will go a long way in making sure that people know Meacher, Councilor Meacher.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much for the report and I think as a principle this is a great idea to go for safety is our concern always so see that everybody is safe The fees, is this significantly higher or lower than what you had before, the fee structure that we had?

Commissioner?

through the chair to the council. It is relatively the same. When we went through, as you can see in the memo that we put together, We have four original fee structures for the different types of restaurants. For the sizes, we had one to 99, over 100, and then over 500, and they were for $275, $350, I believe, and $450. And then we had one for $500 for $10,000. Establishments over 10,000 square feet. With the new fee structure that we're proposing, we actually lower the initial fee for risk level one down to $200. and then each one after that is $125 and that accounts for the two hour inspection for the inspector going out. So the fees themselves

are relatively the same with a minor increase at the top and an actual reduction for the lower establishments.

Thank you. Mr. Thuy, one more thing that when the inspectors go to these different places to inspect, Do they let them know ahead of time that they're coming or they're kind of, you know, go hidden?

Commissioner?

to the Chair, to the Council. They are random and they show up. These are safety inspections. We do not tell people when we're going to show up to catch them doing stuff wrong so we do have follow-up inspections if we do show up on the initial inspection and we do find violations or areas of correction then we do speak with them and we schedule a follow-up. But the initial inspections throughout the year, the compliance inspections aren't done on a scheduled basis.

Makes sense. Excellent way to do this. An excellent report. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Mitra. So send that to. Excuse me, Mr. Chair. Councilor Bilotta.

No, just wanna say again, thank you for this, I think this is, Good step forward and I think it'll definitely help small businesses especially like you said in the report where it mentions how low risk establishments could be paying more simply because they have a higher amount of seating so I think that and so forth. So I think it makes a lot of sense. And again, too, knowing that we have so many small businesses that are in neighborhoods, that I think it's great that we're making sure that there's stronger regulatory compliance and that it's more efficient for the to make sure that businesses are following the rules and the sanitary codes, especially businesses that are in buildings that also have residents. So I think it's important too to make sure that local businesses are doing what they can. So thank you.

OK, all set. Send that to public safety, roll call.

Burgman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King. Yes. Mitra. Yes. Ojeda. Yes. Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey. Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes, we have a couple of people in the audience. If we want to take a couple items out of order, 21A and 27B. These are both economic development items. The first one was 21A. upon the communication of the CM Manager, recommend the adoption of a resolution for a certified project designation, tax agreement, finance agreement for Resource Center, Booster, LLC. Motions accept and adopt on the roll call. Roll call.

Yes. Councilors Bergman. Yes. Bilotta. Yes. Economou. Yes. Fresolo. Yes. King. Yes. Mitra. Yes. Ojeda.

Yes.

Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey. Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes. Congratulations. Okay, we have 27B, Community Management Team Manager recommend the adoption of the Housing Development Certified Project slash Tax Increment Exemption Amendment for 39 Green Island Boulevard. So motion is to accept and adopt on the roll call. Roll call.

Mr. Mayor, on which item was that again?

Let me work it up and make sure I give you the right number. I'm sorry. That should go to Economic Development for a hearing. I'm sorry. 27B. Thank you.

Councilors Bergman?

Yes. Bilotta?

Wait a minute.

Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Okay, we can vote on it if we want.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman.

What's that?

Point of order. We just began the vote to select committee, I thought.

The first vote was to send it to, is to vote it. Then I thought it had to go to Economic Development for a hearing under the- Yeah, you said that it was going to committee.

That's what we voted, we're voting on.

What's that?

Mr. Mayor, I wrote that note down because those items have traditionally gone to Economic Development Committee. But if the Chief Development Officer thinks otherwise, then we'd be fine with that as well, I'm sure.

Mr. Dunn.

Yes, Mr. Mayor, so traditionally new applications for these projects go to the Economic Development Committee, but where this one is actually an amendment to a previously approved project, we felt like it was within the council's authority to take it up for a vote if you so choose.

Okay. Councilor Bergman, you're fine with that?

Yes, we had a good discussion at the last economic development meeting about issues related to this, and I think it could be voted on this evening.

Okay.

Mr. Chairman.

Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. To the chair, to the administration, if you could just state for the public what the amendment is.

Mr. Dunn.

Yes, through the mayor to the council as described in our communication. This is the what we refer to as the second residential building in the ballpark district. So this was a Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. Council of the City Council. up to date on the fact that Madison Properties has a purchase and sale agreement with the buyer GFI partners who will be constructing this. and their proposal with the project meets all of the requirements and expectations of the project as was approved by Council previously. And they are inheriting the same terms of that tax increment exemption. agreement that was previously approved by the council. So from our perspective, it's not what we would do with a new application, a new project that the council has never seen before where we would send that to committee.

This is an amendment to a previously approved project.

So just to change your name through the chair, basically.

Through the Chair to the Councilor, I would think it would be more accurate to say it's changing the project sponsor. It's not just like a name change. Madison Properties will not be involved in the ownership moving forward.

Yes. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I support voting on it.

Okay. So motion is accepted to adopt a roll call.

Yes. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra? Yes. Ojeda? Yes. Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey? Yes.

Yes. Okay, that brings us to finance items. I believe.

I'll go back. 15.26a.

Mr. Mayor, I believe the next item would be 15.26a.

1562A. Okay, we're on 15.35. There's a finance item, so let me know if you have any questions on any of them, but 15.35 A and B, 15.36 A through E, Motions adopted on the roll call.

Mr. Chairman, I'd like to pull out 15.36B and 15.36E. I have some questions.

Okay, so vote the other ones except for B and E at 15.36. Okay, hold up B and E, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, yes, Bilotta, yes, Economou, yes, Fresolo, yes, King, yes. Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes. So we have 15.36B, which is $3,323 to be transferred from fund damage settlements and appropriate to the cost center, transportation, mobility, and ordinary maintenance. Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It's a rather small sum, Mr. Chairman, so I'm not splitting hairs as it relates to that. It's more so the idea that this indicates that this funding will repair traffic signals that have been damaged by motor vehicle crashes so outside of the small amount. I just have a question as to why are we paying for this and I don't know if there's a pattern of this sort of thing where there's some sort of Motor Vehicle crash into something and we're paying for the repairs. I'm wondering if is there an insurance consequence to the motor vehicle operators in this particular instance, but also sort of across the board in like circumstances. Chair to the administration, just wanted to have that question answered.

Mr. McCarthy?

Why we're paying for this.

Mr. Chairman, through the chair, this is exactly the results of an insurance settlement. This is a reserve for appropriations account. So when an accident occurs that impacts city property, The city obviously has to go out and address whatever that issue may be, whether it's the vehicle or street light in this case. and then the insurance company has to go and reimburse the city for costs. Any reimbursements that come in are put into this reserve for appropriations account. that is then used to go back and as in this case fund the department, replace the funds that were taken out of the department to address the issue in the first place. These are accounts that simply reimburse departments for costs that have been covered by an outside insurance agency.

Thank you. And to the Chair, to the administration, do we have an idea how much is in that fund? And secondly, if there is an insurance settlement, I'm assuming that there's some flexibility with respect to whether or not we use it for that particular issue. You know, there could be potentially a situation where there's an accident, there's insurance coverage, and we choose not to perhaps fix it or it's not to that level. I'm just curious how that works through the chair. Ms. McCarthy?

So through the chair, I would have to look up the actual balance in the fund at this time. It's constantly changing as funds are received and then funds are distributed out to departments. the funds go back into a department's OM or whatever kind of source the payment originally came from the the department could then use that for whatever purposes it has available presumably the amount would match the cost to the department or at least closely resemble the cost of the department to address the original problem so in essentially it goes back to just make the department whole but if there is excess funds they utilize it as part of their OM structure to pay for any of the needs within the department. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Okay, we have 15E, which is $37,087.17, transferred from Damage Settlements, the Proprietary of the Cost Center of Police Law and Area Maintenance.

Mr. Chin, this is just another financial question I have, and I'm just wondering, including Worcester Police Department, but outside the Worcester Police Department as well, I've seen some damaged vehicles over the past few weeks. I've seen one outside the police headquarters. I've seen them in other departments. And I'm just wondering, How do we track that? Where's that data collected? And is when you say no fault, is that a determination by the city or is that a determination by the insurance folks that you're repeating through the chair?

Mr. McCarthy?

Through the chair, the impact or effect of some sort of accident is tracked by the department. The department will assess the vehicle, determine whether or not, A, there is a kind of a perpetrator for whom the insurance could be sought, or they'll determine whether or not it's something that they have to repair or replace internally. If it goes to the level of a legal question, it would go to the law department for representation. Again, they would represent the city in terms of securing those funds. In terms of the no-fault insurance, The language simply means that the city was not at fault in this circumstance. It doesn't imply no fault or fault under state law or insurance jargon. It's simply a situation where the city was not at fault for the accident. and therefore it is being reimbursed for any issues.

Okay Mr. Chairman, I would like a report back on any documentation related to this particular situation involving these vehicles and the reason why is I'm wondering across departments how the public's Property is being managed. So I like to take a look at that so that we can determine if in fact there's a opportunity to do better across departments. Mr. Chairman, so I'll be my motion, thank you.

Okay, so we'll take 15, three, six, B and E off the motion, roll call. Okay, we'll take B and E first, then we'll do the motion separately, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, now we have the motion. Can you repeat the motion one more time, Councilor King?

Yeah, the motion, that's like a report on these particular issues, I just moved it. These particular accidents that's referenced for this small minimal funding, I think it's $37,000. like a report from that that's comprehensive so we can see the details of those accidents and as related to the no fault and the rest of the order is that this is in the interest of determining if there's a way that we can protect the public's property across departments in a more effective way. Thank you.

Okay. Roll call. Councilor Bergman?

No.

Bilotta? Yes. Economou? No. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra?

No.

Ojeda?

Yes.

Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey?

No.

And Mayor Petty? Yes.

Okay. We are on... Chairman's orders, 16A to 16R, motions to adopt.

Roco. Councilors Bergman. Yes. Bilotta. Yes. Economou. Yes. Fresolo. Yes. King. Yes. Mitra. Yes. Ojeda?

Yes.

Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey? Yes. Mayor Petty?

Yes, okay, we have orders. First of all, the City Councilor will state this hereby amend this meeting schedule for the ensuing dates as follows. So just changing the dates from May 12th, 2028, no meeting, to budget hearing May 19th, 2026, and joint agenda on May 26th. and no meeting budget hearing only June 6th and joint agenda on June 9th. Roll call.

Mr. Chairman, are these all the same time for the order?

Yeah, 5 o'clock.

Was that right? 5 o'clock? Mr. Mayor, I do believe we sent out a general poll to see what the councilor's preference were, and I think the best times appear to be 5 p.m. for the hearing starts. Okay.

So we have Mr. McGrath at 5 p.m.? You agree? Okay. Roll call.

Mr. Chairman.

Yeah, Councilor King.

Thank you. So I just wanna understand this point of clarification. So May 12th, no meeting, just budget. May 19th, joint agenda. No budget? Is that right? No budget on May 19th?

It's a joint agenda, correct. Is that correct, Mr. McGrath? No. There'll be a budget. All these have budgets. Go ahead, though.

All right, so since they all have budgets, Mr. Chairman, we've had a number of canceled City Council meetings, and I think we should do everything we can to ensure that We're hearing things. And when we have these joint agendas, that's when we have Marathon, City Council meetings, which I'm not averse to, but in the past we've had folks that are averse to doing the work up until midnight. But I would just ask, Mr. Chairman, that there be consideration that we not Council, City Council meetings. What we've done in the past, Mr. Chairman, is, you know, when you chaired those sorts of meetings where it wasn't canceled, so we wouldn't have a joint agenda because things get backlogged.

without things being held, they get backlogged, was that we as a legislative body were very selective at the request of the chair, being yourself, Mr. Mayor, is what you've done in the past. asking folks to be selective about what they're filing. So Mr. Chairman, I would ask that we have these city council meetings. That would be a friendly amendment. if you're inclined to receive that amendment, Mr. Chairman.

Yeah, we're not changing anything. We're just changing some of the dates. We didn't change, we're not canceling a council meeting, correct, Mr. McGrethy?

It was May 12th, no meeting.

Yeah, but we just switched, that was the 19th, I believe the 19th was no meeting. Mr. Mayor, that's correct. So the way that it was structured, we're basically just changing which days are full budget hearing days and which days are budget hearings with council meeting days. So we're just flipping which is which.

We're just flipping because of people's schedules, I believe. That's correct.

Okay.

And if we need another meeting, I have no problem doing another meeting if we have to when we get closer. That never happens. It does if we ask, yes. The problem is everybody's busy.

Right. So May 12th, it was on our agenda that we had a city council meeting on May 12th. We're no longer having a city council meeting that involves a city council agenda. Is that correct? That's not happening.

get correctly because May 19th was the no city council meeting. So we just switched the meetings. We just switched the meetings. I understand what you're saying. Thank you. Okay, Councilor Ojeda.

Yeah, just to, sorry, just to be clear to the chair. Could you just give me the dates then? Because it's, just reading this kind of all bunched up. So May 12th, what do we have?

May 12th is a budget meeting.

Okay, and then May 19th?

It's a joint meeting, budget and council.

Okay.

And manager.

And then also budget, council, and manager, all three? Okay. And then the 26th?

There's no meeting, budget.

I'm sorry, say it again?

Just the budget.

Just budget, okay. And then after that we have what, June 2nd?

There's a joint agenda.

and then the ninth.

Is City Council agenda.

Okay.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It helps, okay.

Just for a second time, so between May 12th and June 9th, there's only one City Council agenda meeting by itself. Is that correct? Stand alone.

stand all on May 12th, June 9th, we have one on June 9th, we have one on, so there's two meetings. There's nothing difference in this than what it was before except we switched a few dates. We flip-flopped.

Okay, thank you.

Okay, roll call.

Councilor Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou?

Yes.

Fresolo? Yes. King?

Yes.

Mitra?

Yes.

Ojeda? Yes. Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty?

Yes. B, request to see manager by the council with a report concerning the current city ordinance related to excessive and unreasonable noise levels in the city. Federal request that said report and quote information concerning the department or departments tasked with enforcing such ordinance. Talk to Councilor Mitra.

Thank you Mr. Chair, to you, to Mr. Chair, Manager. As it reads, I request a report on the and so on. So I think it's important to think about the noise ordinance or the excessive unreasonable noise that happens in the and so on. We have an organization in our city that controls that or enforces that. Call the WPD and they don't find that anybody knows about the ordinance. So I know that probably there is one ordinance, but just wanted to know if there is one What it is, after what time the ordinance is probably going to be followed and which department is responsible for it. So that's the request I have. Thank you.

So send that to the manager roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes. We have one request to take an item out of order. and that is 27D, which was held under privilege, I believe. but this is 27D, Recommendations to the manager, to the residential chicken keeping. Anybody on this?

What are we voting on?

The motion in front of me is to place the item on file. Who made that motion? It's just the motion.

Oh, it's from, I don't have that item in front of me. I just lost the page. What number is it? So let's look at it.

It's the 27D.

27D.

That's on the residential chicken keeping.

Can I ask a question on that Mr.

Chair? Councilor Rivera?

I understand the direction the city is going and I just wanted to know was there any options of obviously the city is made up of different you know buildings houses you know and there's some residents who have plenty of yard. so it's across the board, not if you have the right yardage or right acreage or whatever, it's just across the board, no chickens as opposed to, from the chair to administration, sorry.

Commissioner or Mr. Mayor?

Yeah, through the chairs of the council. That was all taken into consideration. If you provide an opportunity for consideration depending on the yardage or the acreage that you have in your home, then now you have to create a process to manage that where there's a special permit process etc. to determine to allow certain properties in the city. And then you have to then have a body or through a special permit process to decide who is allowed and who is not. whether the three-decker is allowed or not, whether the tenant is allowed or not, or homeowner is allowed or not, who, like there's a lot of, so what we felt is though because we would have to create a special permit process, you're basically allowing tickets in the city so might as well allow it across the board and so it because you the level of capacity of staffing and oversight that would be required to do that would be the same as if you were to try to allow it across the board of the city. So for us, we saw this as either you allow it or we continue to enforce the current

City Ordinance that we currently have which does not allow chickens and our position the position of the Commissioner through the discussions we felt as though our position was to keep the court ordinance the way it is

Sure. Okay, so just by keeping the, to the chair of the administration, just by keeping the ordinance, it goes forward, but are you saying, just for clarification, are you saying that Some residents do have an option to ask for permits or no, that's just Mr.

Manager.

Through the chair to the council and the current ordinance, no one in the city is allowed to have tickets. Okay. Thank you.

Thank you.

King, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I certainly appreciate Ogalo's questioning of the city manager. You know, we revisited this issue previously, and there's a number of, you know, things that could be done it's done in other cities it's done in other municipalities here in the city there's all sorts of options i'm not following the logic of special permitting and perhaps if you're unable to enforce every single matter pertaining to residential chickens, it's like implementing it across the city. you know we've gone through this again and again through the chair to the administration my it's from what my recollection the planning board had

recommended this, that we do move forward with residential chickens as an ordinance on two separate occasions. So my question is, is that accurate? Is my memory faulty? and then subsequent to that, Mr. Chairman, what were the basis for those two recommendations through the chair?

Mr. Manager?

To the chairs of the council, the planning board did approve in both instances, but I will have the chief development officer explain a little bit of the reasonings why the planning board made those decisions.

Mr. Dunn.

through the Chair to the Council. Obviously, that level of detail is not in the report before you that was submitted by the Inspectional Services Commissioner, but some of that detail was included when the report was issued to the manager, committed to the manager to come back based on petitions from residents. So it was on the two occasions petitioned from residents to consider allowing chickens and the planning board did not recommend a particular ordinance. They didn't recommend it should be by right or it should be allowed only in you know residential single-family zones or only on lots with a certain acreage or it should be by special permit that's not really what was before them it was basically just a petition from residents that said we'd like the city to explore creating permission for this under whatever parameters deemed appropriate. So that was ultimately what they said generally that the planning board was pro-chicken.

But again, they didn't have specifics in front of them to vote on particular ordinance recommendation that information was provided to the city manager through the council to come back with a report and a position from the administration on whether to create some framework for it or to continue as the manager said with the current prohibition on it.

Thank you. Through chair to the administration, that particular report that was sent over the request, the ask basically, was that this term or the prior term?

Mr. Dunn.

through the chair to the councilor, it was in 2025. I believe it was late summer of 2025 when it was sent from the city council to the city manager to evaluate all of those considerations and come back to the council with a, with a final report on that.

I'm sorry, so was that the prior term or was that this term?

Through the Chair to the Councilor, that would be the prior term because this term started in January.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I understand the term limits. I just wanted to state it for the public. That being said, Mr. Chairman, it's particularly ties the hands. Well, it actually doesn't tie the hands of this legislative body. We can do what we will. This is simply a recommendation. from the administration. I don't think it really allows for thoughtful consideration if we simply file this, Mr. Chairman. This should go to committee for discussion. I think it's a quality of life for some people on both sides of the issue, a quality of life issue. There's some public health concerns that can be addressed. There's some public health needs that are met. And it's certainly worth, given the history of this, an opportunity to not simply kill this, but to have a further discussion by this body.

It's apparent to me based on some of the questions that were just previously asked that there's not an awareness as relates to all of this. From what I recall off the top of my head, There was discussions about not allowing roosters because of noise. There was discussions about, again, how they do things in other cities. et cetera. There was also a discussion about folks coming from all over the world to the city of Worcester and whatnot. So I think that those considerations certainly should happen. Mr. Chairman, and I'm not sure who... There is no motion on the floor. It's a recommendation from the manager. I would recommend, Mr. Chairman, that we move to send this to the appropriate committee.

and in addition to that, Mr. Chairman, we've had, it's not just residents, we've had people over the years, we've had folks call in who are experts in this area, in support, we've had a situation where there's been a paralysis by analysis by the city legislative body when it was before us and we could have actually voted and was kicked back to the city manager. some time ago. But I think it's worthy of further consideration, Mr. Chairman. That would be my motion to request that it go to the proper committee. Mr. Chairman, I'm certainly not chicken-hearted enough to vote this and file it. I think it's chicken-hearted to do that. And I would ask that we send this to the appropriate committee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So I want to start off by making a motion to adopt the manager's recommendation. So this matter has been Kicking around a long time. Deserves a vote tonight. Listen, there's going to be people vote for it, people vote against it. That's the nature of the show.

Hang on, I'll finish. Go ahead.

I don't know. Okay, thank you, Mr. Chairman. People vote for it and then people vote against it. That's the nature of democracy. That's the nature of what we do. Let me just say that I base a lot of the decisions I make, not all of them. in my position as City Council based upon expectations. I don't think people move to the City of Worcester expecting to have chickens. I think people do move to City of Worcester expecting Worcester to be more of a city kind of atmosphere. I've said it before, I respect those who want to grow their own produce, who want to raise honeybees, who want to have chickens. But you have to take into consideration this is a city environment. and the expectation shouldn't be that that's gonna be something that you're allowed to do. Yes, there are cities who have gone ahead and done it, Much like what's going to come up later in a discussion on another topic, the fact that some cities do this doesn't mean that Worcester has to follow the lead of every

City that decides to make a decision that's kind of in the minority of what other cities and towns are going to do. Let me just say this. We can't get potholes right. I am going to bring up potholes. We can't get potholes right. Now we're going to have to devote Resources to look into who has a rooster because they want to have more chickens. They don't want to have to pay to buy them because they can have a rooster that helps produce them. Who's following the health and sanitary code violations? whose chickens are making noises? Who owns the chickens? Who's letting the chickens loose? Who's going to pick up after the coyotes and the hawks and the other animals eat the chickens? We don't have the capacity, nor should we, as a city to worry about chickens. If you like to raise chickens, there's plenty of locations you can raise chickens. And again, I don't have a dislike for chicken. I eat chicken. Love chicken soup. Probably eat more chicken soup than anybody here. People do have chickens.

I see them. But at the same time, It shouldn't be allowed as a matter of right. And you're going to start with a discussion about special permits. Who's going to get permission from the landlord? to apply for the special permit. If it's a multifamily, what if one person on one floor wants chickens and the other person doesn't? One person owns a dog and is gonna have a conflict with the chickens or a cat is gonna have a conflict. It is riddled with problems. I'm going to go to the line that I love that people say all the time to me. What can go wrong? a ton of stuff not only can go wrong will go wrong and we'll be back in this position ruin the day that we decided to give this a chance it's time to put an end to the discussion and again It's all well intended. There are people on both sides of the issue. They all have good arguments. But I think the argument against this and to adopt the manager's recommendation, which is my motion, should prevail. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

I think the right motion would be, there's nothing to adopt, so I think the motion would be to support the manager's recommendation. Fine.

Okay, Councilor Toomey. I had a point of order that you ignored.

Hang on, there's no point of order.

I'm allowed to interrupt it for a point of order.

What's the point of order then? The point of order you needed.

Well, you answered it, but the point is you ignored me. I was going to ask exactly what you said, but when someone makes a statement that we adopt something that's not adoptable, I have a right to say point of order and to be recognized by the chair.

I don't know that's a point of order, but go ahead. But Councilor Toomey?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I've been on both sides of this argument. I've been for it. I've been against it. And for me, the biggest issue is equity. The majority of people who have the yardage and the land and the ability to have the space for these chickens Most people who are living in the inner city do not have that. And if you're talking about food equity and all that stuff, those folks that People are saying, oh, but what about the people who just want to have the eggs to help feed their family and all of that stuff? I get it. My heart breaks for people. But you know what? It's a health issue. It's a health issue in terms of making sure that the community is healthy, that you're not inviting diseases. And we know that that happens, right, if you don't take care of the chickens right. But the point is it's an equity issue.

Most of the people who would be able to have chickens would be people who are middle class and upper middle class, who have the land and the ability to do that. And that's not fair. It's not equitable. and I you know I think I get the arguments on both sides but I just don't think it's where we need to go I think that we need to focus on things that are We've been trying to accomplish the rental registry. We need to focus on things like that. We need to focus on the bread and butter issues that we need to do running this city on a day-to-day basis. and adding chickens and all that comes with that with the inspections and making sure that they're not interfering with other people. You want to talk about noise ordinance, How many phone calls are going to come in, right? If you're in a very close-knit neighborhood and a bunch of three-deckers and you've got chickens out in your backyard, you know, so I just can't. I just can't support it.

I think we need to put it to rest. And I think we need to focus on the things that we can do moving forward and just move on. Thank you. We've talked about it for years.

Mr. Chairman. and we have Councilor Mitra. Mr. Chairman, point of order here? What's the point of all this? So we have three motions so far, but Councilor Mitra.

Thank you Mr. Chair. I am in support of Mr. Manager's motion because I think City of Worcester is not ready for having chickens in their backyard. We don't have that much yardage. We need about an acre to have chickens. We don't have that. You go to many neighborhoods. My neighborhood, I don't think there are chickens all over the street. And we have problems so many in different ways that we have to tackle. Now we've got another problem to issue with, as many of my colleagues have already spoke. I don't think the city of Worcester is a city where we can really adopt to have the chickens in our backyard. We don't have that much space. On the other hand, it's also a health hazard. We know that. So issues that will bring more problems than anything in our city We need to make our city more practical, more livable, so that people can come here finding this city more attractive, do the business, raise the family, do many other things. Not taking care of the chickens and having problems.

So I will vote for what city manager has given the motion and really take the vote today and take care of this today. Thank you.

Mr. Chairman, Mr. Chairman. Hang on, what's that, Councilor King?

If there's no one else, I'd like to speak after everyone's spoken.

Oh, okay, Councilor Economou?

Mr. Chairman, I make the motion to file the item, please.

Motion to file. Okay, Council King, before anybody else who hasn't been heard.

I think Councilor Hayter may have raised his hand. Councilor Hayter?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just, I don't know, I was concerned of hearing it being equitable and need an acreage and stuff like we needed so much yard space. The reality is you don't need that much yard space. So I just want to make sure we understand that residents will be watching this. And I don't think it matters your income or class you're in or whatever it may be. I'm not saying this because I'm against it or for it but let's not just say it's a you have to fit in some type of category to be able to do this. And it's important that we get that out there and let residents know that it doesn't matter what economical status you're in. or what size yard you have or don't have. There's ways of making this happen. So I just want to make sure we understand that. To hear that, it is a little bothersome because you kind of,

put people in a position where they feel as though because I don't have a certain yard space or I don't make enough money to do something like this or because of where I live, that's going to be an issue. Is there noise? Yes. But there's some people that have chickens They're probably your neighbors. You don't even know because there is no noise depending on how it's taken care of. There's not a rooster around. it's very quiet and you won't you won't hear it if it's Tim Kiv correctly again I just want to make sure that we're not saying things that I feel as though that shouldn't be said based on, again, economic status, where someone lives or whatever it may be, or again, the amount of space someone needs. That's all, thank you.

Council King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. You know, I'm going to reiterate some of the things that I said previously. You know, my family comes from the island of Bermuda. There's a lot of immigrants on this council. There's a number of folks that come from the islands. They come from other places. This is routine. and certainly Worcester is not Bermuda. So I say all that to say this, Mr. Chairman, Boston has this or an ordinance. and again, we're not Boston, but I hear a lot of we can't, we can't. We wanna attract people. Well, this will attract people. It'll attract more people than it. then it propels away from the city of Worcester. And in Boston, as Councilor Ojeda astutely stated, it doesn't take a whole lot of space. I also reject the exclamation of of Equity as an aspect of this. But, you know, in that ordinance in our capital, in this state, it requires

You know, a number of things. One is it requires that the coups and runs are located in the rear yard with a setback of five feet. from the property unless a solid barrier exists. It also prohibits roosters because of the noise issues to prevent noise issues, Mr. Chairman. And we've discussed this before, but this legislative body has not. Predator protection is part of it. Electric fencing is recommended in addition to that. Neighbor relations. There is a recommendation in their policy to proactively engage with work with neighbors, but the abutters also have an opportunity to comment on the permit application, Mr. Chairman.

You know, cube space must provide a minimum of two square feet per hen and not exceed eight feet in height. and the maximum number of hens is six adult hens, six non-egg laying hens, replacement chicks or pullets are permitted per lot. and yes, there's a permitting process, Mr. Chairman. This is clearly doable. It's been recommended all over the place by the planning committee. and other cities to say that Worcester can't do this. I can tell you this. Having a chicken ordinance is going to have absolutely no impact on snow operations. It will have no impact on filling the potholes. and it remains to be seen to what degree the Appetite for chicken permitting would occur, Mr. Chairman. I'm gonna encourage my colleagues to vote no to file.

let's send this forward. There's no ordinance to vote on. This is just a recommendation. So we're not voting no, even on our ordinance. you know and the fact that we're not going to set this forward to present all the facts is interesting to me Mr. Chairman and I think we should educate this particular body before we reject something out of hand. We had the same issue with the stretch code as it relates to not having data, not having information in this particular term. and here we are again, folks ready to vote on an issue with all the information. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor Rivera, for the second time.

I'll rise a second time. Just clarification purposes. Obviously, the way it was explained today and the way this We can't have that. But just so you know, I'm open to maybe in the future They're working it out. I mean, it is what it is. You either have the space, the property for owning a chicken, or you don't but we just can't have people in triple deckers and people in apartment buildings and people just owning anybody can own a chicken so I understand the way it's now this is now I'll support the filing of it but but I'm open to so I just think if somebody has the proper

Space, and talking about good amount of land, you know, we're away from other, and it's unfortunate that not everybody has that, but I know a couple of them, then they should be able to own some chickens, you know, and I guess that's my take on it. Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor. Mayor Petty.

I just have a question to the Commissioner, maybe in his experience and prior.

Commissioner.

and prior cities that you worked in. I know where the pros and cons, have you seen, have you learned anything on this when it comes to chickens and cities?

Commissioner?

Through the chair to the council. Yes, I've had experience in three other communities dealing with chickens and chicken enforcement and chicken permitting. In all cases, allowing chicken permits increases the effort and enforcement required to keep that under control. The other items that I've seen from communities that have allowed chickens in there is an increase in the rodent population. We've also seen increase in trash complaints. We've also seen the increase in noise. Now, yes, I do know all of the studies. I do know that chickens among themselves do not create lots of noise. However, we do get the roosters in there and then if the chickens do escape, there are noises. We also have the predators that come in. We do see an increase in foxes.

In Worcester, we would see increases of potentially coyotes and bears due to the surrounding communities that we have that are experiencing those issues. In writing this report to the council and speaking with the city manager, I took into account my experiences as well as the communities that I've worked in in making this recommendation.

Thank you. Mr. Mayor?

Thank you, Commissioner. I appreciate your comments and your experience. I think you said it pretty clearly. One of the biggest concerns I think the council has is the rodent issues or predator animals coming in. and even public health issues that could cause. So yeah, so I'm not a big supporter of this and so I appreciate your report and your recommendation. Thank you.

Thank you. Mr. Mayor, I just rise. There were a couple of comments that- Councilor Toomey. Implied that I had some bias and perhaps even implicated that I was racist with my comments.

Point of order, Mr. Chairman. Point of order, Mr. Chairman. That has nothing, excuse me, I'm speaking. I'm speaking, I'm speaking. No one called this woman racist. rule her out of order Mr. Chairman. That is out of order. It's a false statement. No one called her biased. No one called her racist. I'm asking you Mr. Chairman.

We are moving on.

Will her comments out of order, Mr. Chairman?

I don't think that was his intention.

It's out of order.

No.

It's out of order, Mr. Chairman. It was not his intention. I'm sorry, and I agree with Councilor King. It's out of order, Mr. Chairman. Nothing was implied in that way. Leave the council, Mr. Chairman.

Do you have anything else you want to say, Councilor Toomey? I can't believe that word is actually used right now. Thank you. Out of order Mr. Chairman. We're good. Out of order.

So the motion is to file, roll call. Councilors Bergman? Yes. Bilotta?

Yes.

Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty. Okay.

We're going back to the agenda, the orders. on request of the C-Manager, request the Commissioner of Public Works review and repair the existing guard rail on May Street near the intersection of Mann Street.

Azarit.

Roll call.

Councilors Bergman, yes, Bilotta, yes, Economou, yes, Fresolo, yes, King, yes, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty

Yes, 17D, request the City Manager, request the Commissioner of Public Works, repaint the crosswalks at the intersection of Lakeview Street and Cobra Now, Councilor Bilotta.

Yes, since we just talked chickens ad nauseum, could we please take 17D to 17I as one order?

Okay, request the City Manager to request the Commission of Public Works repaint the crosswalks at the intersection of Hamilton Street and Harrington Way. and request the same manager request the Commission of Public Works repaint the crosswalks at the intersection of Bigelow, Davis, Parkway and Lake Ave. and request the City Manager, request the Commissioner of Parks and Recs, request the crosswalks at the intersection of Providence Street and Harrison Street. and request the City Manager request the Commissioner of Public Works repaint the crosswalks at the intersection of Harrison Street and Blake Street and request the City Manager request of Public Works we paint the crosswalks at the intersection of Boardman Street and West Boylston Street. and request the City Manager request the Commissioner of Public Works consider discontinuing the practice allowing the public oversight parking in DPW parking lot located at Fantasia Drive. Councilor Bilotta.

Thank you. Yeah, the 17D through, I just wanted to get some crosswalks repainted. 17J, I know there's been issues with a auto body shop illegally parking their cars in this lot overnight, so we're trying to just crack down on that. That's all it is. Thank you.

Thank you. Roll call.

Councillors Bergman. Yes. Bilotta.

Yes.

Economou. Yes. Fresolo. Yes. King. This is all of them, right? D through J.

Yes.

Mitra. Yes. Ojeda.

Yes.

Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey. Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes, request to the manager, request to Commissioner Parks to immediately review and remove shop shards on the Sunny Hill Drive resulting from the chip seal on the road, Council Rivera and Bergman. Rivera, Councilor Bergman, go ahead.

We communicated. I think it's okay if I go first. I'll be really quick. It's something Councilor Rivera and myself filed together, him taking the lead as a district councilor, but At some point, I can certainly wait till the budget discussion. The chip sale program seems to have been a failure. Maybe I'm wrong. It seems to have been a failure. As a result of it being a failure, These shards are now breaking off the asphalt and causing issues in the neighborhoods. constituents are asking us who's responsible for cleaning it up. Obviously, it's not them. They didn't put them there. It's DPW. So fortunately, adding more work upon DPW's plate are issues like this. So I guess I'll wait for the budget discussion to find out how many streets are affected by this and what's the game plan in trying to clean these up. It's unfortunate it happened. I don't know what technology

and expert advice was given, but again, it's not something that's successful and the residents of the city shouldn't have to suffer from it. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, so that's the public work. Councilor Rivera?

So basically, similar to what Councilor Bergman said, I'm getting quite a few complaints on different streets who are paved this way with the cheap sale and having issues with when they with their cars, when they're mowing the lawn, when they're blowing leaves. It's a problem a lot in the yard. So we're just hoping that we can remedy the situation. That's it. Thank you.

Yeah, you know, Councilor Economou found... As amended then, Councilor Cromwell filed an item a couple weeks ago on this item and hopefully get a detailed report on this coming forward. Okay, so as amended, 17K, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes. I request City Management by the Council to report concerning whether there's enough affordable city, state, public, private, and college owned pools as well as local, Lakes and ponds in the city to ensure the city can avoid summer closures and provide swimming lessons and swimming opportunities to the city's youth. for request of such report also review the availability of any federal and state funding that could be applied to funding the swimming pool at Beaver Park Council Rosen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, I just wanna make sure that we're ready for this summer, and there's enough swimming opportunities for our youth, and especially opportunities for them to learn how to swim. And we do have a lot of pools throughout the city, many of our colleges and universities have pools and since they don't contribute much to pilot programs here in the city, maybe they would let us use, the youth use their pools in the summer but there's other agencies that have pools. We have our beaches and our ponds and our lakes and we know throughout the summer that sometimes they get closed down, different bacteria and situations. I know co-spawn sometimes, Indian Lakes certainly sometimes. we do our best to keep those open. And we do talk about spray parks in the city of Worcester, which I like the spray parks, but obviously you can't learn how to swim in a spray park.

and maybe a report from the administration soon if possible and just what opportunities are available to the young people. in the city of Worcester to learn how to swim and to be able to swim during the summer. But then I added this because I remember the pool at Beaverbrook Park and I know we've, I was on the council and we closed all the pools we had good reason because we hadn't maintained them for so many decades, we couldn't salvage them, we couldn't save them. And I understand we don't build pools any longer. But we have the two state pools, that's good. The Vernon Hill State Pool was a Dennis Shine, I think Park, and we have the one over at Bennett Field and we have the one at the City Pool at Crompton Park. And I know they're always busy and there's lines waiting and sometimes they have to tell children to line up and take them in different shifts. but Beaverbrook, I mean, if we have the room over there, and I know we're not talking about building any more pools, but maybe we could talk about building one more pool.

This would be a great location in that neighborhood for a swimming pool, but If it's impossible, then I know the neighborhood, the people I've talked to would settle for a spray park over there. As much as we don't really want a spray park, we want a pool. So that's the recommendation to send it to the manager and get a report back and see what we're doing with swimming in the city of Worcester and including at Beaver Book Park. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Roll call.

Councilor Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, next request, Standing Committee on Public Health and Human Services review Merrick at the Commonwealth's new public health data and workflow plan with Merrick to develop climate public health. strives to help municipalities reduce administrative burdens, improve visibility into the local trends, enhance the ability of communities to provide efficient and effective public health services and ensure access to the same secure highway quality reporting tools throughout the Commonwealth. Councilor Rosen.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. As it reads,

Okay, send that to Public Health, roll call.

I'd like to sign on to that, Mr. Chairman.

Okay, as amended.

Public Health, yeah.

Public Health, yeah, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, yes, Bilotta, yes, Economou, yes, Fresolo, yes, King, Yes. Mitra. Yes. Ojeda.

Yes.

Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey. Yes. Mayor Petty.

Yes. Quests stand in command of Public Health and Human Services. Hold one or more public hearings to discuss the state of youth mental health in the city, including whether more needs to be done to provide care, treatment, and hope to struggling youth in the city. who are experiencing mental, behavioral, and addiction health services, among others. Councilor Rosen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The youth of the city I know certainly as a former teacher, former school committee member, city councilor certainly, and member of the Board of Health recently, and now the chair of our public health committee. the youth of Worcester are struggling. A lot of issues out there. and they were struggling before COVID, but COVID didn't make it any better. COVID made it a lot worse. And I'm concerned about the youth in the city of Worcester. So many issues, so many challenges and issues they face you know social media being probably one of the worst ones I mean people might say social media is great I don't use social media and I'm thrilled not to use it but you know from what I you know hear about it and read about it and I know the state's talking about limits on social media the the bullying of our youth on social media. A lot of teens and preteens are hurting and that's not good.

We know how many homeless, we have so many homeless students in the city of Worcester in our public schools. We have so many youth with addiction problems. We have, and this city council, previous city council, last year, maybe the year before too, heard from the LGBTQ community. about their youth and the issues they face. We can go on and on with a long list. I would just like the Public Health Committee to take a look at mental health and Behavioral Health and Addiction and all that and services here in the city of Worcester and try to come up with a plan that will help our youth in the future because they have a, I mean, when I grew up years ago, decades ago, Things were not like this. We didn't even have cell phones, of course, in those days. And we just didn't have all these issues that the kids face now. And they need our help, so as a city council, let's help them and go through our Public Health Committee on this item. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Chairman. Thank you. Councilor King, followed by Councilor Fresolo, Councilor Rivera.

I just want to say thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I want to say thank you to Councilor Rosen for this item. We've talked about a lot of things tonight. and I think this is the most important item on this agenda Mr. Chairman because it's about our future it's about our young people it's about resourcing and assessing what's the state of young people in the city of Worcester. We know as we talked earlier, dual diagnosis, comorbidity, trauma, the trauma to the prison pipeline, all of these things, are real. And when you add to it the lack of Services and Support. We talked about CHL. We talked about losing the Motivating Youth Recovery M.E.A.R. program, Teen Substance Abuse. Inpatient, none exists in the state any longer. Burncoat Family Services, it was right up there on Burncoat Street where families can go

and engage in clinical treatment with their children, gone. Grace House, another UMass CHL program that was across the street from Dougherty High School where young girls could go. and have a therapeutic milieu where they could exercise the skills that they learned in their treatment process. Not there. We look at the challenges that our educators are having Managing, Behaviors. We look at all of those things. The lack of, as just mentioned in the previous order, lack of things like pools in our city. I'm glad that the Councilor has brought that forward and I'll have a partner in that fight. But this is the most important thing on this agenda, Mr. Chairman. and I'm not saying that I'm in any sensational sort of way. I look forward to this. I look forward to the hearing.

I look forward to seeing who's brought into the room for this public hearing because when we have systemic shortcomings, it ends up with adult challenges that impact life, family, and the fiscal realities of our city. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Councilor Fresolo?

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, through you. I couldn't agree more with my colleague, Councilor King. This is the most important item on this agenda. That's why I wanted to sign on. I thank my colleague, I want to thank the Chairman of the Public Health Committee, Councilor Rosen, for adding this to the calendar tonight. My eight terms in the legislature, I was educated By so many who would come in and ask for their support with mental illness and depression and it really hit home how I'm fortunate that is to have that type of illness. And in all seriousness and all due respect, I believe the Commonwealth does not

Fund that area of our government does not support this addiction and mental illness as well as it should. So anything we can do here at a local level, I support 100%. And I'd... Again, look forward to the hearings as well and just wanted to stand and lend my support.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want the men to sign on, everyone. Okay, roll call as amended.

Councilors Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra? Yes. Ojeda? Yes. Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey? Yes. And Mayor Petty?

Yes. The question is to provide counsel with an update concerning when bids for the opportunity to rent the restaurant space located within Union Station will be available. The current lease of the space expires prior to July 1st, 2026. Councilor King.

Thank you Mr. Chairman. It's my understanding that one of the restaurants over there is lease is expiring. I'm not sure what the status is of all the other you know, opportunities in Union Station are. I know that WRA has some involvement here and perhaps our purchasing division but we have a venue that has infrastructure that's currently involved with our FIFA and our hosting, being the host city for Ghana as a venue structure and activating spaces for businesses and interfaith opportunities, Mr. Chairman.

that being said you know there's there certainly are some some challenges within the building but you know what we're trying to do here is make sure that we have a process that makes sense. We have you know Luciano's has been in that building for quite some time. I know that they're specifically their lease is up on July 1st. There's 30 events currently on hold. For that space, there's 35 working people in Worcester that don't know if they're working after July 1st. Now, it's my understanding that when bids go out, it takes a period of time. We are in We're almost in May and I have significant concerns, Mr. Chairman. So I'd like to amend this order to also include the other spaces in Union Station.

and any related work that's being done by the Worcester Redevelopment Authority pertaining to those spaces, including Luciano's. so we can have a transparent process through the chair to the administration as it relates to putting bids out for these sorts of things. How long does that process generally take? Low estimate, high estimate for a bid to go out. And through the Chair, has a bid gone out for this and is a decision pending based on the bid response?

Mr. Dunn.

Through the Chair to the Councilor it kind of depends on the nature of the goods or services being procured but for a request for proposals for a lease opportunity like this we would generally have that open for about 45 days and that will be We had hoped to have it released by now but we took a step back Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, Councilor, get that plan, get the word out about that, host that, digest the commentary, take that into account as we structure the request for proposals evaluation criteria. But that is effectively finalized, so we're just working on the steps necessary to get that advertisement released next week and we would expect that procurement to be completed before the end of June.

and if you could share through the chair, you said that that process was finalized as of what date was it finalized?

Mr. Dunn?

Through the Chair to the Councilor, off the top of my head, I think we had the listening session at some point in March and then went through the current draft document that we had with the request for proposals and discussed those evaluation criteria and we're just working to then get it advertised so like I said it should be released next week.

Bill and Marge, thank you. And through the Chair, to the administration, the listening piece of it, what was the participation like in that?

Mr. Dunn.

Through the Chair to the Councilor, we had a couple of board members including the Chair participate in that, some staff, and then as it relates to the community I believe it was certainly less than 10. I think we probably had about seven or eight participants at that session.

I'm not quite sure how we got to this point, but I can certainly say that businesses like Luciano are important to us. Obviously the bidding process is what it is and everyone has a fair opportunity. But when you have a host of Worcester employees on hold, and there's been no response. It's extremely difficult. What happens on July 1st if a new contract, sorry if a bid has not been awarded and has not been accepted. by the awardee through the chair. What happens on July 1st to that business or a business such as Luciano's whose lease would be up?

Is it done?

Through the Chair to the Councilor, just for clarification, it sounded like there was maybe the impression that there's like some outstanding requests or information or communications that have been transmitted to the Redevelopment Authority by Luciano's that have gone unresponded to. that's not the case as of today. Typically what happens in these types of situations is that the leases provide for a holdover term. So it wouldn't be extended. We actually communicated three years ago to Luciano's when his lease was expiring at that time that it would be extended one final time for three years and would not be extended further without going through the request for proposals process so this was not done in any kind of opaque manner or any kind of ambiguity. It was something that everybody involved in the matter was well aware of going into it.

Thank you. I must have misspoken. I wasn't saying that. I was just saying that, you know, that lease is ending. And it's quite possible that a new contract with someone else won't be realized as of July 1st. So on July 1st, if that has not been consummated, a contract with Luciano's or someone else, whoever is the best applicant for that. Opportunity, what happens? Will there be a hold over on July 1st to what date? Like, how does that work? How is it communicated? When is it communicated through the chair?

Mr. Dunn?

Through the Chair to the Councilor, I think that's reasonable anticipation for the procurement process to conclude and then actually have a lease agreement executed by that date. and preparing for operations, assuming it would be somebody else. Obviously, we've communicated to Luciano's and he's expressed publicly that he has every intention to submit a proposal to that RFP so the continuity of operations is a lot more seamless if he were to be the awarded bidder. But if there was somebody else selected, We would be working with them and we would start that communication soon about the likelihood of the holdover being necessary and being quite frankly an opportunity. if there are for whatever reason events that have been scheduled beyond the current lease agreement.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the explanations. I look forward to Luciano's and whoever else deems this as an opportunity to actually have that opportunity to bid. And again, I just want to reiterate my concerns for the events and the employees that are unable to move forward. I was under the impression that you know, given the fact that this has been three years in the making, that we would have been much further along in the process. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Okay. Roll call.

Councilor Bergman. Yes. Bilotta. Mr. Chair, can I sign off on this as well?

No, Councilor Bilotta.

I'd like to sign on.

Okay, as amended, the council doesn't wanna sign on, as amended.

Councilor Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra. Yes. Ojeda. Yes. Rivera. Yes. Rosen. Yes. Toomey. Yes. And Mayor Petty.

Yes, 18A, that the City Council see a list of those hereby go on record in opposition to the November in Massachusetts ballot question which seeks to roll back Marijuana legislation in the Commonwealth. If this ballot question passes, recreational marijuana shops would have would have to convert to medical marijuana shops and the adults would lose their right to cultivate cannabis at home. Councilor Rosen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, we usually, discuss and take votes on supporting legislation and other efforts in the community. This is important, I think, to the city of Worcester. We have, I believe, 15, up to 15, I think we hit 15, pot shops here in the city of Worcester and some of them are minority owned and they employ a lot of people. the revenue throughout the city has been strong from the pie chops. We started out the first few years I think 2019 to around 2023, and we collected $5 million in community impact fees, then we had to stop collecting them across the state, I think. No one collects those any longer. that was early on we collected that. And it looks like just some of the figures I dug out, 400 pot shops statewide. What are we gonna do? Close all those down with all the employees?

and especially where it's been really good revenue for the city of Worcester and for the state. 140 licensed farms to cultivate, legalized licensed farms to cultivate marijuana. and over a billion dollars in state and local taxes have been raised. Eight billion dollars in gross sales. This has been very successful in the city of Worcester and throughout the Commonwealth. to actually, and I wasn't in favor of it several years ago when it first came up. I didn't support it, I wasn't in favor of it. But I was wrong, it turned out to be very good for the city of Worcester, for the commonwealth financially, and for those who certainly imbibe in marijuana, they seem to think this is good legislation and it's maybe certainly improved their lives to some degree socially. We even have at least one place in the city where people can go and smoke marijuana over on Water Street.

We've had that for years and so on. it seems like this is legislation that's really just so bad. It's so bad, it's so unnecessary, it's so wrong, it's financially dangerous to the City of Worcester and to the Commonwealth. So I think we should go on record and hope that we can persuade, influence many, many voters here in the city of Worcester to vote against this unnecessary, this bad legislation. Thank you, Mr. Chair.

Okay. Council Borgman.

I didn't vote for it either. What I'm referring to is the legalization. I'm not suggesting it should be made illegal, but I'm very conflicted on this item, and I'll share with you Why? The reasons I was not in favor initially of legalizing marijuana are no different today than they were when it was legalized. The CDC, which is no insignificant institution, came out of many reports on this. Cannabis likely can contribute to cannabis use disorder, which is an addiction. Brain function doesn't fully form until age 25. There's a suggestion that smoking marijuana prior to that age could affect brain function. Heart health, lung health, mental health, including depression, anxiety, and schizophrenia. all contribute, according to the CDC. And driving, there's still no measure of telling whether or not somebody's driving under the influence of marijuana. So it's not necessarily a safety issue.

It is a safety issue to the public. It's not necessarily without pitfalls or potential harm. So whether it's successful monetarily or not doesn't really matter to me. I still have the same concerns. Thank you very much. that are out there now because of the fees and the financial success of some of these facilities. They contribute to a lot of good programs. and you know as government does best now that we're spending the money I don't know if we could figure out how to not spend the money because we would have to do away with some very good programs As far as I'm concerned, 40% of the voters of Worcester voted against it. Approximately 60 voted for it. It was not a vote that was overwhelming.

And I don't think the voters of the city of Worcester care about whether Councilor Bergman supports this resolution. or not. So respectfully, because I cannot be inconsistent with how I felt about marijuana use to begin with, this has nothing to do with medical marijuana, which I support. 100%. But because I voted against this initially and because I don't want to see businesses harmed by rolling it back, I'm going to abstain.

OK.

Councilor Rosen, second time.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Chairman, if this passes, besides ruining many businesses, costing a lot of jobs and so on, taking away the rights that people have had for the last many years to smoke and cultivate marijuana. I would hate to see that the sale and use of marijuana returns to the black market like we had for years, for decades. That would be just foolish to do. So I understand where Councilor Bergman is coming from. I opposed it at the beginning too. but it's been with us and people use it. You can make the same arguments that Councilor Bergman just made for tobacco, but it's legal. You can make the same arguments for alcohol, but it's legal. I don't use marijuana, I never have, I don't support its use, but I'm saying that to roll back what's happened over the past several years, at least 400 vendors

in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. I don't know how many users, but there's a heck of a lot of users. And a lot of those users don't use tobacco, and a lot of them don't even use alcohol, but they use marijuana. It's terrible legislation. I really hope that this council will go on record in saying the 15 shops that we have in the city of Worcester Okay, owned some by minorities, many employees. Let's keep them in business. Let's not close them down because some people think that marijuana is bad, but I guess they think tobacco and alcohol are good. None of them are good, but they're all legal, at least they are right now. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Councilor Toomey?

Thank you, Mr. Chair. I certainly understand Council's intent. I also agree with Councilor Bergman. I didn't support it myself. But I want to just take a step back. I don't want to harm a business or anything like that but we talked at length tonight about mental health of our youth and the THC level in the current Marijuana that's being sold out there is extremely high and is having an incredibly adverse effect on the mental health of our youth. And so for that reason I would also abstain. Not because I don't support our small businesses and all of that, but it's just we're talking about youth mental health, and that's one of the things that they're talking about right now that's a leading contributor to some of the problems that our youth are having. Thank you.

Okay, anybody else? Councilor King?

Thank you Mr. Chairman. I did in fact vote for this, you know, and some great points were brought up as relates to the fact that we have legalized alcoholism, which is a much more You know, detriment to a society overall. And I also speak as someone who's never smoked marijuana, never tried alcohol. So it's not a matter of personal indulgence or anything of that nature. So I want to state that for the record. That being said, Mr. Chairman, you know, I'm going to speak a little bit less about the business piece and the public health and fairness aspect. And that is this, when you look at sentencing disparities for possession of marijuana. They're significant.

They absolutely was considered as it relates to you know this legislative this the legalizing of marijuana in our state. Certainly that's important and those run along the lines of socioeconomic status and yes race. Black folks are four times more likely to be arrested than their counterparts, that's significant, that's research, that's evidence-based, that's not Khrystian King projecting. In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, being caught with possession of marijuana in the past resulted in obstacles to housing. couldn't get housing.

And again, if you think about the disproportionate impact, you have the money to mount a good legal defense for these infractions. in addition to that, access to education were limited. There were obstacles, there were barriers. And then when you look at the mental health component, Yes, there is cannabis use disorder. I'm very familiar with that as a licensed clinical social worker who can diagnose. There's also a thing called alcoholism. So we can't be selectively moral. when it comes to these sorts of matters, Mr. Chairman. From the mental health perspective, we know that it can be used to treat you know the impacts of having pervasive and chronic pain that impacts your medical and your mental health you know and you can't

understate the importance of disrupting and contributing to criminal justice reform. as it relates to all of this. So while I want to be on the record and be clear is for those reasons and more, that we want to make sure that there is equity and that decriminalization and getting away from the prison industrial complex and letting people continue to life in a way that's safe and fair. And while there are some real gains that need to be made, as it relates to things that were brought up such as, you know, what's the situation with driving, et cetera. I think we'll get there, but we shouldn't go back, Mr. Chairman. We cannot go back.

I hope that the majority of this council in the second largest city in New England comes out clearly in opposition to this attempt to recriminalize. Thank you.

Thank you. Some roll call on the resolution.

Councilors Bergman. Abstain. Bilotta. Yes. Economou. Yes. Fresolo. Yes. King. Yes. Mitra. Ojeda?

Yes.

Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey?

Abstain.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes. 20A, Communication of Paul Matthews, Ex-Director of the Worcester Regional Research Bureau, the Promises of the Worcester Franklin, Framingham Line, Infrastructure Improvements, potential ridership across the line. Refer to the Public Service and Transportation. Roll call.

Councilor Bergman. Yes. Bilotta. Yes Economou Yes Fresolo Yes King Yes Mitra Yes Ojeda Yes Rivera Yes Rosen Yes Toomey Yes And Mayor Petty

Yes, we have reports. We have 21B to 21E, which is a motion to accept. We have 22A to 22C is a motion to accept. 22, 23A to 23B is a motion to accept. 24A to 24C is a motion to accept and to adopt. and 24D to 24W is motion to accept roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, 25A to 25O, motions to accept, roll call.

Councilors Bergman, Bilotta, Economou, Fresolo, King, Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, 26A is more ordained on the roll call.

Mr. Chairman, just a question. Councilor Economou. How soon will that get implemented?

We're talking about the,

The legal dumping fine.

Okay.

Right, that's what we're on, correct?

Yeah. Mr. Manager?

We will work very quickly to try to implement that. Will signage be put up?

in various areas where there's problem dumping or anything like that?

Yeah, that's something that we would work to identify what are the areas that we could potentially do that. No, we would need to take into consideration that oftentimes this happens in private property, so we would work to notify the property owners as well.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. Okay, roll call. Councilor Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Mitra, Ojeda, Rivera, Rosen, Toomey, and Mayor Petty.

Yes, we have items under privilege. First one is request to manage by council with a report concerning the status of the designated union representative, seat on the Worcester Housing Authority as the term for the position expired on November 30, 2025. Further requests of said report include information related to the overview of its appointment. King. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

You know, this particular moment is not about simply filling the vacancy. It's about strengthening the perspective at Worcester Housing Authority and opening this process up in a way that reflects a full labor community, Mr. Chairman. Speaking briefly on this, this particular seat that I referenced that's now been held expired in November of 2025, and it's currently vacant. It may have changed in the last few days. I don't know. I know that there was a communication from the city manager that's not a part of this record indicating that it was going to be steps taken so that it would not be vacant, but I'm not sure what the update is. Mr. Chairman, the law, the master of the law requires that

for a labor seat that a representative organized labor who shall be appointed by the city manager or a mayor comes from a list of not less than two or more than five names representing different unions that are submitted by the Central Mass Labor Council, the AFL-CIO, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehouse and Helpers of America, of the city of the district, which the city is included, Mr. Chairman. If no such names are submitted within 60 days after vacancy, there may be an appointment by the city. within 60 days after the vacancy occurs. And that appointment may be of any representative, organized labor, of the own choosing in this instance, the own choosing of the city manager, and in strong marriage,

of Systems, the Mayor, Mr. Chairman. This particular seat did expire. And the Central Mass Labor Council was required to submit that and we went through November, December, January, February, March to April, five months without a seat, not the two that's required. In addition to that, Mr. Chairman, this is not a simple criticism. This was filed in the spirit of valuing the role and voice that Central Mass Labor Council bring. I was a member of that body for almost 10 years. So I certainly value that. It was more about making sure the seat reflects the full scope of today's workforce, Mr. Chairman. Labor has evolved. The working class is broader, more diverse, and not confined to a single umbrella.

Given the nature of the legislation, there are many unions and working people who are not represented through the Central Mass Labor Council. and historically, that's just been the fact. That seat has always been intended to represent the entirety of working people. So again, it's not just about a vacancy. It's about being transparent about the process. and in my view, making sure that there's three attributes that are embodied in the next person who assumes that position. and that's someone who knows trades and understands the work required to maintain and revitalize our housing stock. Someone who knows struggle, someone who's with lived experience who understands what our residents face day to day, including the lived experience in public housing. and someone who knows community and civil rights, who understands that housing is about dignity, stability and equity. So this is not about moving away from neighbor. from labor. That's not what the spirit of this.

It was about evolving how we define and represent labor in this moment. And that opportunity was given to the city. These terms will last for 10 years. The past decade of service concluded in November. And by law, the seat was vacant. We had a responsibility to fill it with someone who can guide the future and revitalize the integrity of our public housing.

Thank you.

The current, the outgoing commissioner served from 1995 to 2005 and then 2015 to currently, so over 20 years of serving mostly as chairperson. and so forth. You know, we certainly and there was a holdover and I'm pretty sure that if I didn't file this, there would continue to be a holdover, Mr. Chairman. So, you know, The Central Mass Labor Council did not submit more than one name. The last I knew, perhaps that's changed. I'm sure it probably has. But if you don't submit two names, it essentially usurps the authority of the city because then the decision is made on the singular. nomination, which means that there is no actually decision being made by the city. So, you know,

I certainly would like a report back so folks can understand the important work and the process to validate and outline what the law is. and how we move forward. Historically, we've always moved forward because there's been a conscientious effort. I'd also like to report back. It's my understanding that there's also an additional position that's on a state level for Worcester Housing that hasn't been filled since 2021. I'd like to report back on that as well. Mr. Chairman, we have a lot of different entities with the Worcester Redevelopment Authority. We have the Worcester Housing Authority. We have different boards and commissions as we spoke about in previous weeks. and part of the duties of the administration is to make sure that we're on top of these things. So I would appreciate that to come back in short order. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you, Councilor Bergman.

through the Chair to the City Manager. Has that position been filled?

To the council, yes, I made a decision recently and provided documentation to the Housing Authority.

And that's the email that we all received, is that correct? That is correct. All right, so my motion would be to file that.

Mr. Chairman.

Councilor King for a second time.

Yes, if the manager just could repeat his answer to the counselor's question so I can be clear.

Mr. Manager, I think his answer was yes, the position was filled.

I don't think that was his answer. That's why I'm asking him to repeat it.

through the chair to the council. What I've stated is that I have appointed somebody to that position and I've communicated that to the council body.

Okay, so that person's been sworn in, they applied, they had an application, et cetera, through the chair?

I'm not aware of the person that has been sworn in as of yet, but I know that the person has been appointed.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, requesting some transparency for this process. I understand the city managers indicate he's made an appointment and he's communicated that and I accept that. This is simply a request for information to provide transparency Transparency. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. So we have a motion to file. It takes precedent. So from the first motion, motion to file. If that fails, then we'll send this motion to be sent to the city manager for a report. Roll call.

Bergeman, Yes, Bilotta, Economou, Yes. Fresolo recused, Councilor King. This motion is to file, right? Correct. No. Mitra? Yes. Ojeda?

No.

Rivera? Yes. Rosen? Yes. Toomey?

Yes.

And Mayor Petty?

Yes. Okay, the next item up is 27C, communication with city manager, recommend adoption of a pause in the enforcement and the specialized stretch code in response to the city council order. And may I just come back and ask that the motion is to file. Councilor Bergman.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. There's a lot to be said about where we're at right now on this and I'm certainly not here to say that I am or anyone on this council is happy with the outcome in the sense that we at least can't take a vote on it and it would have been good to kind of take a vote on it. But I just want to go back a little in time. I did spend a good amount of time over the last week listening to the actual Council meeting in which this item was voted on I think it's important for background because there's been a lot of people that say well council voted for it the first time so well why are you thinking about changing your mind and in the Meeting that we voted on this, there were representations made that there would be incentives provided for the stretch code, so it would minimize the impact on developers.

Truth is not significant incentives have ever been provided. There was representations that this would bear no impact have no impact on the biomedical field. Well, the truth is it does. And we know from some of the developers in Worcester that have expressed concern about that. There was representations made that the cost would be cheaper up front than actually keeping it based on fuel as opposed to converting to electricity. So it would be cheaper to go with the specialized stretch code. That hasn't turned out to be true either. Nowhere was it said that parts were made out of the United States and difficult to obtain. Nowhere in that conversation was there a conversation about delays those pieces of equipment that needed to be imported from other countries. So I make my decisions based on the information I receive that I believe is accurate.

and I made a decision that night and I will say that I was one of the 10 out of 11 councils that voted for the specialized stretch code. I would say that I also made my decision that night based upon what I believe to be the opportunity for the city council to pull back their enthusiasm for the specialized stretch code if in fact it didn't turn out to be working out the way we had hoped it would. And I'm looking at a publication from the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources in which it says that the code may also be rescinded by any municipality. Now, that would lead and others to believe that if it isn't working out well, we could certainly pause it as an interim step to rescinding it. And that was the intent of what I proposed. Now, incidentally, Coincidentally and curiously, that language in the Department of Energy Resources was updated. And guess when it was updated? April 2026.

So I think there's a recognition there as well that perhaps that statement wasn't accurate. Then I'm looking at another publication from the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources, which it says, please note, once this strategy code specialized code is adopted by the municipality, all future additions and amendments are automatically adopted unless the municipality rescinds adoption of the code itself. So there were certainly credible agencies dealing with this subject in Massachusetts that would lead one to believe that this could be paused or rescinded. And that's the good faith belief that I had in moving forward and trying to do this. Now, not only that, we have anecdotal evidence from developers and others that this specialized stretch code, I should say, has become very difficult to work with. So that was the intent. As it turns out, Massachusetts General Law trumps, so to speak, or prevails over the language that we've received. from the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources.

And we can't do it for at least three years. So I accept that. That's the reality. I will tell you I've learned some lessons. One of the lessons I've learned I want to do in the form of a motion which is that anytime this body is asked going forward to opt in to any legislation, I'm asking that there be a detailed report from the law department that if we adopt that opt in, what do we have to do to opt out? In case we don't like it, in case we change your mind, in case like what happened here, factors are different than what was represented to us. I don't want to ever be put in a position again, I don't think my colleagues do either, with having to be in a position we're in tonight where those of us that feel the information we were given to opt in didn't pan out to be accurate, and now we're stuck with something for the next year and a half that none of us, or I don't believe, I shouldn't say none of us, I don't believe benefits anyone because if our goal is to develop more units,

that is going to be impeded by the specialized stretch code. We have to put Worcester in a place, Mr. Chairman, where developers look at Worcester differently than other communities and say Worcester has something, that other communities don't have. Being one of 19 or so communities that adopted the specialized stretch code, my opinion only, isn't going to get us the interest from the developers that the other 351 minus 19 communities are going to get without having the specialized stretch code. I would also say that I'm concerned I'm concerned that developers are going to get the wrong message. So we're going to have to work harder. I'm going to have to work harder. Those of us that feel that development is stifled by the Specialized Stretch Code in its current form under the current conditions, I'm going to have to work harder to make sure more units are built. I don't think the Specialized Trench Code in 2026 is helping that. And it's unfortunate when the position we're in. I get it.

I'm not looking to point fingers and blame anyone. Massachusetts general law is the law of the Commonwealth and we've sworn oaths to uphold it and that's just the way it's going to be but at the end of the day I'm hoping we all re-energize ourselves and look for ways to accomplish two things and they're not mutually exclusive. To make more units easier to be developed and to provide more opportunities for people to have roofs over their head in the city of Worcester. Thank you Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Anybody else?

Mr. Chairman.

Councilor King.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Once again, I have the opportunity to talk about climate, to talk about green energy, in addition to the business interests, the housing, the development in concert. And it's an honor to have that opportunity. I'm glad to be the first person to put that on the floor today. That being said, Mr. Chairman, I was exoriated on the council floor and in the public sphere for holding this item. I'm glad I held it. I'm going to reiterate, it didn't have the data, didn't have the information. And that's more than true, Mr. Chairman. There's some mythical matters at play. There's a claim that the code is slowing down housing production. I asked for data. Show me the data. Pre and post. pre and post specialized stretch code.

Well, I've gotten some of the data. Since that specialized stretch code went into effect for Worcester, we've produced more housing, not less. a 44% increase in total units and even higher, larger increase or higher increase in multifamily developments, Mr. Chairman. So the idea that we have to choose between building and building responsibly and green initiatives and the green Worcester plan, well, Mr. Chairman, that's a false hope. Worcester is doing both. There's also a concern that it's too expensive, too complicated. But the requirements are straightforward, Mr. Chairman. There's no mandate for all electric buildings and fuels are used. The requirement is simply to pre-wire for future electrification and include a minimal level of solar. Those are lost low-cost decisions during construction that prevent much higher costs later.

For large buildings, the additional cost for high efficiency standard is around 2% to 3%, and much of that is offset through existing incentives. and importantly, the upfront costs translate into long-term savings for guess who? Residents. We have fiscal responsibilities for sure. We also have to be clear about the financial impact of stepping back. I'm glad we're not doing that. the previous speaker, you know, there was a conflation of opt in versus pause, you know, in terms of what the council's authority is or isn't. You know, it was reported back from the administration that The administration had the ability to pause on its own, which led me to think, well, if you can pause, you can pause selectively. Mr. Chairman, pausing this code would also impact us fiscally.

it would cost over a million, between one to two million dollars in loss of state funding. State funding for resources meant to support our infrastructure in Worcester, and Long Term Planning. So it's no small decision. This body wanted to vote this and not even send it to committee for a full hearing. with regards to Mass Save. Yes, there have been, are some potential changes to Mass Save. It's not a settled issue. You know, but we shouldn't base long-term decisions on uncertainty, Mr. Chairman. At the end of the day, this is really about who bears the costs. Do we push those costs on the future residents? Do we make smart decisions now? Worcester has the opportunity to lead and to continue to lead to build more housing and to build in a way that works for people over the long term. We can do both. Mr. Chairman, and we should.

Let's think about some of the comments that were made. Well, if we continue to have this, we're not going to have affordable housing. We'll have less affordable housing or whatever the language was. and builders aren't gonna come because they can't profit. The numbers won't work. And also, it'll drive rents up. The market rate is the market rate. No one building or not many folks building are going to rent their rents less than the market rate, unless it's inclusionary zoning or a specific project that's getting state and federal funds for affordability. Let's think about Ariel Norell. Altar on the Row. That development costs $166 million. It's sold for $157 million. Now, they also received, you know,

2.5 million in HTIP, a $10.1 million tie. So you're talking about, you know, 63.6 million in profit. To think that a few hundred thousand dollars, a million dollars would dissuade them from doing business with the city is not accurate in addition to that, Mr. Chairman. We had some things that were stated that, hey, we can't compete. this is really having an impact. But we did have a chief development officer that was able to state on the record that there's not an ability to assess any cost benefit analysis pre or post specialized stretch code because there wasn't enough time. I'm very glad that the legislature is aware that you need additional time to actively assess this.

and to have taken the decision a week ago would have been irresponsible legislation by this body. I'm glad we didn't do it. Mr. Chairman, when you talk about the other factors that are involved, when you're talking about tariffs, when you're talking about percentage interest rates, when you're talking about the workforce, when you're talking about our permitting process, when you're talking about those things, Folks say, well, it's a disadvantage. Well, don't forget Springfield, Lowell, other gateway cities, they said, you know, don't have it. But guess what? They don't have it. They don't have a specialized stretch code, but they also are experiencing production delays. They're also experiencing labor shortage. They're also experiencing complex permitting, high development dollars, high interest rates. So again, conflating

you know, an opt out or a pause was really a pause. We're gonna take a vote to opt out and we just call it what it is, Mr. Chairman. In addition to that, one of the things that we did not discuss We have environmental justice neighborhoods here in the city of Worcester. Those environmental justice neighborhoods are the locations where large-scale developments usually occur. And we know that large buildings emit gas house gases. where it becomes problematic. And those happen in environmental justice neighborhoods. No assessment of that impact, but we want to take a vote. no assessment of that. Again, we were put in a situation where the city administration is having

two departments, Department of Sustainability and Resilience, and the Economic Development, working at cross purposes. to a degree that I've never seen. Now that happens on occasion, but not to this degree. We have yet to receive any data as it relates to the impact on the environment. We had the Environmental League of Massachusetts on the state level reach out and communicate with all the counselors in opposition.

Couple minutes left.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, in opposition to that, you know, and that there was an increase in 44% more permitted houses post stretch code, Mr. Chairman. Reduction in energy use by 40% to 60%, Mr. Chairman. That we can have good climate and impact all rate players, rate payers. and we can lower the use of the grid. So those are all impactful matters, Mr. Chairman. We did not talk about and we didn't get a report back on the health conditions that would be impacted if we roll it back. truly an incomplete report, Mr. Chairman. The risks that future folks would not realize, low lifetime energy bills,

Long-term climate and resilience goals, quality of life. And again, the slower greenhouse gas reduction, heat island mitigation. We hadn't have those. And I'm going to state this very clearly. When things come before us that are of this sort of stature, we need the full information. to the administration. We need the full information. And it's really not OK to ask me as a sitting counselor to make a decision with half the information.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilor Mitra

Thank you, Mr. Chair. This council has been speaking, discussing about enforcing to pause the specialized stretch code or not to pause for the last few weeks. We know it has been a long time that we discussed about it and now we know the reality that we can't talk about it and the legislation doesn't allow us. I absolutely agree with my colleague, Councilor Bergman, what he said that we accept what is in our hands now, but we should move forward. to move forward to do the development in our city that we need. We need a lot of homes. We know that. Every year we have to develop about 1,000 homes. For a few years, we have to develop about 12,000. Holmes and this would have given probably as we thought some incentive for the developers to move forward and expedite the job on hand and get those done. Pausing was not killing it.

Pausing was just to moratorium and after 12 months or 20 months, whatever would have been the vote, we would have resumed it back again. We are in favor of specialized stretch code. What I really would like to know from Mr. Manager is that after all this discussion that we are having, I got the message from your office that We cannot discuss about it anymore. Would you please give us an explanation of when did you come to know about it and how come we didn't know this about about this rule before?

Mr.

Manager.

Through the Chair to the Council, there was a lot of discussion on the last time we presented the item and made the recommendation of pausing. We were under the impression based on our review of information and the economic development team and myself and others working to try to understand the implications of it, including the commissioner of and Special Service to try to understand the implications of what this could mean. We looked at all the possibilities of what are our options and we felt as though the pausing was a valid option. There was indication or we felt as though based on previous information or information that we've known that we felt as though that was the right decision. After the conversation that happened on this council floor, and the request to hold the item, it gave us the ability to further review that.

So the solicitor, under her review, she provided her guidance to us. And then she also then confirmed her review with the state, which aligned her review of the actual matter. So that's when we knew right away there was some language in the law that prohibited us to do what we actually had requested to do. and we moved quickly to try to provide some information to the council and to the public to let them know that we were in essence basically requesting to Not rescind, but file the item because there is this provision that we cannot take any decision. We cannot act on it. We cannot pause it. opt out within that three-year provision.

And earlier, some of the language that you heard from the council here related to the DOER, Department of Energy Resources. Some of that language also was what we utilized to kind of lead us in that way. but again further work through our solicitor she was able to identify these things and provide that feedback to us which then we were able to confirm with the state including the Attorney General's office and so then we were able to then move quickly to provide some information to the public and ask the council just to file the item.

Thank you, Mr. Manager. In that case, after what I hear from you, I would definitely agree with Councilor Bergman that anytime we have such things, probably we should really go through our solicitor and find out the facts before we put it on the floor because it's certainly now after discussing so much not to be able to talk about it and finding that's what is the legislation is puts us to be in a little bit of an unprofessional position that how come we're discussing all this when this was not even supposed to have been discussed so I just will request you that make sure that we are talking about with the solicitor before we put it on the floor.

Thank you.

Yeah, through Chip to the council. I definitely hear you on that. I take full responsibility as the city manager. It's my job to make sure to review, ask every question, dot every I, cross every T. So I take full responsibility. and knowing that we put the council in that position, that I put the council in that position, when we should have put more thorough process into reviewing that documentation.

Mr. Mayor.

I'll be real quick but I just The community come up to me, a lot of people who were very supportive of the stretch code and this council is supportive of it. And one of the questions they kept on saying, one of the statements from me made is that we had a 44% increase. and making permits in the last year or so. And I just want to, what's that? and across the state. And I was just curious what our stats are here in the city of Worcester. Would you have like what the percentage, is it decline, increase? like I just wanna make sure that people understand what is the effective date of the specialized stretch code that went into effect?

Mr. Dunn?

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I'll start through the chair and then turn it over to Mr. Antonovica. You know, one of the things that I tried to do in approaching this was to really take a balanced approach in evaluating the data. As Councilor King also mentioned, I wasn't going to make conjectures about what might be or talk about data that doesn't yet exist. and I think one thing that I learned through that process in reviewing information and studies and commentary from both the development community but also the sort of energy advocacy community is that you need to kind of understand and take that with a grain of salt and kind of question the data you might be getting. What's the source of that data? Is it comparing apples to apples? One of the things that I referenced specifically in the report to council is that there's a lot of conversation about comparing the specialized stretch code and the performance of those buildings to the base code, even just earlier tonight. that was referenced like it's 40% to 60% more efficient.

But again, we need to be talking about what's the differential between the stretch code and the specialized stretch code, not the base code in standard buildings, because if we want to really evaluate and so forth. So I think we need to be talking about the cost benefit analysis and what might happen in terms of utility bills or just the overall energy performance of the building. We need to be talking about just what's in front of us. And that's the differential between the stretch code and the specialized stretch code. framed in a certain way. It can be used strategically depending on who's putting out that data to maybe support their position on a particular matter. To be honest with you, I don't know what the 44% increase in building permits, where that came from. It's certainly not aligned with our experience here in Worcester and what we're seeing. So I'd happy to, I think Mr. Antonovic looked at that specifically in terms of what we're talking about with new construction as well. Like as we know, the specialized stretch code only refers to new construction.

So if somebody pulled a residential building permit to put a deck on the back of their house, I don't know why we would be counting that in terms of residential permits being up. I also people use the term permit in different ways. I don't know if people are referring to what comes before a planning board. It's one thing to see a project be proposed in front of a planning board and have somebody you know contemplate building units it's another thing to get a building permit and actually start commencing the construction of that project so we did try to take a look at our experience with new residential building permits from prior to when the specialized stretch code was adopted to now. I'd be happy to have Mr. Antionavica comment on that.

Commissioner.

to the chair, to the council. So after last council meeting, I did hear the same statements that there were an increase in permits after the passage of the specialized code. It kind of piqued my ears because in my experience enforcing the specialized code, that hasn't really been the case. So we went back and I asked Nancy, our operations manager, to run a couple of reports for me. We did a year before the council adopted it, a year after the council adopted it, and then we did a year before the activation date and the year after the activation date. What we did see was an increase in applications prior to the adoption, but what we've seen afterwards is, yes, there is an increase in permits from the year before to the year after. What we've seen, though, is a decrease in new residential permits from 130 down to 103. There's been a drop of 16%.

and new residential permits. We've seen an increase in the amount of renovations and repairs. So what that is, is that is people not wanting to take on the big projects and not wanting to upgrade to the new systems. They are doing lesser projects and not being bumped into the higher costs and the higher stringencies of the codes.

Thank you. Mr. Manager?

Yeah, I just want to add something else. One of the things that we're seeing, and again, the specialized thresholds is addressing new construction. A lot of the new construction that's even happening here in the City of Worcester or any external communities across the entire state, a lot of them are requiring state incentives. Now, if you utilize state incentives, if you're seeking subsidy from the state, the state requires you to utilize the passive house model or the passive house requirements of the building code. which then allows you to go through the Specialized Trust Code or utilize the Specialized Trust Code. But to do that, they're requiring those subsidies in major dollars. And we talk about H-DIP program. We talk about all these kind of the Affordable Homes Act. all those dollars are helping to, but they're requiring that. So the taxpayers are taking on that responsibility.

And in addition to that, many of those developers are not only seeking that incentive, at the state level, they're also seeking local incentives. So it's a double whammy just to be able to meet the requirement that the state is requiring on these passive house requirements. So again, there is significant and when we talked about data and we talked about like the actual cost, we have to look at these nuances, right? Because it's easy to throw out 44% of new construction. Yeah, we've had an increase. Okay, how many of those increases have actually been projects that have been supported by incentives from the state level? Because if 100 or 80% of them are, the state automatically requires you but then the state has to pony up those dollars in the significance of millions of dollars to be able to get those projects moving. Otherwise, developers will stay stagnant and they won't build those projects.

Mr. Mayor?

Out of the 103 projects, I think you said about 103, going from 140 to 103 or something like that, how many of those are, I guess, lack of a better term, real, going forward, that were done after we passed the specialized stretch code?

Commissioner.

So through the chair of the council, of those 103, those are those are real projects. Those are physical permits that we have in that are under review and in the building permit process, not just planning, not with the planning approval. actual permits in with plans ready to go.

And out of that, how many are going forth with construction? I'm just trying to get an answer. Like, still 103 is a lot of...

Through the Chair, to the Council, right now, we I can't tell you that answer because we don't know what the financial situations are with all of these projects. We know that The applicants have put them in. We typically don't see an application come in to the building department if a project is not going to be moved forward and they don't have the funding. like I said, the biggest drop we've seen is just the amount of new projects. One of the other items that we've noticed and it's something that Worcester doesn't have in place right now but out east towards the Boston area, a lot of the communities that adopted the specialized code

were able to make their projects pencil out because their zoning codes had density bonuses that allowed all of these all-electric buildings to create more units within their envelope in order to make the projects pencil out on the other end for the developers and the investors.

Interesting. Mr. Mayor?

Okay, so my guidance is that it's not going to a positive direction, but still a positive result. and not to the degree that you were hoping of 150, what's gone down 16% the permits for new construction, correct?

Through the Chair, yes. Commissioner. But there's still over 100 that are going forward as far as you know. At this point in time, yes, that's the number we have is 103 new residential permits. So as these progress, maybe several months, we get a report back to the council asking where these 103 projects are at. Through the chair, we can absolutely do that. and also in the form of a motion I know the manager talked about all the subsidies that go into making this happen from the state, from us. I don't know if that's economic development to you, but a detailed report on the analysis of that and how that impacts the taxpayer, but also the project itself.

I'm sure Mr. Dunne and I can come up with a good report on that. OK.

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Roll call on those orders, Chairman, on those orders.

Councilor.

Madam Chair.

Excuse me. Mr. Mayor, what did you say? You want to do him next?

Okay. Council Rivera. Thank you. To the Chair, to the administration, Commissioner, Just to clarification, 103 permits down 16%, so now up 44%, down 16%. and out of the 103, I don't know if you answered this question, how many of them are new projects, new residential, which the special code comes into play?

Through the chair of the council, all of those are under the specialized code. All of those 103 are enforced underneath the specialized stretch code.

Sounds good. And the next question is, I heard what the city manager say through the chair of the administration is, do all of them qualify for programs, state and local programs, or are they just straight up themselves? doing it, you know, without tax credits or local or state funded programs.

through the chair to the council. I don't have that answer right now without doing an analysis of all 103 permits and speaking with Mr. Dunn as to which ones are getting credits. I don't have that answer at my fingertips right now.

If I may, through the Chair to the Councilor, I agree with the Commissioner in the sense of we don't necessarily, especially on the smaller projects, don't always have that reporting info. They don't have a requirement to tell us if they're getting the Passive House Incentive under Mass Save for example. There are some limitations because I think of the and I don't know for sure because we haven't like reviewed the full list or provided that to council but of the 103 projects that the commissioner was referencing like what are the size there's probably a great range in terms of the size for everything from a single family probably all the way up to More than 100 units in one of those projects. But the Passive House Incentive Program through MassSave is probably the most right now, at least if it doesn't get cut. is probably the most predictable incentive that is out there. And right now it is at $3,000 per unit in terms of offsetting the construction costs.

for that but what I think is kind of again being deliberated is that I think there's some folks that feel like that's a great incentive and that it's offsetting a significant amount of the cost but then there's other folks that are saying the additional costs are far beyond that. So that's not even making a dent in the added cost that those projects are seeing. In addition, the requirement to access that particular program under MassSave is that it's limited to multifamily projects over five units. So if you were doing like for whatever reason a new construction of three units that was triggering specialized stretch code, that program would not be available to you because you haven't met that What's that? Through the chair.

Council Rosen.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I don't think the discussion tonight is necessarily about the pros and cons of the specialized stretch code. I think it's more about why three or four years ago I wasn't on that council, but three or four years ago, that council that adopted this wasn't told they were making at least a three year commitment to it. So my question would be, and it's been kind of talked around tonight. My direct question to the manager would be why weren't they told that there was a three year commitment a few years ago when they adopted this? Seems like none of them really knew.

Mr. Manager?

To return to the council, I think there was something that there was a misclarification or misunderstanding on the current statute or what was happening at the time. based on what was recommended by the Department of Sustainability and Resiliency. So all parties in the city three years ago were not aware of those provisions that were actually included as part of the Mass General Law. and in what's in the Mass General Law in correlation to what the OER was releasing.

So through the Chair, this to me seems like a problem here. So three or four years ago when the council was advised by the administration to adopt the specialized stretch code, they didn't find out that it was a three year commitment at least because I assume the City Manager, the Economic Development Office, the city solicitor at the time, the law department, didn't know that it was a three year commitment. Is that correct through the chair to the manager?

Mr. Manager. That also includes the Department of Sustainability and Resiliency who actually move that forward as well. So collectively everyone.

Okay, so collectively, so I mentioned three, you just added one. So at least four. And again, I hope my colleagues see that as a problem. Now some said tonight, I don't wanna criticize. No, we have a job to do here, okay? And this was, I mean, two weeks ago, I was among seven or eight of us who was adamant I wanted to hold this. I wanted to pause it. I wanted to pause it. I shouldn't say hold it. I wanted to pause it. And I felt that was a good decision at the time and I still do. If we didn't have this three year commitment, I'd be voting tonight to pause it. But what worries me, what concerns me, is that four of our departments, our city manager and economic development, especially who a few weeks ago were saying, Rosen, you should support the pause because it's the right thing to do. I just can't accept the fact that we didn't know.

If we're gonna run a city government that way by people saying, I'm sorry, we didn't know, not acceptable to me. So I won't go along with the council to say I don't want to place the blame. I'm just saying it's not acceptable. It better not happen again. If we're going to accept it again, then that means we'll accept it again and again and again. I won't. So the discussion here, it's been all tonight. It's been about the, is it good? Is the stretch code good or bad? Or good for the city, bad for developers? None of that matters. The question tonight is, are you going to accept the administration encouraging us, twisting our arms, pause it. but not knowing that we can't even do that, not knowing the state law, I find that it's inexcusable and I just won't accept it.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Anybody else? Yep. Councilor Bergman.

I just want to say I think this is why it's so important for as a council for us to do our due diligence and take time and research and I know you know things like this do happen. And I know, you know, but we talk when we talk about housing development, the stretch code has not had a significant impact on slowing housing down in the city and you know and that's credit to our economic development team and the city manager for you know Stitching together the different programs that the state is offering by providing incentives and that's what we should be doing. And I think we should be doing what Boston is doing as well, which is putting together more incentives to balance out the construction of housing that saves residents money and that is better for the environment. It's possible to do both.

So I just want to say I think, you know, It's important that as a council we do our due diligence and do research and really this is why government doesn't move fast for this exact reason. So that's all I want to say.

Okay. I just want to wrap up.

I didn't use my second five minutes. I don't think I finished my first, but I don't need all of that. I just want to wrap up with a few comments. I want to reiterate my motion. which is, I think, consistent with what Councilor Rosen just said. Going forward, I'm just gonna say for myself, I hope my colleagues agree, I personally will never vote for an item that requires us to opt in or opt out unless and until I have a report from whoever I need to have a report from, and it could be more than one department, and it certainly includes the city solicitor, on what happens if we decide that we didn't take the right course of action and we need to rescind, pause, whatever word you want to use. Unless and until I have that information in front of me, I will be in abstain and I will be difficult about it because it's not fair to any of us to be put in that position and it's not a matter. We should know if we're voting for something, what if it turns out not to be a good idea?

Some people in the audience think that we have a gift beyond the average human being, that every time we vote for something, it has to be the right decision. I'm going to admit, I'm not going to speak for anyone else, I've made a couple bad decisions in my time on the council. and I'd like to know when I make those bad decisions that they can be undone or at least have the information before I take those decisions. Now, thankfully, the vast majority of decisions have been correct. But let me also say something else. And I don't have to ask either of the department heads that are in front of me. It's something I know intuitively. There's nobody. no other colleague of mine or anyone else is going to ever convince me that the cities and towns of Massachusetts that don't have the specialized Stretch Code are at a disadvantage compared to Worcester that has it as far as attracting developers. It just doesn't make any sense. It doesn't make any sense, just like a comment a while ago, that people might move to Worcester if we allow chickens. It just doesn't make sense. Not to me, anyways.

Maybe to other people it does. So the specialized stretch code, yeah, it is a disadvantage. Now, could we work with it? Yeah, we could. But did that pause need to happen? It did, but it can't. And again, I don't want to go backwards. but what I want to do is reiterate that that motion should be voted on and going forward we have to have clear information on what the ramifications are if we vote to opt in or opt out or something and how we can undo it. Because yes, circumstances change. Let me just add one last thing. And that is that, and it was alluded to by Mr. Dunn, Things are often phrased in ways that people want people to hear based on the outcome they want to have happen. I'm going to be extra vigilant, particularly when it comes to a couple of departments, not every department in this city, when the information is presented to me by what I perceive as to be people that might be more activists than policymakers.

because much of the information, and I don't want to skip over this, much of the information I heard two and a half years ago turns out to be not accurate whatsoever. Now granted, it could have been just information that was available at the time and it turned out not to be accurate, but when people are striving for a result, Oftentimes, it's easier to cater what is said in a way that tries to get you the result you want to get. And I'm going to be, it's on me. I voted for this. I voted for this. I believed everything I was told. I'm not saying anybody lied to me. But what I am saying is I took it at good faith value that what was being presented to me was 100% accurate to the best of the ability of the people telling me that. And I look back now and I don't feel that was the case. And I am not mad at anybody but myself, but I'm just saying it will never happen again.

Okay, anybody else?

Mr. Chairman.

Councilor King, your time is up.

Thank you.

Let me just suspend the rules. Doral, Roll Call, Suspender, Rosa, Council, King.

Councilor Bergman? No. Bilotta? No. Economou? No. Fresolo? No. King?

Yes.

Mitra?

No.

Ojeda?

Yes.

Rivera? No. Rosen? No. Toomey?

No.

Mayor Petty?

No.

Okay, so the motion is to file. Councilors Bergman? Yes. Bilotta? Yes. Economou? Yes. Fresolo? Yes. King? Yes. Yes. Mitra.

Yes.