2026-07-21 - City Council

00:00The city council is the sole legislative

00:03body of the city of Framingham and is

00:04therefore responsible for passing city

00:06ordinances. The city council is made up

00:08of 11 members who exercise the

00:10legislative powers of Framingham. Two of

00:12these members are known as counselors at

00:14large and nine members are known as

00:15district counselors. The city council

00:17serves as a link between the citizens of

00:19Framingham and their municipal

00:20government. Counselors help constituents

00:22by connecting them to resources,

00:24services, and city departments and also

00:26serve as advocates for all Framingham

00:28residents. The following city council

00:30coverage is brought to you by the

00:32Government Channel, a service of the

00:33city of Framingham.

00:57Good evening and welcome to the uh city

00:59council meeting for July 21st, 2026. Uh

01:03the first item on our agenda tonight is

01:05an executive session. So I'll take a

01:07motion to enter into executive session.

01:10>> So moved.

01:10>> Second.

01:11>> Moved by M. Uh for the purpose uh stated

01:13on the agenda. Uh so moved by Mr.

01:15Cannon, seconded by Mr. Stephanini. Uh

01:18by roll call vote. Where is that coming

01:20from?

01:20>> It's me.

01:21>> Okay. No problem.

01:22>> You need a new computer. I don't know

01:23how to turn.

01:23>> No, no, that's that's fine. I just

01:25didn't know. I couldn't tell where it's

01:26coming from. All right. Anyways, um all

01:28those in favor, Mr. Aani.

01:29>> Yes.

01:30>> Yes.

01:32>> Yes.

01:32>> Yes.

01:33>> To Zoom. Let's see. Who do we have on

01:36Zoom? Christine.

01:37>> Yes.

01:39>> Janet.

01:41>> Wow.

01:43>> I was very eager to vote.

01:45>> Thank you, Janet. I'll vote for Janet.

01:47Yes.

01:47>> Okay. And I think that's it. So, that's

01:50uh one, two, three, four, five. It's

01:51eight in favor, zero opposed. We are now

01:54in executive session. Good evening and

01:55welcome to the city council meeting for

01:58July 21st, 2026.

02:01The first item on our agenda tonight,

02:04which I don't have with me anymore.

02:06Hold on. No, I just got to get to it.

02:08Anyways,

02:11we had an executive session which um has

02:14already been completed. So the first

02:16item for our open session would be our

02:19ex um executive session minutes of

02:216:3026.

02:23>> Motion to approve.

02:24>> Second.

02:25>> Is there any further discussion?

02:28Okay. All those in uh do we have anybody

02:31in Zoom?

02:32>> Christine.

02:34>> Okay. So hold on for a second then. I

02:36get my trusty vote sheet out even though

02:40this is a

02:41>> she's in the spot for this thing.

02:44>> Okay. So, um, Miss Long,

02:48>> yes.

02:48>> Mr. Ward,

02:50>> yes.

02:50>> Miss Feny,

02:51>> yes.

02:51>> Mr. Canon, yes.

02:52>> Mr. Alexander,

02:53>> yes.

02:53>> Mr. Aani,

02:54>> yes.

02:55>> Miss Malik,

02:55>> yes.

02:56>> Mr. Miss Bryant,

02:57>> yes.

02:58>> Myself, yes. Miss Lebrono,

03:00>> yes.

03:01>> Very good. Okay. Next on the agenda is

03:04the minutes from

03:076226 open session.

03:09>> Second.

03:10>> Any further discussion?

03:11>> Yep.

03:12Yes,

03:13>> uh there is, I believe, a mistake. Um

03:16I'm sorry, Marian, for not giving you a

03:17heads up. Um about uh the chair called

03:20for a moment of silence. It said the

03:22name is John Cur Curran. Shouldn't that

03:24be John Khan?

03:26>> Yes.

03:28Thank you. An amendment. Anything a

03:32friendly amendment. Anything else uh

03:34other than that? Thank you for pointing

03:35that out. Okay.

03:38>> All those in favor? Mr. Ward?

03:41>> Yes. Miss Feny,

03:42>> yes.

03:42>> Mr. Canon, yes. Mr. Alexander,

03:44>> yes.

03:44>> Mr. Daviani, yes.

03:45>> Miss Malik,

03:46>> yes.

03:46>> Mr. Stephanie, Miss Bryant,

03:48>> yes.

03:48>> Myself, yes. Miss Bruno,

03:50>> yes.

03:50>> Miss Long,

03:52>> yes.

03:53>> Okay. For the audience purposes, when

03:56there's a member on Zoom, it's required

03:58that all our votes be roll call votes.

04:00We cannot do hand votes when uh people

04:02are when any member is on Zoom.

04:08Okay.

04:12Sorry,

04:21just want to state that that agenda on

04:23top of the information I just gave you.

04:25The agenda is uh posted in our public

04:27meeting portal online. All the backup

04:30material that we refer to is on that

04:32agenda online. There's no other backup

04:34material that we have that's not

04:35available and viewable online.

04:43Next is a proclamation upon request of

04:45council Malik is a joint proclamation

04:47declaring August 9th to 15, 2026 as

04:50urban agricultural week in the city of

04:52Framingham.

04:54>> Thank you. Thank you, chair. Um I want

04:56to thank in particular the um

04:58agricultural advis advisory committee

05:01who's been working on recognizing urban

05:03agriculture week and bolstering it and

05:06um who created the initiative to put

05:09this proclamation together uh which I'll

05:11read.

05:14Whereas the history of agriculture in

05:16this region is rooted in the tradition

05:18of the Nipmouth freshwater people whose

05:20communities have long practiced skilled

05:22agricultural stewardship including the

05:24cultivation of the land known as

05:26Danforth farms incorporated as the town

05:28of Framingham in 1700. Whereas the

05:31cooperative efforts of the Framingham

05:33Farmers Union, which supported local

05:35agriculture through the sharing of tools

05:36and resources, as well as the household

05:39and victory gardens tended by

05:41generations of residents, all

05:42contributed to a continuing tradition of

05:45local food cultivation within

05:47Framingham's increasingly urban

05:48landscape. And whereas today, urban

05:51farming and homesteading contribute to

05:52the health and well-being of urban

05:54communities by providing innovative

05:56farming solution designed for denser

05:58areas, including front yards, backyards,

06:01sideyards, rooftops, old koi ponds, and

06:04garage side trelluses. Whereas these

06:07areas support local produce growers,

06:09beekeepers, chicken owners, orchardists,

06:11and naturalists. Whereas expanding local

06:13food production is key to building a

06:15sustainable food system that allows for

06:18adapting to the increasing impacts and

06:20risks of climate change on food supply

06:22channels. Whereas our more urban

06:25neighborhoods are often the hardest

06:28place to source locally grown

06:29vegetables. And whereas urban

06:31agriculture often beautifies public

06:33spaces previously neglected and

06:36blighting blighted, turning them into

06:38productive community spaces.

06:40Whereas urban agriculture provides

06:42opportunity for a diversity of

06:44nationalities to grow an array of

06:46produce representing their home cuisine.

06:48Whereas urban agriculture provides

06:51multi-generational opportunities for

06:53engagement and transmission of cultural

06:55knowledge. Whereas Framingham is host to

06:57six community garden sites with

06:59approximately

07:01181 plots that grow fresh and nutritious

07:04crops that feed hundreds. Whereas

07:06multiple partner organizations support

07:09residents access to fresh local food,

07:11including A Place to Turn, Daniel's

07:13Table, Framingham Community Farm,

07:15Framingham Grows Food, Framingham Public

07:18Library, Framingham Seed Lending

07:20Library, Gems of the Arts, Greater

07:22Framingham Community Church, Hansen's

07:24Farm, Hope Framingham Food Pantry, Metro

07:26SMCA, Sterns Farm, Tasty Harvet's

07:29Kitchen Gardens, United Way of Tri

07:31County, and the Agricultural Advisory

07:33Committee. Whereas the continued growth

07:36of the Framingham Farmers Market further

07:38promotes and provides for fresh produce,

07:40food, and connection to neighbors to the

07:42city residents in a weekly convenient

07:44community center event. Whereas multiple

07:47partner organizations further support

07:49the beautifification of green space in

07:51our urban core, including the parks and

07:53recreation department, the Framingham

07:55Garden Club, and the Pinefield Garden

07:56Club. Now therefore, the mayor and the

07:58city council of the city of Framingham

08:00do hereby proclaim the week of August

08:029th through 15, 2026 as Urban

08:05Agriculture Week in the city of

08:06Framingham and encourage all residents

08:09to recognize and participate in its

08:10observance.

08:17So, I think there's really briefly a

08:20representative from Framingham Gross

08:22Food, if that's okay, was just going to

08:24briefly take a minute um to say

08:26something and then we'll do a photo

08:29together.

08:30>> Okay,

08:31>> if that's okay.

08:31>> Yes.

08:32>> Yep.

08:33>> Hi there. I'm Mary Mett from Framingham

08:35Grows Food. Um we just are grateful for

08:38the city for recognizing Urban Egg Week

08:40and for Leora. I think the crocation

08:42covered it. Um we are all about you guys

08:44can see my back.

08:47Uh grow food build community and you you

08:49gave the history of how growing food

08:51builds community. That was really

08:52wonderful. If you want to find out more

08:54we're new but we don't look new. We're

08:56all people have been involved in

08:57encouraging local food for many years as

08:59transition Frammingham. We have a new

09:01website framingfood.org and our 15th

09:04annual um Framingham vegetable gardens

09:06tour. you have been an urban agriculture

09:09proponent for longer than that, but 15th

09:12annual garden tour is August 29th. You

09:14can find out about it on our website.

09:16Thank you.

09:17>> Thank you.

09:22>> I have a picture with the citation for

09:24the city council.

09:36So, next item on the agenda is public

09:38participation. This is for people who do

09:40not want to speak on something that um

09:42is on the agenda tonight. There are five

09:44people signed up. Four of them state or

09:46indicate reorganization which is subject

09:48to a public hearing which will happen in

09:50a little while. So, and uh also Helen Le

09:53Moine is not I don't believe for

09:55something on the agenda. So, please,

10:00>> good evening. Thank you. It's nice to

10:02see you all. I am here um on behalf of

10:06the Framingham History Center as a

10:07volunteer. Um I've been spearheading a

10:10summer project of the history center

10:12commemorating 250 years of American

10:15independence. Um to mark the

10:17anniversary, the s uh the history center

10:20has identified more than 20 homes in

10:23Framingham that were standing before the

10:26war finally ended in 1783.

10:29And therefore they witnessed the

10:31revolution, the start of which included

10:33many Framingham men and boys who marched

10:36to battles at Lexington, conquered

10:38Bunker Hill, and more uh as part of the

10:41Minutemen, the Framingham militia, and

10:43even George Washington's Continental

10:45Army.

10:46Um, I hope you've all seen some of the

10:4815 homes identified by signs that read,

10:51"This house saw the American

10:53Revolution." The purpose of the signs is

10:56to recognize these homes for their

10:58historic importance, their longevity,

11:01and uh, their preservation by private

11:03owners and to inspire curiosity and

11:06community pride about Framingham's major

11:09role in the American Revolution. I just

11:12wanted to show you what the signs look

11:15like. So, if you haven't seen them yet,

11:17please look for them on those 15 homes.

11:23And of course, Framingham was the last

11:26rest stop on the 56-day trek of General

11:30Henry Knox, who most of us learned about

11:32in history class, whose soldiers dragged

11:3559 tons of cannons captured from the

11:38British for 300 miles in the middle of

11:41winter from Fort Ticonderoga to

11:43Cambridge. And then General Washington

11:46moved those cannons into position at

11:48Dorchester Heights and surprised the

11:50British, forcing them to evacuate after

11:53an 11-month siege of Boston.

11:56Knox's stop included hiding a team of

11:58oxen in the barn at 281 Brook Street so

12:02British spies wouldn't discover the

12:04planned attack. Knox's soldiers and the

12:07cannons were hiding in many of the

12:08patriots homes around Framingham before

12:11continuing the final stretch of their

12:13march.

12:15We will be adding a few more signs as we

12:17hear from owners, but as of now, please

12:19look for those 15 homes on Bellnap,

12:22Edmmonds, Nixon, Wayside Inn,

12:25Parmmentor, Winch, Old Connecticut Path,

12:28Conquered, Maple, and Brookke. And

12:31imagine many of those original owners

12:33fighting for independence, including

12:36John Butler, who built my house in 1750

12:39and went on to fight at the Battle of

12:40Bunker Hill. They would be proud and

12:43maybe surprised to know their houses

12:45still stand and their struggle with

12:48England was worth it 250 years later.

12:51The History Center hopes these signs

12:53make us all proud of Framingham and more

12:56curious about our amazing history. Thank

12:58you.

12:59>> Thank you.

13:06Okay. I don't see anyone else in public

13:08participation except on Zoom. I see Mr.

13:11Chason. I assuming you are for the

13:13reorganization. Is that

13:18>> Mr. Chason? Are you looking to speak to

13:20the reorganization? Is that what you're

13:21looking to speak to?

13:22>> No, no, no. Thank you. I would like to

13:25speak now on a general topic and later

13:29on the reorg. Is that okay with you?

13:32>> Certainly. But you have three minutes

13:33now as if it's not on the agenda.

13:36>> Okay. Okay. So, I want to raise an issue

13:40about tonight's agenda.

13:42One of the most important issues facing

13:45our city. The proposal to reorganize

13:48major departments, eliminate the

13:52director of elder services is buried as

13:55item 18 on the agenda.

13:59This proposal affects thousands of

14:01seniors, veterans, library patrons, etc.

14:05It needs to be it deserves to be front

14:09and center, not something the public

14:12must wait hours to reach to reach.

14:15Right. Many seniors cannot sit through a

14:18three or four hour meeting. Others

14:21simply don't have the stamina to remain

14:24late in the evening. By scheduling this

14:27hearing so far down on the agenda, the

14:31practical effect is that many people

14:34most affected may never get the

14:37opportunity to participate.

14:40Whether intentional or not, this sends

14:42the wrong message.

14:45It creates the appearance that the

14:47administration is hoping this proposal

14:50will receive less public attention and

14:54less public comment.

14:57Government works best when it welcomes

15:01particip participation and not when it

15:05makes participation more difficult.

15:09for future meetings involving major

15:11policy changes. I respectfully request

15:16that this council schedule these items

15:18near the beginning of the agenda. Our s

15:22our seniors and all residents deserve

15:26nothing less.

15:28A proposal of this magnitude should be

15:30given the prominence it deserves, not

15:34treated just as another item to get

15:38through before the meeting ends. Thank

15:41you.

15:42>> Thank you. Normally we don't respond,

15:44but I think it's important to point out

15:45given that comment, our agenda is

15:47structured by our rules which were

15:48adopted by the committee in January. And

15:50our rules require appointments to be

15:52upfront. That was an addition the

15:53council made upon the recommendation of

15:55our rules committee back in January.

15:57They used to be more at the end of the

15:58meeting, but so they are upfront and

16:00they take up up all the way up through

16:02item number 13. So the suggested it's

16:04number 18 like it's buried is really not

16:06accurate and it's not discretionary.

16:08It's in the next section after

16:09appointments by rule is public hearing

16:12and it's in the public hearing section

16:14which is um as I say right after the

16:16appointment section. And so if anybody's

16:18interested in that, you can look at our

16:19rules which is on the website, city

16:21council website, and it shows the

16:22structure of our agenda. So I don't want

16:24anybody to think that the uh it's just

16:26something that we put down there because

16:28we felt like it because it's it's not.

16:30Okay, with that, um, next is

16:35appointments. Speaking of, uh,

16:38>> what's that?

16:40>> Did you sign up, sir?

16:41>> I did.

16:43That was

16:43>> That's all right. Come. You can come up.

16:44You get three minutes. Is this a f

16:46public participation for something not

16:47on the agenda?

16:48>> This is not on the agenda. Correct.

16:50>> Yeah. Okay.

16:56>> All right. Can you hear me?

16:58>> Yes.

16:59>> Good evening. My name is Anton. I'm

17:01resident of District 2. As of 6:35 p.m.

17:04this evening, there are at least two

17:05Flock cameras that are still pointed at

17:06our streets. The city uh contract with

17:09Flock ended on June 30th, and initial

17:11reports suggested the cameras would be

17:13taken down on July 20th. That is now

17:15yesterday. According to Fox Transparency

17:17Portal, the last time our police

17:18department accessed data from the

17:19cameras was on June 30th at around at

17:22around 9:00 a.m. Eastern time. While the

17:24police department may no longer have

17:26access, I'm not aware of a way to verify

17:27that the cameras have actually been

17:29disabled and are no longer collecting

17:31data. I would like you to consider

17:33whether any additional actions are

17:35warranted while we wait for the

17:36remaining cameras to be removed. Thank

17:38you for your time.

17:39>> Thank you.

17:42Okay, next on the agenda is

17:44appointments. Uh the first set of

17:46appointments are division head

17:47appointments. We haven't had these for a

17:48while. So, um these there are three

17:51appointments of division heads. I just

17:53like to make a statement regarding this.

17:55All three of these division heads um are

17:57being reappointed back to a year ago,

18:00last July 1st, I believe. Uh July 1st,

18:032025 would have been an appointment that

18:06was effective in the fourth year of the

18:07mayor's term by charter. any division

18:10had appointments in the first three

18:11years of the mayor's term require that

18:14the city council, if they were to

18:15disapprove them, so to speak, would have

18:16to have a two-thirds vote to disapprove.

18:18Otherwise, the mayor's appointment for

18:20years one through three of the charter

18:21are are approved unless the city council

18:24disapproves him by uh a two-thirds vote.

18:26However, in the fourth year of the

18:28charter of a mayor's term, the charter

18:30says any appointments in those years

18:32must be approved by a twothirds vote of

18:34the city council for the fourth year of

18:36a mayor's term. Since these are

18:38retroactive to that fourth year of the

18:40mayor's term, they require twothirds

18:41vote of approval. Okay,

18:45>> thank you for clearing that up because I

18:47had a couple people ask about that. Um,

18:50so we met, the appointment subcommittee

18:52met on July 15th and we met with um the

18:56three division heads. We met with Kathy

18:58uh Olirri, director of human resources,

19:02uh Fred Bray, building commissioner, and

19:04Saki Sarkeesian, and director of

19:06planning and community development. Um I

19:10guess we could take these separate. The

19:11the first one was uh was Kathy and it

19:14was a three

19:16um vote and Fred Prey was also a three

19:20vote and then Saki Saresian was a 2-1

19:25split vote. Um well they all passed um

19:28but one of them had um a dissenting

19:30counselor. So I don't know if we just

19:33take separate

19:34>> I think I think for the I think for

19:36these I I normally I think blocking our

19:39appointments makes sense but I think we

19:40should probably take three separate

19:41votes.

19:42>> That's what I figured as well. So um so

19:45I'd like to make the motion to approve

19:47Kathy Davis Olri.

19:48>> Second it.

19:49>> Okay. Is there a second?

19:51>> Second.

19:51>> I'm sorry. I just want to make sure we

19:53do it all in order. So Mr. Staviani has

19:56the second. Any further discussion?

20:00Seeing none, all those in favor, Miss

20:01Feny,

20:03>> yes.

20:03>> Mr. Cannon,

20:04>> yes.

20:05>> Miss Alexander, Mr. Alexander,

20:06>> yes.

20:06>> Mr. Daviani,

20:07>> yes.

20:08>> Miss Malik,

20:08>> yes.

20:08>> Mr. Stephanie, Miss Bryant,

20:10>> yes.

20:11>> Myself, yes. Miss Leam Bruno,

20:12>> yes.

20:13>> Miss Long,

20:15>> yes.

20:15>> Mr. Ward,

20:16>> yes.

20:17>> Okay. Next, please.

20:18>> Thanks. So, next we have Fred Bray for

20:21building commissioner. That was a 300

20:22vote and I'd like to make the motion to

20:24move him forward.

20:25>> Second.

20:25>> Second.

20:26>> Is there any further discussion?

20:30>> Seeing none, all those in favor? Mr.

20:32Cannon? Yes.

20:32>> Mr. Alexander?

20:33>> Yes.

20:33>> Mr. Yes.

20:34>> Miss Malik, yes.

20:35>> Mr. Sini. Miss Bryant, yes.

20:37>> Myself, yes. Miss Lambruto,

20:39>> yes.

20:40>> Miss Long,

20:41>> yes.

20:42>> Mr. Ward,

20:42>> yes. Miss Feny,

20:44>> yes.

20:44>> Okay. And last.

20:46>> Okay. Thank you. So last was Saki

20:48Sakisian, director of planning and

20:50community development. I'd like to make

20:52that motion to move him forward.

20:54>> Second.

20:56>> Okay. Is there any further discussion?

20:59>> M.

21:00>> Hi chair. Thank you. I'm sorry I didn't

21:01ask this before. So um were these the

21:05three applications or were there more

21:08applications?

21:09>> The appointment by the mayor. I mean

21:11there

21:12>> Oh, right, right, right. Sorry. Sorry. I

21:14was thinking about another board, but

21:16okay. Thank you,

21:19>> Miss Long.

21:21>> Uh, yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just

21:22want to say I'm the dissenting vote on

21:24this. Um, I do want to thank Mr.

21:26Sarkeesian for his services, city of

21:28Framingham and his dedication to his

21:29current position. However, I will not be

21:32voting for his reappointment to this

21:33current position. My comments do not

21:35reflect his character work ethic

21:37commitment to Framingham, but rather a

21:39more critique of his vision for

21:41Framingham, which seems to lack focus on

21:43economic development. I believe

21:45Framingham is at a serious crossroad in

21:47time where we need strong leadership

21:49focusing on the vision of our master

21:51land use plan particularly in economic

21:53development and to generate long-term

21:56revenue which is direly needed to

21:58support the city's future needs.

21:59Framingham needs to regain its former

22:01position as economic engine of Metro

22:03West if the city will continue to grow

22:06and thrive. While I do not support Mr.

22:09Sarkeesian reappoint to his current

22:11position. I would consider retaining him

22:13in another role where his experience and

22:15institutional knowledge could continue

22:17to benefit the city. So I just wanted to

22:20say that um since I'm the dissenting

22:23opinion.

22:24>> Thank you, Mr. Stephanie.

22:26>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um

22:29just a few comments. Um,

22:33I find uh our planning and economic

22:35development function to be well

22:37organized. I don't know anybody who

22:40works harder. I respect the mayor's

22:41ability to choose his team. I think we

22:44do. I think Miss Long's assessment that

22:46we lag behind where we were in terms of

22:50uh development is true, but I think that

22:53relates largely to the fact that we were

22:55configured and developed as an old

22:57industrial city with manufacturing and

22:59industry which does not exist anymore.

23:02And I think we need to look in a mirror,

23:04myself included, at the council. We have

23:07not been able to redo our zoning bylaws

23:09at the pace in which they need to be

23:11looked at to keep pace with what

23:13industry and development needs. We've

23:15not set up biotechnology zones. We've

23:18not looked at our vacant apartment uh uh

23:20office buildings to figure out what we

23:22need to do. I think the administration

23:23has done that. I think the council needs

23:26to put our hats on and do our work. I

23:29think there's a lot of work to do, but I

23:31for one think Mr. Sarkeesian is a a

23:34consmate professional who works really

23:35hard, gets a lot of things done. Um, and

23:39even if not, I respect the mayor's

23:40ability to prerogative to choose his

23:43team. So, I would hope we would we would

23:46support this person and I would hope

23:48that we would address Miss Long's

23:50comments, but we as a council in

23:54collaboration with the mayor and

23:55everyone else need to address that.

23:56That's not a oneperson

23:59challenge. Um, General Motors used to be

24:02a giant manufacturing facility

24:04delivering $26 million a year in

24:06revenues to the city. Today, it's an

24:08auto auction. A lot of our industrial

24:10buildings, similarly, our office

24:13buildings, which were filled with

24:15corporate offices, now a lot of them are

24:17vacant. We've got to figure out how we

24:20deal with that as a community. Um, so I

24:23would hope we would reappoint Mr.

24:24Sarkeesian and work with the mayor and

24:27his team to address these issues.

24:30Matt,

24:32>> just a question. But the um but Adessa,

24:34right? I mean, they pay taxes, too,

24:37right?

24:38>> They do just not at the same level with

24:39the same jobs.

24:43>> Thank you. Um I think it's interesting

24:45that there's all this emphasis on

24:47economic development and the department

24:49is planning and community development.

24:52And I think that's an important

24:53distinction because when we're thinking

24:54about community development, economic is

24:57obviously a large piece of it. um which

25:00drives community development, but let's

25:02also acknowledge that it is like a piece

25:05of that larger community development. So

25:08um just wanted to respect that.

25:11Anyone else? Seeing none, take a vote on

25:14the nomination of Mr. Skeesian. Uh all

25:17three nominations as say retroactive to

25:19July 1st, 2025. Mr. Alexander,

25:22>> yes.

25:22>> Mr.

25:23>> Yes.

25:24>> Miss Malik,

25:24>> yes.

25:25>> Mr. Stephanie, Miss Bryant,

25:26>> yes. myself. Yes. Mr. Bruno,

25:29>> yes.

25:29>> Miss Long,

25:30>> no.

25:31>> Mr. Wood,

25:32>> yes.

25:33>> Miss Feny,

25:34>> yes.

25:34>> Mr. Canon,

25:35>> yes.

25:36>> Okay. So, all those in favor, all three

25:37candidates do achieve a two-thirds vote.

25:39Congratulations.

25:40>> Thanks, guys.

25:41>> Okay.

25:46>> Congratulations.

25:48>> Okay. So next um uh numbers six to 13

25:51are all appointments to various boards

25:53and committees which have been uh

25:54reviewed by the

25:56>> Thank you.

25:57>> Thanks.

25:58>> Thank you.

25:58>> Thanks for all you do.

25:59>> Thanks.

26:01>> Reviewed by the committee, the

26:03appointments committee.

26:03>> 101's a good number.

26:06>> That's a win.

26:07>> Are we all set to keep going with

26:09business here? I

26:09>> hope so.

26:11Um I would recommend that we take them

26:13all at once both for the purposes of uh

26:16time and also uh just for organization

26:19efficiency. So Mr. Lebr unless there's

26:22objection I'll accept a broad motion

26:24>> the rest of the appointments. Yes.

26:25>> Yes. Oh absolutely. So I'll make the

26:27motion that we do what he said and take

26:30them all at once as one. Um

26:33>> are you going to read at least their

26:34names in the district?

26:35>> Yes. Yes.

26:36>> Okay. So there are a lot. So all right.

26:39So, we have Matthew um Strum from

26:42District 1 who was approved um these are

26:45all three zero votes to the Disability

26:47Commission through June 30th, 2029.

26:50Um Howard Schwarz, District 3 on the

26:53Elderly and Disabled Tax Fund Committee

26:56through June 30th, 2029.

26:59Um Susan Kennedy and Lynn Damianos. Um

27:04Susan is district 4 and Lynn is district

27:07two from the Framingham Historical

27:09Commission through June 30th, 2029.

27:13And then the historic we had three for

27:17the historic district commission running

27:20through June 30th, 2029. It's Paul

27:22Silva, D3, Paul Shaberno, D8, and Andrew

27:28Habo. I think I might have said that

27:30wrong, but um district six for that

27:33committee. And then

27:36we have um Michelle Castle from district

27:407 for the women, children's and families

27:43commission. We have Encha uh as a

27:46register of voters. And those are all

27:48through um I should say Michelle from

27:52the Women's and Children is June 30th,

27:542029. and egg chow is March 31st, 2029.

27:59And then we have constables Trevor Nadis

28:03and Sean. He's the resident um seed and

28:06Sean Halpin from Milford um because he

28:09is the that you can be out of town for

28:11those constable seats. Um and they are

28:15um just voted for um reappoint and that

28:19again was 300. And then lastly, we have

28:24um police advisory committee, and we

28:26have Ray um Lain from District 2, Lee

28:30Gottenberg, District 2, and Susie

28:33Santon, District 2. I didn't realize

28:35they're all D2. Um and they were all

28:37three. So, I respectfully ask um to move

28:40them all forward.

28:42>> Mr. Chairman, Mr. Stephanie,

28:45>> um just a a a point. It'd be helpful if

28:48the appointment committee at some point

28:50could present to the county council as

28:53was the the ordinance rules where all

28:56these appointments come from. I just I

28:58think of it only because you've got

29:00three appointments to a small committee

29:01that are all from D2.

29:04So, it might be helpful to think about

29:06that and reflect on it at some point. I

29:08don't think it's an urgent matter, but

29:10the next time we do appointments and

29:11you're meeting with those folks, it

29:13might be worth getting the statistics

29:14and thinking about distribution, which

29:17was part of the ordinance that first

29:18council passed. No, and I appreciate

29:21that too. And I do think that these were

29:22reappoints, but you I do know that that

29:25that is something that, you know, we

29:27tried, you know, I should say Nicole and

29:29the mayor. So, um, but I don't disagree

29:31with, you know, having them spread out.

29:36Thank you.

29:37>> Okay.

29:40All right. So, take a motion. Take a

29:42vote.

29:42>> A motion.

29:44>> Motion to approve items 6 through 13. I

29:47believe it was

29:48>> I believe that was

29:49>> made a motion canon second already.

29:51>> That's right.

29:52>> Oh, really? By who?

29:54>> Oh, you mean the the whole

29:56>> entire group of people. She stated the

29:57names and she moved and sec and moved

29:59and seconded. Now we're voting them

30:01unless there's any further discussion.

30:03>> Seeing none, Mr. Daviani,

30:05>> yes.

30:05>> Miss Malik,

30:06>> yes.

30:07>> Mr. Stephan, Miss Bryant,

30:08>> yes.

30:09>> Myself, yes. Mr. Bruno,

30:10>> yes.

30:11>> Miss Long,

30:12>> yes.

30:13>> Mr. Ward,

30:13>> yes.

30:14>> Miss Feny,

30:14>> yes.

30:15>> Mr. Canon,

30:16>> yes.

30:16>> Mr. Alexander.

30:18>> Okay, so those are all approved.

30:20>> Thank you.

30:21>> Next, we have a public hearing. Um,

30:24grant the location hearing at the

30:25request of Verizon Evidence Source to

30:27install one new pole and re relocate two

30:29existing poles on Salem and the road.

30:32And who do we have here from Eversource?

30:36>> Chris.

30:37>> I saw that.

30:39>> I know.

30:40Thanks for that reszone. I don't I don't

30:42have much of that street anymore. Don't

30:43kid yourself.

30:46Dr.

30:47>> Hi. Yes, this is Christine Cosby.

30:49>> Okay. Thank you. Your name wasn't there,

30:51so I didn't realize that you've been

30:53promoted. So,

30:55>> what was the last name? Kantiby.

30:57>> Cosby.

30:58>> Okay. Yes. So, do you want to please

31:00address uh this opening of public

31:02hearing? Uh do you want to address the

31:04uh poll that's uh one new poll and

31:07relocate two existing poles in Salem

31:09Road?

31:12>> Yes. Um, we're requesting a grant to

31:14location to install

31:16two poles on Salem Road and to relocate

31:20two existing poles on Salem Road. And

31:23the reason for that is that uh we're

31:25going to be doing a reconductoring

31:27project where we're going to um

31:31the the polls are needed to to provide

31:33support to the existing pole line and

31:35then to allow for us to reconduct system

31:38improvements and reliability.

31:42Okay. Are there any questions,

31:46Mr. Alexander?

31:48>> I'd just like to ask the applicant if um

31:51this is not going to um being a result

31:53of a double pole at the end of this

31:56relocation.

31:58>> Well, well, once the poles the new poles

32:01are installed, the old poles will come

32:04out after all the other utilities

32:05transfer.

32:08>> That's all I have. So, the answer is

32:10yes.

32:10>> Yes. Right. I make a motion to approve

32:12as presented, Mr. Chairman.

32:15>> Okay. Any further discussion? Seeing

32:18none, all those in favor? Miss Malik?

32:21>> Yes.

32:22>> Miss Bryant?

32:22>> Yes.

32:23>> Myself? Yes. Mr. Bruno?

32:24>> Yes.

32:25>> Miss Long?

32:27>> Yes.

32:27>> Mr. Ward?

32:28>> Yes.

32:28>> Miss Feny?

32:29>> Yes.

32:29>> Mr. Canon? Yes.

32:30>> Mr. Alexander?

32:31>> Yep.

32:32>> Mr. Davidi?

32:33>> Yes.

32:34>> Next is a grant of location

32:37public hearing. By the way, if anyone is

32:39here to speak about any of these polls,

32:40please put your hand up as it is a

32:41public hearing. I'm sorry, forgot to ask

32:43for public the last one. Grant the

32:45location request of Verizon ever source

32:48existing one pole in Heather Drive. So,

32:49let me first Anyone here to speak on

32:51that? Seeing none, Miss Cosby.

32:55>> Hi. Yes, sir. On Heather Drive, we're

32:57looking to relocate an existing pole to

33:00five 556 over6. And the purpose of that

33:04is because the property owner is looking

33:06to relocate his point of attachment 30

33:09feet 30 ft back away from there's an oil

33:12tank in in on his property and he wants

33:15to relocate his service line uh away

33:18from 30 ft away from where it is

33:20currently.

33:23>> Okay. Any questions?

33:24>> I make a motion approve as second.

33:26>> Seeing no questions. Motion all those in

33:29favor. Mr. Stephanie.

33:31>> Yes. Miss Bryant,

33:32>> yes.

33:33>> Self, yes. Miss Lamberlin,

33:34>> yes.

33:35>> Miss Long,

33:37>> yes.

33:37>> Mr. Ward,

33:38>> yes.

33:38>> Miss Feny, yes.

33:39>> Mr. Canon, yes.

33:40>> Mr. Alexander.

33:41>> Mr.

33:42>> Yes.

33:42>> Miss Malik,

33:43>> yes.

33:45>> Okay. Last for polls. Um, one existing

33:50pole in Pearl Street. Uh, so that's

33:52number 16. Is anyone here to speak about

33:54the correct location request by Verizon

33:55Ever Source relocate one existing pole

33:57on Pearl Street? Seeing none. Miss

34:00Cosby,

34:01>> I have a question after Miss Cosby.

34:03>> I'm sure I didn't miss anything.

34:04>> I'm sorry.

34:05>> Yes. Go ahead.

34:07>> Uh Pearl Street, we're looking to

34:08relocate um a pole an existing pole 175

34:13over 17. It's It's actually a temporary

34:16relocation. They're looking to relocate

34:18that across the street because the

34:20overhead wires in that section are it

34:23that we need to get clearance in order

34:25for them to do construction on the

34:27building out there at 121 Union.

34:30>> So that's a new regional justice center.

34:33>> Yes.

34:34>> Okay. Uh Mr. Wette, did you have a

34:37comment about the poll?

34:40>> Yes, I did. Um, and thank you for uh

34:44noting the uh that I'm on Zoom. Um, I

34:49have a question about the polls. I have

34:51three comments to make.

34:54>> The uh wish that the city council uh

34:57through the uh poll poll subcommittee

35:01would provide a list of all polls and

35:04all double poles and their location in

35:07the city. Number two, uh the utility

35:10should provide a schedule of when the

35:13poles will be removed um or and

35:18especially when double poles have been

35:20around for a long time. And number

35:22three, I request that the committee and

35:25the city council encourage the utility

35:27companies uh to address the removal of

35:30poles within two years of the placement

35:34of a of a pole. Um

35:38uh there there could be something by the

35:40city council in discussing when they put

35:43up a poll uh how long will it take

35:47before they remove the the pole that's

35:50been damaged. Uh it can go on for many

35:53years and I think there should be a

35:55schedule of when that will be done and

35:57it's an encouragement to do it within

35:59the two-year period. Um uh and I also

36:03like to know when the schedule of the

36:05utility pole committee meets. I h

36:08haven't seen a meeting of that committee

36:10for a while. Thank you.

36:12>> Thank you. Okay. Is any further

36:14discussion, Malik?

36:15>> I just want to flag for you um that we

36:20are later in this meeting

36:22uh voting on a proposal to put handicap

36:25accessible parking right where this new

36:28pole's going. I mean, obviously not on

36:29the sidewalk. Um, but just it's going to

36:32become a there's also a stop sign there.

36:35Just feels like there's going to be a

36:37lot that's happening right at that

36:38intersection. So, that

36:41>> Stephanie, um, where this pole is being

36:44located is the only tree that is in that

36:47little square and it's a nice tree. How

36:50are you going to protect that tree?

36:56>> Oh, sorry. the the the treat you said. I

36:59I from what I could see the poles going

37:02into like a little small grass strip at

37:04the corner of

37:08Banker Street and Pearl Street,

37:10>> right? And in that corner is a tree that

37:12overhangs the sidewalk in the area.

37:18>> If you're going to if you're going to

37:19damage the tree, are you going to

37:20replace it when you're done?

37:23>> I I I'll I'll find out for sure on that.

37:27um whether or not the tree will be

37:29damaged or if we even if the tree will

37:31be affected at all and if so what we

37:34would do to correct it.

37:37>> Thank you.

37:39>> Okay. Is any further discussion? Is

37:41there a motion?

37:43>> I mo I already made a motion.

37:45>> Okay.

37:47You have a comment?

37:48>> Yeah.

37:49>> Go ahead. Well, um I would be I'd rather

37:53know um whether the tree would be

37:55damaged before I vote on that this

37:58>> the only issue in that is and that's

38:00fine. You can move the table, but this

38:03is for the regional justice center.

38:04They're in the midst of construction and

38:06we're a month away from our next

38:07meeting. So,

38:10>> I trust their ability to do it. I just

38:11wanted to flag it to them to make sure

38:13if they need to take it down, move it,

38:15they plant another one. Well, can we get

38:17some some assurance from the person here

38:20that um they will

38:22>> Well, she said that they would.

38:23>> She said they would.

38:24>> Well, I thought she said they would let

38:26us know if it if if they would might if

38:29there was going to be any damage or

38:30>> chairman, can I offer a friendly

38:32amendment?

38:34Approved as presented with the

38:35condition. If they damage the tree or

38:37have to relocate the tree, plant the new

38:38tree.

38:39>> Second.

38:40>> Friendly amendments. So, so there Okay.

38:44Any other questions? All right. Okay.

38:45So, we'll take a vote on the amended

38:46motion with the tree uh provided for.

38:52>> Okay. Um Mr. Stephanie,

38:55>> yes.

38:55>> Miss Bryant,

38:56>> yes.

38:57>> Myself, yes. Miss Lebrono,

38:58>> yes.

38:59>> Miss Long,

39:00>> yes.

39:01>> Mr. Ward,

39:02>> yes.

39:02>> Miss Feny,

39:03>> yes.

39:03>> Mr. Cannon,

39:04>> yes.

39:04>> Mr. Alexander,

39:06>> Mr. Daviani?

39:07>> Yes.

39:07>> Miss Malik,

39:08>> yes.

39:09>> Very good.

39:11Okay.

39:17So,

39:19next on the agenda is our planning and

39:22zoning uh request for Eagle Rock. Um

39:27I'm trying to do here is

39:34trying to figure out what is the fairest

39:36way to move forward here because there

39:37there's advantages to both ways. We have

39:39two public hearings. Both could be a

39:41little bit of time. one probably more

39:43time than the other. I want to be fair

39:45to the most people, but at the same

39:47point I uh so this is what I'm thinking.

39:50But I would s we I think we should take

39:53it possibly in order but limit the time

39:55we're going to handle it because

39:58for Eagle Rock there's add next on the

40:00agenda and if we go past say a half hour

40:02then maybe postpone it because we may be

40:05close enough to get something done with

40:06Eagle Rock and then it'll get done

40:08because if we take the other hearing

40:10just looking at um I don't think there's

40:13not as many people as maybe I would have

40:14expected but there's still a number of

40:16people that will take the testimony will

40:18probably take an hour or

40:22that doesn't accumulate. So I would

40:24propose I'm trying to be sensitive to

40:25everybody's needs, but I would suggest

40:27that we agree to take Eagle Rock in

40:31order, but after a half hour reconsider

40:33where we are and potentially table it

40:35for another time. So then take the other

40:38>> So Eagle Rock a half hour, we go over a

40:40half hour, they come back.

40:41>> Right.

40:41>> Right. Just based on Mr. Chason's

40:43comments, the hour is only 7:40. It's

40:45not

40:45>> It is. Right. So we'll be on at 8:10. So

40:47I think that's

40:47>> I think that's more than fair. We're all

40:49there a lot few seniors up here at this

40:51table too,

40:51>> right?

40:52>> How many?

40:53>> There's a few of us.

40:55>> I know a few people over 60 up here.

40:57>> Depends how you define senior.

40:59>> Yeah, 55. Apostles.

41:03Everybody here is eligible.

41:06>> All right. So, anyways, um give your

41:09wife a card. See how it goes. I did

41:11that.

41:15>> Okay. Miss Long, do you want to start

41:17here?

41:18Uh sure. Um so this is a zoning map

41:23change. Uh we have discussed this. The

41:26planning and zoning reviewed it over the

41:28course of a year and a half. So I don't

41:31think there's a I mean I understand

41:32there's things that the council may have

41:34concerns about or questions about. But I

41:37did send over a memo later this morning

41:40and I apologize for a late

41:43recommendation. I have still struggling

41:45with vision. Um, so it's been a stretch

41:49for me to be able to review or read

41:51anything or even write anything. But,

41:54um, I did send over a recommendation on

41:56this. Uh, theou has been provided by

42:00the, uh, the by Eagle Rock's uh,

42:03attorney, uh, Kathy Garan, and has been

42:06reviewed by our city solicitor. And you

42:09have that that was provided to everyone

42:12earlier, I think on Friday.

42:14Um

42:16there are a couple of things in it that

42:18I think are of most concern to the

42:21council and it's under one under number

42:25one under 1D regarding uh on 1A and 1D

42:30regarding the um percentage of units it

42:34would be for sale you know condos for

42:37ownership which um theou that you have

42:41states 10%

42:43however ever. After speaking with the um

42:46attorney for Eagle Rock and with Eagle

42:50Rock U principles, um they're willing to

42:53do up to 20%

42:56of uh units for sale. However, they

42:59really don't have the resources, the

43:01funding, the um financing would they

43:04would never get financing for more than

43:0620% uh ownership. They really need the

43:09uh return on investment for rental

43:11units. So that's one change that was in

43:14theou. So we could change that to 20%

43:16from the 10%. And then the other thing

43:19is they're not um amin a amendable to

43:22doing a conservation restriction on

43:24their property. But they are amendable

43:26to have an agreement um in lie of a

43:29conservation restriction to consider

43:31supporting language requiring the

43:33developer to make available suitable

43:35land through a lease uh license or some

43:39sort of similar agreement at a nominal

43:41cost nominal cost to a nonprofit

43:43organization serving children youth or

43:46the broader community. And this issue

43:48came up um uh with councelor Alexander

43:51who had visited with them uh made

43:53comments about the possible potential

43:55use for some of the uh unusable property

43:59um that's wetlands that would be um a

44:02benefit to Framingham.

44:04So basically the gist of that memo that

44:07I sent over does recommend to uh approve

44:11the with those changes and also

44:15um I note that the public benefits to

44:18this project

44:20uh to this zoning change would and the

44:22memorandum of understanding would

44:24balance the city's objectives with the

44:26economic realities of the project by

44:28incorporating the following facility and

44:30the creation of new housing including

44:32affordable and workhouse units.

44:34workforce units, supporting a

44:36financially viable development,

44:38providing long-term community benefits,

44:40creating opportunities for educational

44:42and environmental programming for

44:44Framingham children and families, and

44:46preserving flexibility for future site

44:48planning while protecting

44:50environmentally sensitive areas through

44:52appropriate management and oversight.

44:54Um, and I don't want to make a motion to

44:57approve the zoning map at this time

44:59because I think you u Mr. Chairman, you

45:01probably want to take discussion prior

45:03to any kind of motion, but I did

45:05incorporate that into the memo.

45:07>> Well, I I think maybe a motion could

45:10frame the discussion, though, but I I

45:12don't care.

45:12>> All right. So, I will then make a motion

45:15to approve the zoning map amendment. Um

45:18and also theou as presented with the

45:21with the uh uh suggestions

45:24recommendations that I've made that city

45:26council approve these amendments with

45:28the framing and zoning map for eagleark

45:30which includes expansion of the business

45:33district for the majority portion of 33

45:36Dor Avenue parcel ID 1032361710000

45:42into the remainder of that parcel as

45:44well as into a portion of 31 Valentine

45:47road partial ID 1032212180000

45:52to replace a portion of a R1 single

45:55family district uh residence as shown on

45:58the proposed plan in the background

46:00material.

46:02>> Okay. So, it's been moved and seconded.

46:04Um so, so I'll ask questions. Um do you

46:08guys have anything you want to add

46:10before we start?

46:11>> Um very very briefly, Mr. Chair. Um,

46:14just for the record, Katherine Garahan

46:16from Badage and Dwey and with me are Jim

46:18Hman of Eagle Rock and also Kyle

46:20Magcguire of Eagle Brock and the project

46:22engineer um Tyler King is online if if

46:26he's needed. Um the since the last

46:29meeting um uh we wanted to mention that

46:33the the chair of the council did make a

46:35site visit. Um and as um councelor Long

46:40um detailed um we worked with with um

46:42the chair of planning and zoning

46:44subcommittee and the and the city

46:45solicitor on refining of theou. Um, one

46:49thing I'll add to the um the percentage

46:52of um ownership units um which which was

46:56a change since the last version you saw.

46:58Um we also incorporated some of the um

47:01procedural changes that you saw with the

47:04one Clark's Hill project such as having

47:06theou signed by the mayor and some of

47:09the other items that you saw um a couple

47:12weeks ago with with one Clark's Hill. Um

47:16the um if if you would like to hear a

47:19little bit more from Eagle Rock about

47:22the the um uh percentage of um ownership

47:28units that they felt comfortable being

47:29able to to say that they would reach as

47:32a minimum. Uh Mr. Hman would be happy to

47:35talk to you a little bit more about

47:37that. And um you know other than that we

47:40hope that you'll be able to take the

47:42your first vote on the map change

47:44tonight and we would come back at a

47:46subsequent meeting um for your second

47:49vote. Um and I think that's that's it.

47:53And any questions that you have we're

47:55happy to address. Mr.

47:57>> So theou that I read today was version

47:59three. Is that correct? So now with

48:01Christine's new stuff it's a new

48:02version. Is that where we're at?

48:03>> It's version 4.17. It's the bottom of

48:06the list.

48:06>> Right. I talked to the chair. I All

48:08right. Um, okay. We'll let them I just

48:12because this is

48:13>> No, I mean if you want to speak I mean

48:15we are on somewhat of a limited time

48:17schedule. I apologize for that. So I

48:18want to see how deep we've discussed

48:20this many times. So I'm not sure there's

48:22a lot more discussion to be had here. So

48:24that's why I think we can do it. If we

48:26can't, we'll have to put it off. But uh

48:28so if everybody could just try to keep

48:30that in mind. I don't want to cut off

48:31the discussion, but it's a well

48:33discussed subject. So if we could keep

48:35it as concise as we can so hopefully we

48:37can get to some level of um resolution

48:40for lack of a better term tonight.

48:42>> And and Mr. Chair, if I may to to

48:44councelor Adavani's point um the the

48:47version that was circulated on Friday is

48:50the exact same um it's that except for

48:53the change from changing a 10% to 20%.

48:56There's no other change.

48:58>> Okay.

48:58>> So it could be perhaps a floor

49:00amendment, you know.

49:01>> Thank you, Mr.

49:02>> Chairman. Mr. Stephanie,

49:04>> thank you. Um, I I don't have any issues

49:07with the map or whatever on theou. Just

49:10two issues to be clear. You said it

49:12would be signed by the mayor and not the

49:13council. The version 4.7 has the

49:16council. So, to be clear, this is anou

49:19between the mayor and your client.

49:22>> Um, I'm wondering if you're looking at

49:24the same

49:25>> I've looked through each of the versions

49:27online.

49:28>> The

49:28>> and they're all with the Framingham City

49:30Council at the bottom. the um so the one

49:33that there may be three in there. There

49:36may have been the prior one and a red

49:38line and this new one. You know, it's

49:40been a while. So, there's been versions.

49:42This one should say 0.1 at the end of

49:45the the number at the bottom.

49:46>> It's the second item in the agenda

49:48>> and and um the mayor's signature is on

49:51the one that I have in front of me and

49:53that that was posted. Um I printed it

49:56from the city council site. So, um

50:00>> Okay. Okay. So, we'll we'll clarify

50:01that. It's a good point.

50:02>> I don't see the only other question I

50:03had, Mr. Chairman, was um would you be

50:05amendable to including as we did in the

50:08recent just to be clear that these are

50:11uh the ownership units are arms length

50:13transactions. They're sold. It means

50:16that the owner can't buy all the units

50:18themselves. They have to be sold to

50:21people.

50:22>> People

50:24solicitor has some language they used at

50:26733 Wavely Street that is similar.

50:30That's all I had. Otherwise, I'm good

50:31with this.

50:32>> Yeah, the the um the owner's agreeable

50:34to that.

50:35>> Thank you.

50:36>> Other questions, Miss Bryant?

50:38>> So, on the MOUA, right? Um there's the

50:41added one um 2026-004

50:46revised 71726.

50:49So, I thought that was the one that

50:51carried except for Christine's last

50:53minute letter, but it is if you had

50:55time. Okay, good. Um and my question is

50:59so why um what is the uh hesitation on

51:04the conservation? What would be the

51:06problem with the permanent conservation

51:08thing?

51:10>> Um so I'll take I'll start and then if

51:14if my client would like to add to it. Um

51:16conservation restrictions are extremely

51:18complicated and take a long time to do.

51:21Number one. Um number two they involve

51:24the state. There's a um it's a very

51:26extensive pro process. Um there's um

51:31it's they're usually not something that

51:33is done as a mitigation, you know, with

51:35a planning board decision or zoning

51:37board decision. um they're typically

51:39done as like a tax um uh transaction.

51:44You know, the um so it's it just it's it

51:49feels way overkill for um it's also very

51:53difficult to get financing once you've

51:55done that.

51:56>> Um there's a lot of gu that said there's

51:58a lot of guard rails on this property.

52:00It's that portion of the property is all

52:02zoned R1.

52:04Um, and there's a lot of wetlands there

52:07and um, you know, the development

52:09options there are

52:12not not great. So, I don't know if if

52:14Mr. Houseman would like to add to that,

52:16but

52:17>> uh, yeah, and thank you everybody. Uh,

52:19good evening. Um, in discussing the

52:21parcel with uh, Commissioner Alexander

52:24on site that day, it's a small portion

52:26of the property way down at the bottom

52:28of a grade. Um, and I think for ease of

52:33execution, we would just prefer not to

52:35have a, as Christine said, complicated

52:38uh, conservation easement and just

52:41essentially enter into a private

52:43contract for whatever the use uses that

52:46uh, uh, we can find that are further

52:50described in theou, which we're

52:52completely supportive of.

52:53>> Okay. So the last question is and I mean

52:55I support the you know uh some of those

52:57suggestions but would um those uses take

53:01up like all of the like would that

53:04interfere with all of the wetlands and

53:07you know um or no just a portion or some

53:11that that's the um question I have too

53:15right I mean well um it's hard to answer

53:18because the there there's some

53:20engineering and wetland staking that

53:22will need to take place that has not

53:24taken place yet. So, um but the intent

53:28is to find a usable area, work with the

53:31nonprofit as to what they need. You

53:33know, it's outdoor activities. It's not

53:37um nothing's being nothing would be

53:39built.

53:40>> All right. Thank you.

53:42>> Anyone else? Mr. Mr. Wood,

53:45>> I this is through you to councelor to

53:48councelor Long. Just to confirm, your

53:50original motion includes the change to

53:5120% ownership units.

53:56>> Yes.

53:57>> Okay, great.

53:58>> Any further discussion?

54:00>> Mr. Viani,

54:02>> in front of the zoning board recently,

54:03we made Wavely Street to 100% ownership

54:05and we did one in here that required no

54:07ownership. What? Where? Why the 20%. Why

54:11I know we were at 10, which I wasn't

54:13happy. 20 is better, but why not a third

54:15or 25%? What What's wrong with a number

54:17like that? We to say it's not

54:19economically feasible. It might not e

54:21economically feasible if it was 50 or

54:2360, but I I we're looking for home

54:26ownership. We've been talking about that

54:27for a long time. You made Wavely Street

54:29do 40 units, 100% ownership. I watched

54:33the zoning board meetings. All right. I

54:35wasn't happy with the number, but you

54:36know, 1.2 parking spaces per unit. So,

54:39if it's a two-bedroom, we got a problem

54:40on Wavely Street, but that's was the

54:42zoning board, and that's what they did.

54:44But, um on something like this, there's

54:46a lot of land. They've done huge

54:48improvements. They've spent a lot of

54:49money.

54:51There's a lot of money to be made still.

54:53So 25, 30, a third or 25%. That I don't

54:58think that's asking for much. But I'm

54:59I'm supportive. I like the at 10. I

55:02wasn't happy. 20. When I had a

55:03discussion today with somebody, I said,

55:04"I can live with 20, but why isn't it

55:05more?" That's my only question. You

55:06>> want to make an amendment?

55:08>> I'd like to see the number be 25%. I'll

55:09split it in the middle.

55:10>> So amendment to 25%.

55:12>> Amended to 25%.

55:13>> Second.

55:14>> I'll second that.

55:15>> Okay. Okay. So, it's accepted. So, it'll

55:17be accepted. All right. So, if we're all

55:19set, we'll take a vote.

55:23All right. Um,

55:25so as a motion made by Ms. Long, amended

55:29friendly amendment by Mr. Aviani for 25%

55:32on the affordable for not affordable

55:35ownership and the amendment by not

55:38really amendment, but understanding by

55:40Mr. Stephanie needed to be arms length

55:42transactions will be in theou. Okay,

55:46seeing everybody ready to vote. Miss

55:49Bryant,

55:49>> yes.

55:50>> Myself, yes. Mr. Lebrono,

55:52>> yes.

55:52>> Miss Long,

55:53>> yes.

55:54>> Mr. Ward,

55:55>> yes.

55:55>> Miss Feny,

55:56>> yes.

55:56>> Mr. Cannon,

55:57>> yes.

55:57>> Mr. Alexander,

55:59>> yes.

55:59>> Mr. Aani,

56:00>> yes.

56:00>> Miss Malik,

56:01>> yes.

56:02>> Yes. Thank you. Unanimous. Thank you.

56:04Congratulations. We'll see you next

56:06time.

56:06>> Thanks everybody.

56:07>> Thank you everybody. Thank you.

56:09>> We'll see you in four weeks. I think

56:12it's four weeks.

56:13>> A whole month of

56:14>> soon. Too soon. It'll be late in August

56:17by the time we're here.

56:18>> I don't want to hear about

56:19>> I know, but I know. I know. Okay. Next

56:22on the agenda is the public hearing

56:25regarding the reorganization

56:28of the administration as submitted by

56:30the mayor.

56:34>> So,

56:39This is a public hearing of the city

56:41council and as I stated earlier, our

56:43public hearings are in the uh they're in

56:47the rules as to how our public hearings

56:49are conducted.

56:51So the first thing we will do is we'll

56:54hear from the uh presenters who are

56:56looking for it, which would be the

56:57administration.

56:59Uh at that point all questions should be

57:02uh presiding to the presiding officer

57:04which is the chairman of the city

57:05council in this instance. Uh the rules

57:07state that first will be questions from

57:09the council and then the audience. All

57:11members of the audience will have up to

57:13three minutes when we get to the public

57:15hearing public comment portion of this.

57:17So um I think that is all we need just

57:21just wait a minute

57:23>> just for uh everyone's knowledge that

57:26this is a proposal for reorganization of

57:28the uh of the local government. It is

57:31not amendable. We cannot amend it. We

57:34can only vote it yes or no. We have 60

57:36days at which to vote it yes or no. So,

57:40as I stated, public hearing rules allow

57:42for the presentation first, then

57:43questions from the counselors and then

57:46public participation.

57:47>> Mr. Chairman, just point of

57:48parliamentary inquiry.

57:50>> How do you see this proceeding?

57:52>> I think I just stated it.

57:54>> No, no, but I mean the last time we had

57:56a hearing, we asked questions at the

57:57beginning and then after the audience

57:59spoke, you didn't allow counselors to

58:00speak. Will we be able to speak before

58:02and after? Well, it's not in our rules,

58:04but I I think we can make uh I think we

58:08can make um make

58:09>> because it' be interesting. It'd be good

58:10to hear from the public, but it'd be

58:12good to be able to respond to it,

58:13>> right? But last time was a little

58:14different, but yes, we can make that

58:16happen.

58:17>> And the other question I had is do you

58:18anticipate this? I noticed that in the

58:21package uh late today uh an ordinance

58:23was included. Do you see that being

58:26submitted to the finance committee, the

58:28rules committee? How do you see that

58:30being processed? My intent would be

58:32under the rules to submit that to an ad

58:34hoc committee given the fact this is a

58:36unique um this is a unique request. It

58:39doesn't come off and doesn't fit neatly

58:41under any particular uh committee. Uh it

58:45is finance related because it saves the

58:47money as we discussed stuff like that.

58:48It is ordinance related to some extent

58:50because it has an ordinance in it. But

58:52as as you're aware the rules allow the

58:53chairman to appoint an ad hoc committee.

58:55So I would intend to appoint a three-

58:57member ad hoc committee to review it and

58:59bring your recommendation back at our

59:00August meeting.

59:02>> Thank you for that clarification. That

59:03was helpful.

59:04>> Okay. Thank you.

59:06Okay. So do you guys want to present?

59:11Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh the proposed

59:13reorganization will result in two new

59:16divisions. First new division combines

59:18the CA capital projects and facilities

59:21management division with the parks and

59:24recreation division minus the Callahan

59:26Center and will be called capital

59:29projects facilities management and parks

59:31and recreation division. The second new

59:33division will merge the Callahan Senior

59:35Center with the library and will be

59:38called the library and community

59:40services division. As a result of the

59:42restructuring and the creation of these

59:44two divi two new divisions, the position

59:47of parks director and the position of

59:50the director of the Callahan Senior

59:51Center will be eliminated. Under the

59:54reorganization plan, the capital

59:55projects facilities management and parks

59:58and recreation division will remain as

1:00:00currently structured except for the

1:00:03elimination of the director of parks,

1:00:05recreation and cultural affairs division

1:00:07position and the moving of the Callahan

1:00:09Senior Center to the jurisdiction of the

1:00:12new library and community services

1:00:14division. The Capital Projects,

1:00:16Facilities Management, and Parks and

1:00:18Recreation Division will be placed under

1:00:20the overall supervision and direction of

1:00:22the Capital Projects and Facilities

1:00:24Management Division head. The existing

1:00:27assistant director of parks and recck

1:00:28division will be renamed the D deputy

1:00:31director of parks and recreation and

1:00:34will be responsible for the day-to-day

1:00:36management and operations of personnel

1:00:38serving the parks and recreation

1:00:40division, including parks related

1:00:42capital projects. The deputy director

1:00:45will report directly to the capital

1:00:47projects and facilities management

1:00:50division head. The director of the

1:00:52current capital projects and facilities

1:00:54management division s shall serve as the

1:00:57division head. The most significant

1:01:00changes proposed include the elimination

1:01:02of the director of parks, recreation,

1:01:04cultural affairs. Two, the shift of

1:01:07management responsibilities for park

1:01:09related capital projects operations and

1:01:12personnel to the deputy director. And

1:01:15three, the director of capital projects

1:01:17and facilities management becoming

1:01:19division head for the newly created

1:01:22capital projects facilities management

1:01:24and parks and recreation division. Also

1:01:27under the reorganization plan, the

1:01:29Callahan Senior Center will be placed

1:01:32under the supervision of the library

1:01:34director, who will become the division

1:01:36head of the newly created division of

1:01:38library and community services. The

1:01:41position of assistant director of the

1:01:42Callahan Senior Center will be renamed

1:01:45deputy director and will be responsible

1:01:48for the day-to-day management of

1:01:50operations and personnel serving the

1:01:52Callahan Senior Center and will report

1:01:54to the division head of the new division

1:01:56of library and community services.

1:01:59Except for the elimination of the senior

1:02:01center director position, the Callahan

1:02:03Senior Center center will remain as

1:02:06currently structured. The library,

1:02:08Callahan Senior Center, Capitol

1:02:10Facilities, Park and Wreck, and Luring

1:02:12Arena will have and maintain separate

1:02:14budgets. The proposed reorganization

1:02:17will result in the following.

1:02:20Redirect reporting, overall management,

1:02:22supervision, and oversight of the parks

1:02:24and recreation and cultural affairs

1:02:26division and capital projects and

1:02:28facilities management division to the

1:02:31director of capital projects and

1:02:33facilities management. Two, operation of

1:02:36the Callahan Senior Center will be moved

1:02:38to the new library and community

1:02:40services division and the director of

1:02:42the Callahan Senior position center

1:02:45position will be eliminated. Three, the

1:02:47management oversight and supervision of

1:02:49the day-to-day operations of the

1:02:51Callahan Senior Center will be performed

1:02:54by the deputy director under the

1:02:56supervision of the division head of the

1:02:58new library and community services

1:03:00division. And four, the existing

1:03:02position of the assistant director of

1:03:04park and wreck will be renamed as deputy

1:03:07director uh and management supervision

1:03:09and oversight of the parks and

1:03:11recreation division. Parkreat related

1:03:13capital projects and Laurian arena will

1:03:16be overseen by the deputy director under

1:03:18the oversight of the director of the

1:03:21division.

1:03:24It's very important to understand that

1:03:26the proposed reorganization

1:03:29will not do the following will not do

1:03:32the following. It does not combine

1:03:34budgets. The budgets of each department

1:03:37or division will remain separate.

1:03:40It will not reduce public programming

1:03:42currently provided through existing

1:03:44departments.

1:03:46It will not impact public interfacing

1:03:49services provided by any division or

1:03:51department. All public interfacing

1:03:54services currently provided by both

1:03:56divisions will remain intact. It will

1:03:59not alter permitting requirements. All

1:04:01permitting services currently provided

1:04:04will continue to be provided and remain

1:04:06intact with streamlining to allow for

1:04:08easier permitting processes. It will not

1:04:12alter the mayor's authority to appoint

1:04:14the vision head and deputy directors or

1:04:17the members of the parks and recreation

1:04:19commission. It will not alter any

1:04:22statutory obligations.

1:04:24It will not alter or impact use of

1:04:27authorized revolving funds provided that

1:04:30the same are annually reauthorized by

1:04:32the vote of the city council. uh and the

1:04:37especially will not impact the Cal

1:04:40existing Callahan senior center fund

1:04:44which is established under order

1:04:462022-070-002

1:04:50to be expended by the council on aging.

1:04:53The reorganization will not reduce

1:04:55public programming currently provided by

1:04:57the library or callahan senior center.

1:05:00It will not alter or eliminate any

1:05:02specialized expertise, training,

1:05:05licensing, educational, or other

1:05:07requirements for personnel serving in

1:05:10each department or department. Each

1:05:12division or department. 10. It will not

1:05:15alter the identity or essential

1:05:17functions of each distinct division or

1:05:20department. It will not alter the

1:05:22mayor's authority to appoint the members

1:05:24of the Council on Aging or Parks and

1:05:27Recreation Commission. It will not alter

1:05:30the mayor's general supervision and

1:05:32direction of divisions and it will not

1:05:34alter any statutory obligations.

1:05:39The proposed reorganization does not

1:05:42impact the role, service and

1:05:44responsibilities of the elected board of

1:05:46library trustees. The powers and duties

1:05:49will remain the same. The board of

1:05:51trustees will continue to make rules and

1:05:53regulations for the operation of city

1:05:55libraries. Advise the mayor on matters

1:05:58involving the library division, budget,

1:06:01equipment, and buildings. recommend a

1:06:03candidate for appointment as a library

1:06:05division head as well as provide

1:06:07periodic performance evaluations for the

1:06:10mayor's consideration to accept and

1:06:13manage donations and funds in its trust

1:06:16bind letter and maintain annual reports

1:06:19of the city of Framingham and preserve

1:06:21copies of all city annual reports and

1:06:24prepare an annual report to the city of

1:06:26the full financial statement of all

1:06:29receipts and expenditures, number of

1:06:31books added and circul ated at each

1:06:33library

1:06:35because the division budgets remain

1:06:37separate. The library division budget

1:06:39and services are not co-mingled. Uh

1:06:42library board of trustees duties remain

1:06:45unchanged. There is no anticipated

1:06:47impact on the library certification for

1:06:50state aid eligibility. The library

1:06:53director and board of trustees shall

1:06:55continue to consult with the

1:06:57Massachusetts Board of Library

1:06:58Commissioners as appropriate. The MBLC

1:07:02is mandated by law to advise the

1:07:04librarian, library trustees, and library

1:07:07director on selection and cataloging of

1:07:10books and other matters pertaining to

1:07:12the maintenance of administration of the

1:07:15library. The MBLC is further charged

1:07:18with the obligation to administer

1:07:20federal grants available to the library

1:07:22division to provide improved library

1:07:25services and library materials among

1:07:28numerous other obligations.

1:07:30Further, the Massachusetts treasurer is

1:07:33obligated to provide aid to the city

1:07:36annually based on the formula set forth

1:07:38in the statute from the local aid fund

1:07:41for the support of the city library.

1:07:43Therefore, uh the MBLC must certify the

1:07:46city library has met minimum standards

1:07:49of a free public library in order for

1:07:51aid to be provided to the city. Concerns

1:07:54that any services of the library will be

1:07:57altered such that the libraries do not

1:08:00meet these minimum standards of a free

1:08:02public library do not appear to be based

1:08:05on a proposed reorganization plan

1:08:07because it does not impact the library

1:08:09requirements to meet these minimum

1:08:11standards. Like likewise, the proposed

1:08:15reorganization has no impact on the

1:08:18duties or services of volunteers serving

1:08:22on the council and aging who are

1:08:24appointed by the mayor.

1:08:27Finally, the proposed reorganization

1:08:30does not impact the duties or services

1:08:32of the volunteers serving on the parks

1:08:34and recreation commission. The

1:08:36commission serves in advisory capacity

1:08:38to the department and the mayor. The

1:08:41role of the commission remains unchanged

1:08:43and the commission would continue to

1:08:45provide support and recommendations on

1:08:48use of parks, recreation and

1:08:50programming.

1:08:51Likewise, the proposed reorganization

1:08:54does not impact the role or duties of

1:08:56the Lauren Arena Advisory Committee, the

1:08:59Council on Aging, or other boards,

1:09:01committees, or commissions who are

1:09:03appointed by and act in advisory

1:09:05capacity to the mayor. nor does it

1:09:07impact any of the following activities.

1:09:11Concerts on a common fund established

1:09:13under order 2022 0702

1:09:17to be expended by parks and recreation.

1:09:20Farmers market revolving fund

1:09:22established under order 202359001

1:09:28to be expended by parks and recreation.

1:09:30City-owned buildings, civic use, and

1:09:32municipal buildings revolving fund

1:09:35established under order 2024

1:09:38034001

1:09:40to be expended by capital projects and

1:09:42facilities and the farmers Framingham

1:09:46Farmers Market Management Fund

1:09:48established under order 202434001

1:09:53to be expended by the treasurer

1:09:55collector.

1:09:58The proposed reorganization does not

1:10:00impact the role, service and

1:10:02responsibilities of the elected board of

1:10:04library trustees. I think I read that

1:10:06already.

1:10:08So that uh that is the proposed

1:10:11reorganization

1:10:12and the um

1:10:15restrictions and um changes that are

1:10:18included in the reorg.

1:10:19>> Okay. Thank you very much. So I'm going

1:10:21to at first take questions from the

1:10:22counselors and the audience. This is a

1:10:24public hearing. I do want to remind

1:10:26everybody this is a public hearing.

1:10:28We're trying to resolve these issues

1:10:29tonight or in and our next meeting. I'd

1:10:32ask if people keep their any applause or

1:10:35shouting out or anything. Uh not down,

1:10:37but not at all. So, if we could have a

1:10:39uh if we could have a very professional

1:10:42and reasonable public hearing, that

1:10:44would be great. So, with that, I'll take

1:10:47any questions or comments from members

1:10:49of the council.

1:10:56Mr. Wood.

1:10:58>> So, I I have two quick questions um in

1:11:01regards to the proposed changes to the

1:11:03Callahan Center. Um so, the first would

1:11:05be um um

1:11:10how do going from a staff of nine to a

1:11:12staff of eight as proposed here, how do

1:11:14you see that impacting you're saying

1:11:16it's not going to impact services at

1:11:17all? Um

1:11:20I I guess just just help us walk us

1:11:22through some of that logic, how it's not

1:11:23going to impact um residents. And then

1:11:26um during the budget process, councelor

1:11:28Feny had asked the administration to

1:11:30investigate if there was a way to use um

1:11:34uh funds set aside for uh can you tell

1:11:38me what the fund

1:11:40>> the state formula grant

1:11:42>> the state formula grant funds. um if you

1:11:45looked into that and what your response

1:11:48and or you know what your response was

1:11:51to that that request

1:11:53>> respected

1:11:54>> sorry with respect to the second

1:11:56question um I've been meeting with the

1:12:00um CFO to talk about the status of that

1:12:04whole uh state funded pro uh program uh

1:12:08what we can use the money for how much

1:12:10is available what um we can expect from

1:12:14the state each year based on the formula

1:12:16and we're still evaluating that. So we

1:12:19haven't come up with any uh

1:12:21recommendations yet until we finalize

1:12:23our review of that grant program and how

1:12:26it can be used. Uh Mr. Chairman, with

1:12:28your permission, I'd like to ask the

1:12:32current library director to address the

1:12:35first part of that question because I

1:12:37know she's spent a lot of time working

1:12:40with um the existing assistant director

1:12:43of the library and I think she can more

1:12:47adequately answer that and and in more

1:12:49detail than I could at this time. So,

1:12:52I'd like to ask Don Delisantra to

1:12:54approach the microphone.

1:12:58You want me here or here?

1:13:00>> Wherever you most comfortable.

1:13:03>> Actually, I'll go here.

1:13:05>> Okay. You're probably encouraging more

1:13:07questions by sitting there.

1:13:08>> Oh, that's okay. I love talking to you.

1:13:11>> All right. Good evening. Thank you for

1:13:13having me here tonight. Sure. Um,

1:13:17Councelor Ward, would you please repeat

1:13:19the first part of your question?

1:13:20>> Yes. So, I guess it's just a numbers

1:13:22question for me. So, we're taking our

1:13:23Callahan Center staff from 9 to 8. Um

1:13:26it's a from a percentage standpoint it's

1:13:28a much larger change in terms of

1:13:30staffing than we we're seeing with parks

1:13:31and wreck which is like 37 to 36. So you

1:13:34would expect that to be felt a much more

1:13:36significantly by our residents and so

1:13:39you've hopefully thought through that.

1:13:40What are your conclusions? Why is that

1:13:42not going to be the case in your in your

1:13:44mind or is it are we is there going to

1:13:46be some impact? You know the report we

1:13:48got just was that there wasn't. So

1:13:50>> Sure. Okay. So I will say that what

1:13:54people don't always see um in the

1:13:56community or even the counselors is the

1:13:58work that still gets done every day in

1:14:01the city. Um so we what was most

1:14:04important to us to Noelia who's here as

1:14:06well behind me and to the library and to

1:14:08parks and wreck and to facilities is

1:14:09that no services get interrupted during

1:14:11this time period. So while that means we

1:14:15haven't really transitioned into what we

1:14:18would eventually transition into if this

1:14:20restructuring were to take place, what

1:14:22we have been doing is sitting down and

1:14:24looking really carefully at the tasks

1:14:26and the jobs that exist right now and

1:14:28seeing whether or not those can move

1:14:31into other positions or whether or not

1:14:33some of those um tasks were redundant to

1:14:36begin with. And we took a close look at

1:14:39the um position of director of elder

1:14:41services as it existed last time it was

1:14:44posted and we were able to see that many

1:14:46of and I actually have it with me. Many

1:14:48of those positions or many of those

1:14:50responsibilities were already being

1:14:52performed by Noelia. And if people here

1:14:53don't know Noelia, she is a force to be

1:14:56reckoned with. She's incredible. she has

1:14:58for the last month and a half been

1:15:00running the Callahan Center and not only

1:15:03has it not decreased in services and not

1:15:06only has the um amount of people coming

1:15:08through the doors not decreased but it's

1:15:10actually increased um she's doing an

1:15:12incredible job. She's doing many of the

1:15:14same functions that she did before. So

1:15:17in looking over those tasks and sitting

1:15:19down with her and looking at you know

1:15:21where's something that was performed by

1:15:23her in the past maybe she's not going to

1:15:25have the capacity to do in the future.

1:15:27um we were able to really reallocate and

1:15:30redistribute those tasks in what I think

1:15:32is a very efficient way. Um and as far

1:15:35as some of the um I think some of the

1:15:39like higher level tasks like things that

1:15:41would bring her out of the building

1:15:42meeting with different um partners in

1:15:44the community. Uh I think that we would

1:15:47she would really be capable she would be

1:15:49able to do that. We would be able to

1:15:51kind of tag team it. One thing I talked

1:15:53to the mayor about um and I'm a parent

1:15:55so I have five daughters. many of my

1:15:58references as you know are either Marine

1:16:00Corps or parentbased and so with Noelia

1:16:04um I said to her in the future what we

1:16:06can do is you can kind of think of me as

1:16:08like

1:16:10you can kind of think of me as a

1:16:11mother's helper type of person. I'll

1:16:13come in you can show me the ropes. I can

1:16:15you know start to learn and assist you

1:16:17with certain things and free you up to

1:16:19do some of the things that you um need

1:16:21to leave the building to do. Of course,

1:16:23that's a very oversimplified and I don't

1:16:25want to undermine the um the tasks or

1:16:28the role or anything like that. It's

1:16:30just kind of a colloquialism that's easy

1:16:31for us to understand this um way of

1:16:34showing us the ropes, you know, and the

1:16:37uh I hope I answered your question.

1:16:39>> Followup.

1:16:40>> Yeah, just a couple quick comments, not

1:16:42necessarily a follow-up. Okay, I

1:16:43appreciate that response. Um, I I'm not

1:16:47at the Callahan Center on a day-to-day

1:16:48basis. And so, um, I'm getting lots of

1:16:50information secondhand, not none of it

1:16:51necessarily bad, just I want to make

1:16:53sure that we're um,

1:16:56uh, providing the services that we

1:16:58should to our seniors. And, um, for

1:17:01better or worse, the elimination of the

1:17:02position gives the appearance that

1:17:04services are going down. So, I think if

1:17:06this goes forward, that's a challenge

1:17:08that you'll need to address and want to

1:17:09address head on. Um, for me, the

1:17:12Callahan Center has always been an

1:17:13internal division. It was never a

1:17:15standalone. So whether it reported to

1:17:16the park director of parks and wreck or

1:17:18the director of libraries is really no

1:17:20difference to me and in some ways it

1:17:22makes more sense for it to to be aligned

1:17:24with the libraries. So um I'm still a

1:17:27little concerned around the services

1:17:28being provided and the the loss of staff

1:17:30and so I'll be interested to hear others

1:17:31thoughts on that. Um um but those are

1:17:34kind of my my p my thoughts on that

1:17:37point. Um, in terms of the movement of

1:17:40parks and wreck um, under facilities,

1:17:43um, I think as I kind of stated, I I I

1:17:45think it's a little easier to absorb

1:17:47that position given the the size of the

1:17:49the parks and wreck department. And, uh,

1:17:52yeah, I think I don't know. I'll be

1:17:53interested to see um, how that goes. I

1:17:56think we asked you as the mayor to make

1:17:58some tough decisions in terms of budget

1:17:59cuts and so um, I think this is one that

1:18:03um,

1:18:04makes sense. I I do think the the name

1:18:07needs to get workshopped a little bit.

1:18:09Maybe just facilities, parks and wreck

1:18:12or something. Um the capital projects

1:18:14are kind of inherent, but um that's um a

1:18:17side note. So thanks

1:18:21>> Mr. Stephanini.

1:18:22>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um first, thank

1:18:25you, Mr. Mayor, for thinking outside the

1:18:26box. These reorganizations are not

1:18:29exactly what I expected you to submit. I

1:18:31thought we'd start with some of the

1:18:32things that other communities have done,

1:18:34but I'm not afraid to be first in the

1:18:37Commonwealth to try something different.

1:18:40And I wouldn't disagree with some of

1:18:42what uh Mr. Ward said about some of the

1:18:44synergies that exist for some of these

1:18:48areas. That said, I have a lot of

1:18:50concerns around some of the details. I

1:18:52was pleased to see an ordinance added to

1:18:54the background material today. I think

1:18:56it needs a few additional things.

1:18:58um the reserve funds we talked about um

1:19:02the cost issues. Um we can't if we're

1:19:06going to save dollars here and I don't

1:19:09think these are about saving dollars.

1:19:10$250,000 in a $400 million budget is not

1:19:13the reason to impact direct services.

1:19:16But if we're going to save dollars, we

1:19:18need to know that the job

1:19:19classifications are not changing for the

1:19:20people that remain. So that we just take

1:19:23and share those costs in a different

1:19:25way. Um,

1:19:28and we can get through that as we work

1:19:30through the details, I think, between

1:19:32this meeting and the next meeting. I

1:19:34have two specific questions for you. I

1:19:36thought your list of things that it does

1:19:38not do is helpful, and I think some of

1:19:41that in an ordinance would be helpful.

1:19:43My two questions to you are relative to

1:19:46licensing authority, who's going to sign

1:19:49permits for the park? Where does the

1:19:52buck stop for the person who's in

1:19:55charge? So, if a group wants to apply,

1:19:58they get denied. Who do they appeal to?

1:20:00Who's in charge of it? If a permit gets

1:20:02approved that the community doesn't

1:20:04like, who do they complain to? Who's in

1:20:06charge?

1:20:09>> In terms of in terms of uh approving

1:20:11permits for park activities, it would be

1:20:14the new position of deputy director. And

1:20:18um if that person wasn't available, it

1:20:20would be the division had to sign that.

1:20:22>> That's good to hear. I appreciate that.

1:20:24Second question is who's going to

1:20:26advocate for

1:20:28um seniors for parks?

1:20:32Who's going to take on the advocacy role

1:20:34around grants around

1:20:36um state funding around recognition? Do

1:20:39you see that as the deputy in each of

1:20:42those situations?

1:20:43>> Yes. And I I just want to emphasize uh

1:20:47one comment that uh councelor Ward made.

1:20:50There's not going to be any reduction in

1:20:52services to the residents in any manner.

1:20:55If it anything happens, it'll be to the

1:20:58positive. Services will be improved with

1:21:01this reorganization because it's going

1:21:02to be more efficient. But um the deputy

1:21:06director, the new position of deputy

1:21:08director will handle all all those

1:21:10activities that you mentioned.

1:21:13>> Thank you.

1:21:14>> So I have a comment um a couple

1:21:16comments. First of all, I I appreciate

1:21:18the u thoughtfulness behind this. I

1:21:20agree. I don't think this um necessarily

1:21:22is what I was expecting either, but I

1:21:24appreciate the philosophy behind what I

1:21:27think you're doing. Um the idea that

1:21:29we've often talked about about

1:21:31consolidations is the idea to take

1:21:33management, condense the management, and

1:21:35make it I I just don't think you need as

1:21:37many managers as we have. And by being

1:21:39able to have less managers spend less

1:21:41money there, we have the opportunity to

1:21:43spend more money in other areas or

1:21:46whatever money we have. I think

1:21:47specifically that goes to the issue that

1:21:49councelor Feny raised a couple weeks

1:21:51back. I know you still haven't commented

1:21:54about that fund. I was stunned to be

1:21:55honest with you that it had $600,000 in

1:21:57it. I I'm surprised that whoever was

1:22:01managing that fund there did not spend

1:22:03that money uh on behalf of seniors

1:22:05because that's several years of uh

1:22:07formula grant money. It has to be as we

1:22:09don't get $600,000 a year. I don't know

1:22:11how many years it is. But it strikes me

1:22:13though since though. So I don't think

1:22:15it's good that we had all that money in

1:22:17there and I surprised we had all that

1:22:18money in there. I almost argue that that

1:22:20wasn't a good management move to have

1:22:22all that money in there. That having

1:22:24been said, I think it gives us the

1:22:26opportunity at least for a while even

1:22:27during our difficult times to use some

1:22:30of that money to enhance our services,

1:22:33spend money if you if if it's found to

1:22:35be that we could use a position here or

1:22:36there, it gives us the opportunity to

1:22:38spend that money on a position. So, I

1:22:41think as much as uh I was a little

1:22:43surprised it was there, I think it does

1:22:45present opportunities and I think that's

1:22:46in line with what you're proposing, at

1:22:48least the way I see what you're

1:22:50proposing because by consolidating

1:22:52management and getting more of the

1:22:53resources and funds to the actual, you

1:22:55know, for lack of a better term, I don't

1:22:57really even like the term, but the

1:22:58worker bees, the people doing the the

1:23:00work, I think that gives us an

1:23:01opportunity, especially at the senior

1:23:03center. So, I already see a really big

1:23:04opportunity here to uh hopefully improve

1:23:07our services because of that money that

1:23:09was brought up that as I say uh I I I we

1:23:12had that from the finance subcommittee.

1:23:13I didn't even notice it didn't dawn on

1:23:15me until it was brought up. But I think

1:23:17that I hope that when you after you look

1:23:19at you do decide to use that money not

1:23:21for not for a director or anything but

1:23:24for just maybe some resources and some

1:23:26staffing that will help the seniors so

1:23:28it's not just sitting there like it has

1:23:29been for several years. Anyone else? Uh,

1:23:32Miss Malik and Miss Feny.

1:23:35>> Um, thank you. I appreciate that,

1:23:38Councelor King. Um, that was I had

1:23:42similar thoughts about there's this

1:23:44money that uh, councelor Feny identified

1:23:47and that it should go to provide

1:23:50services. Um, my question for you, Mr.

1:23:53Mayor, is about veteran services and

1:23:56where are they? I see no mention of them

1:23:58in this reorganization and as they were

1:24:01were or are part of the parks,

1:24:03recreation and cultural affairs where

1:24:06where will they sit in this

1:24:07reorganization?

1:24:09>> We initially did talk about moving

1:24:12veterans affairs into the veterans

1:24:14office into the library and cultural

1:24:17affairs division. We had a technical

1:24:20problem. The legal ad didn't mention

1:24:22that. So, we weren't able at the last

1:24:24minute, we were not able to include

1:24:26veterans into this plan. Um hopefully,

1:24:30um at some point in the future, if this

1:24:34is approved, we can take another look at

1:24:36it and um think about how we might deal

1:24:40with the veterans office. I know when we

1:24:43start um renovating this building uh for

1:24:47to for provide handicapped bathrooms on

1:24:50each floor, we're going to be relocating

1:24:53some offices.

1:24:54And at that point, it may be possible or

1:24:58appropriate to relocate the veterans

1:25:00office to another location, uh which

1:25:03could be the senior center. And at that

1:25:06point, if that happens, we can revisit

1:25:08this plan and perhaps uh include the

1:25:12veterans office in into that new

1:25:15division of libraries and cultural

1:25:17affairs. That was the original intent,

1:25:19but because the legal ad didn't mention

1:25:22veterans affairs, we couldn't include it

1:25:23in this plan.

1:25:26So just to clarify, veteran services

1:25:29will remain under the parks and

1:25:32recreation

1:25:33or

1:25:34>> no it's se right now it's separate. It's

1:25:36self-standing. It's kind of supervised

1:25:39by the HR director.

1:25:41>> Okay.

1:25:43>> So what division is it in?

1:25:45>> It's not in a division.

1:25:46>> It's not as in Okay. Thank you,

1:25:49>> Miss Phoenix.

1:25:51>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, first I'm

1:25:53really glad to hear um folks interest

1:25:56and support about the state formula

1:25:58grant. Um, you know, if you looked at

1:26:01the spreadsheet that we did receive from

1:26:03the CFO, there is money that has

1:26:05certainly been spent. Uh, my

1:26:07understanding is that there was banking

1:26:10done for maybe the age well initiative

1:26:13or for updates that need to be at the

1:26:14Callahan Center. All of this should be

1:26:17looked at um, regardless. Um, so just a

1:26:21couple of questions. Um, Mr. Mayor, are

1:26:24there job descriptions for these for the

1:26:26director and deputy director positions?

1:26:30>> They will be developed, but there's not

1:26:32going to be much change in in their

1:26:34existing duties. We're just mainly

1:26:36changing the title.

1:26:38>> Okay. And how would you what are your

1:26:42measures for success or failure? like

1:26:45when you when this h if this happens,

1:26:48what's the time frame? What do we how

1:26:51would you deem this successful?

1:26:54>> I think we'll it's going to take a

1:26:58little bit of time to make sure it

1:26:59works. Um we're going to be watching the

1:27:03uh the attendance at the senior center

1:27:07and how many people take advantage of

1:27:08the different programs, how we can grow

1:27:10programs, how we can um do additional

1:27:13work. I mean uh Don has already started

1:27:17working with um Noelia on on ways to

1:27:21improve services there and so far it's

1:27:24been successful. The morale has improved

1:27:27greatly there. um people are um happy

1:27:31and uh eager to do their job and um I

1:27:36think after about six or eight months

1:27:39certainly before the end of the fiscal

1:27:41year we'll be able to take a look at it

1:27:44and try to evaluate how this is going

1:27:47and uh hopefully uh we'll be able to

1:27:50come back to you and brag about all the

1:27:52successes we've had.

1:27:54>> Thank you for that. I I I would hope

1:27:56that you know the measures of success

1:27:58are just not attendance of uh

1:28:01programming right but that it is

1:28:05internal that I don't want you know it

1:28:08would be great you know we could be like

1:28:09ducks right like it looks cool and we're

1:28:12calm and collected but underneath

1:28:14everything is frantic so I hope when we

1:28:16look at metrics we're looking at the

1:28:17whole picture not just attendance of

1:28:19programs

1:28:19>> that's what we intend to change yes

1:28:21>> fabulous um and uh will these positions

1:28:25uh these new positions, the library

1:28:27director and the deputy directors, will

1:28:30they receive raises or reclassification?

1:28:33>> We're going to have to discuss that with

1:28:34HR and um we'll be back to you if

1:28:38there's going to be any changes. Uh

1:28:39we'll put a package together and return

1:28:42to the city council.

1:28:44>> Okay. So, because then that Okay, that's

1:28:47interesting because that leads my next

1:28:49um question because if this is about

1:28:53saving money, right? And so I see that

1:28:56the director of parks and wreck made

1:28:58$145,000ish

1:29:00and the director of elder services made

1:29:02$110,000ish

1:29:05which made to 25686.

1:29:10But we do if we have to do raises and

1:29:13reclassification, how are we saving

1:29:15money in this reorganization plan?

1:29:17>> Well, certainly we're not going to come

1:29:19anywhere if if there are any

1:29:21adjustments. It's not going to come

1:29:23anywhere close to the savings we've

1:29:25achieved with the elimination of those

1:29:27two jobs.

1:29:30>> Okay. Thank you very much.

1:29:33>> Okay, Mr. Saviani then miss long

1:29:35>> can we can we get an answer how long

1:29:37that money has been there and how many

1:29:38years of money has been in those

1:29:39accounts if it's if it's six it or do we

1:29:42have an idea

1:29:43>> there was the CFO we we did receive a

1:29:45spreadsheet an Excel spreadsheet couple

1:29:48>> did it say how many years of money

1:29:49that's in there

1:29:49>> yes it goes back to 2010

1:29:51>> really

1:29:53no spreadsheet

1:29:54>> the spreadsheet went back to 2010

1:29:56>> right what does the right wait right

1:29:58wait right wait right wait right wait

1:29:58right wait right wait right wait right

1:29:58wait right wait right wait wait wait

1:29:58>> I think the question was for the wait

1:30:00yeah let's let's direct this to one

1:30:02person Right.

1:30:03>> So,

1:30:03>> yeah,

1:30:04>> you want to just give us an over

1:30:06override.

1:30:07>> The cliffnotee version is fine. That's

1:30:08all I'm looking for.

1:30:09>> Override this discussion. Let's give us

1:30:11an idea. How much has been spent in

1:30:13recent years? I take it not much.

1:30:15>> How long did it take to get to the 600?

1:30:17How many years of accumulation is that?

1:30:18And the $50,000 question is why didn't

1:30:21the

1:30:23the people in charge or whatever, why

1:30:24weren't they spending it on the money

1:30:26for the seniors and using the money

1:30:27instead of leaving it in the account?

1:30:29Makes no sense to me.

1:30:31>> Okay. So, the cliff note version.

1:30:34>> Thank you.

1:30:34>> Uh through

1:30:36>> sorry through you, Mr. Chair. Um the

1:30:39majority of the buildup to the projected

1:30:42roughly 633 I think when we close the

1:30:44books it's actually going to be about

1:30:46629,000 but um has come in the last few

1:30:49years when we saw a substantial increase

1:30:52in the amount of money in the formula

1:30:54grant from the state. So what I had sent

1:30:58to the city council at the request I

1:31:00believe from the finance subcommittee

1:31:01was going all the way back to 2010 which

1:31:04started with a balance of approximately

1:31:06at the end of fiscal 10 had

1:31:08approximately 40 $41,000 just rounding

1:31:11and it fluctuated for a great many

1:31:14number of years between 40 and 50,000.

1:31:17Um but what really happened is in just

1:31:20bear with me I move the spreadsheet a

1:31:22little bit here.

1:31:23What really happened is in 2023 and on,

1:31:26we saw a very substantial large increase

1:31:29in the amount of money that we were

1:31:30receiving as part of the formula grant.

1:31:33And that's where the the much larger

1:31:35buildup has actually occurred in the in

1:31:37the last I would say three to four

1:31:38fiscal years. So, it isn't been that

1:31:40we've had 600,000 since 2010. it's

1:31:43gradually been built up and was somewhat

1:31:45steady and gradually over the years when

1:31:47we started receiving a substantial

1:31:49increase um in it is when it started to

1:31:53build up and if you look at the when I

1:31:55had sent you the schedule in 2022 fiscal

1:31:5822 we received 154,000 and it has gone

1:32:01and then in 2023 there was an increase

1:32:03to 201. So that's a 60 almost $65,000

1:32:07increase or $60,000 increase. And then

1:32:10it went to 243 and 240

1:32:13and 25 and then 256 in 20 in 2026 fiscal

1:32:17year. So the buildup really has occurred

1:32:19in the last 3 to five fiscal years. It's

1:32:22not been sitting there since 2010.

1:32:23>> No, but even three to follow up, Mr.

1:32:25Chair, if it's okay, three to five years

1:32:26is still too long in my opinion. That's

1:32:28just me. Yeah, I and I can't speak to

1:32:30the rational the the rationale between

1:32:32the spending and whatnot, but that's

1:32:34what I see in this analysis based on

1:32:36what I had sent to all of you.

1:32:38>> Just one more thing, Mr. Chairman. Way

1:32:40back when when I had spoken to the

1:32:41director, they would have a problem with

1:32:43um getting vans and rides during the the

1:32:46co things and they couldn't get people

1:32:48to appointments. So, I was on the 200

1:32:50Foundation board. I think I don't even

1:32:51remember who even reached out to me. It

1:32:53was um actually Sam Swisser. I got him a

1:32:55grant from the 200 Foundation and I

1:32:57think Mutual One stepped up. But with

1:32:59all this money here, we could have hired

1:33:00we could have gotten a bus driver. We

1:33:02could we could have used the money to

1:33:03help the seniors instead of us going

1:33:05begging all these foundations. That's

1:33:06all I'm going to say.

1:33:09>> Thank you, Mr. Chair.

1:33:10>> Thank you, Miss Long.

1:33:15>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. So, I just have

1:33:17one question. seeing that the purpose of

1:33:19this reorganization is to consolidate

1:33:22departments which the city council has

1:33:24been discussing this for quite a few

1:33:27years since we've been a city about

1:33:29consolidating departments to save money.

1:33:32Has the has Mr. Turbet our CFO done any

1:33:35kind of financial analysis as to the

1:33:37savings that are projected short-term

1:33:40and long-term uh that the purpose of

1:33:42this reorganization is supposed to

1:33:44serve? So that's my question.

1:33:48Go ahead.

1:33:49>> Um through you, Mr. Chair. So when the

1:33:52administration originally presented this

1:33:54reorganization,

1:33:55we projected around approximately

1:33:57270,000 in salary savings, um dependent

1:34:01on the if the reorganization is

1:34:04approved, dependent on the new job

1:34:05descriptions, classifications,

1:34:08um that salary would still be there as a

1:34:10savings on a on a long-term basis. And

1:34:13we also projected some portion of the

1:34:16potential for the health insurance to be

1:34:18we did recover a portion. I think we

1:34:20took one one of the two positions as

1:34:22savings in health insurance. But as I

1:34:24explained to the council, the finance

1:34:26subcommittee and the city council during

1:34:28the process um we have a history of not

1:34:31really including vacancies in the health

1:34:33insurance analysis. So when there's plan

1:34:36changes or employees have life changes

1:34:39that alter the health insurance that

1:34:41they were taking, we historically have

1:34:42never had much of a buffer in the health

1:34:44insurance account to absorb those as

1:34:46evidenced last year by about a $1.4

1:34:48million transfer from free cash to cover

1:34:51health insurance. So, some of any of the

1:34:55projected savings that we we didn't take

1:34:57the full savings from the health

1:34:59insurance as a way to offset any

1:35:01potential additions that had not been

1:35:03planned or health plan changes

1:35:05throughout the year. But pending the

1:35:08analysis from this year with relation to

1:35:10health insurance, we would likely see a

1:35:13the reduction of two two plans in the in

1:35:17future going which would be

1:35:19approximately another 70 roughly 75,000.

1:35:22So all told the plan would generate

1:35:24approximately 325,000 in annual savings

1:35:27if they were not no changes were made

1:35:29based on any job descriptions or

1:35:32anything go on a go forward basis.

1:35:35>> Right. And just as a more one more

1:35:37followup that um pensions usually I mean

1:35:41there's usually life insurance pensions

1:35:42and other long-term benefits and

1:35:45employees get if they stick around for

1:35:47over 10 years. So I just want to make

1:35:50sure that got calculated into the mix.

1:35:52also

1:35:55>> um the pension would be just through the

1:35:57matter of the assessment and we

1:35:59typically probably wouldn't go into that

1:36:01deep of a dive but the pension

1:36:03assessment is also based on salary

1:36:05changes. So my my first initial reaction

1:36:09would be that any pension changes would

1:36:10be offset on any changes to salaries for

1:36:12the employees in subsequent years as a

1:36:15whole not just an individual basis. But

1:36:18um there are probably some other smaller

1:36:21um savings that that will be generated,

1:36:23but we looked at the largest of the

1:36:25savings in doing this analysis.

1:36:28>> All right. Thank you. And I will say

1:36:30thank you to the mayor for presenting a

1:36:33comprehensive plan as to your

1:36:36reorganization. That's very helpful. So,

1:36:38thank you, Mr. Chairman.

1:36:40>> Thank you, uh Miss Lamb Bruno. Then Mr.

1:36:43Cannon,

1:36:44>> excuse me. I had my hand raised when

1:36:46Mary Kate Feny and Laura had their hand

1:36:49raised.

1:36:50>> I'm sorry I didn't see it. I'll put you

1:36:52out. I'll have after Miss Mr. Canon you

1:36:54can speak. I mean everybody no one spoke

1:36:57at the beginning. So now everybody was

1:36:59shy for a while tonight. So

1:37:02>> I'm not usually shy but anyway I want to

1:37:06also thank the mayor. I think you know

1:37:08this is sort of a twofold thing. I know

1:37:10we have been talking about this council

1:37:12for many years about trying to find ways

1:37:14to consolidate resources whether it's

1:37:17with the schools and you know the city

1:37:20facilities

1:37:22um the parks you know and there's been a

1:37:24lot of back and forth and I think that I

1:37:27think this has probably caught people

1:37:28off guard because I don't think this is

1:37:30where maybe people might have thought um

1:37:34you would go but I think that you know

1:37:37at the beginning I think it was a little

1:37:38rocky roll out how it kind of came where

1:37:41the library folks had not been told

1:37:43because it was sort of still in you know

1:37:46in the early um stages and Don hadn't

1:37:50had a chance yet to let everyone know

1:37:53because it was sort of you know so it

1:37:55wasn't her fault and it was sort of a

1:37:57little a mixup and I I understand that

1:38:00that some of the folks in the library

1:38:02you know felt that they were kept out of

1:38:04it and I understand that um and I think

1:38:07that you But when this came up, it kind

1:38:10of was moving fast. And then it came to

1:38:11the subcommittee for the finance. So

1:38:14that's how it kind of broke that night

1:38:15and it sort of maybe didn't take the

1:38:18best um didn't get off the ground the

1:38:20way I think that we would have liked it.

1:38:22You know, it kind of everybody was, you

1:38:25know, questioning it more so and it just

1:38:27came out a little more, you know,

1:38:29rockier than than I would have thought.

1:38:32But I do think that, you know, just in

1:38:35my meetings with the um I did speak with

1:38:38many of the library trustees at length

1:38:41and um my first call was to Heather and

1:38:43I think it was like the next day and um

1:38:46I did speak with a lot of the um

1:38:49Callahan folks. I talked to some of the

1:38:51Callahan um the friends of Callahan and

1:38:54I spoke to some of the um Council on

1:38:57Aging members as well. And I can

1:38:59understand people and even the parks and

1:39:01wreck folks, some of them are here and I

1:39:04understand that, you know, not knowing

1:39:06exactly where this is going to go. Um,

1:39:08where people are going to fit in. Uh, I

1:39:10can see it being, you know, and then a

1:39:12lot of public, you know, misconceptions

1:39:14to some things and there's been a lot of

1:39:16chatter on Facebook that's maybe not

1:39:18been, you know, so kind. Um, and

1:39:20definitely not accurate. Um, but I do

1:39:23think that the mayor deserves some

1:39:25credit here for really listening to,

1:39:28you know, the his staff, people that

1:39:31have, you know, he's brought in Don, I

1:39:33think was a really good choice. I think

1:39:35that I've when I met Don, I just thought

1:39:37she was great. Um, and I think that just

1:39:40seeing the the folks at the Callahan,

1:39:43that's another thing I I really would

1:39:45recommend everybody to go to the

1:39:46Callahan Center and just try to keep up

1:39:48with them down there because they are

1:39:51absolutely rocking and a couple of days

1:39:53after this all broke, we went to the

1:39:55council on it was a friends of Callahan

1:39:58meeting and they were already hit the

1:40:00ground running and the they had Dawn was

1:40:03there um Noelia I mean the whole staff

1:40:06was there and you uh Lisa, like the

1:40:09whole gang. Um and they were um

1:40:14really ready to go and this was

1:40:16literally a couple of days later and now

1:40:18we're what a month, a month and a half,

1:40:20six weeks. Um and they have done some

1:40:23amazing things and I think it's very

1:40:25interesting to see a lot of their staff

1:40:26is here. Um, I would invite everybody to

1:40:29go, well, because they've invited you

1:40:32guys to go, not, you know, me inviting

1:40:33them, but go down to the senior center

1:40:36and talk to the folks down there and

1:40:38talk to the staff, talk to the ladies at

1:40:39the front. Um, you know, talk to the the

1:40:43members from the, um, friends of

1:40:45Callahan. They have a ton of energy and

1:40:48they are just really taking this to the

1:40:50next level. And you know, I think that

1:40:54the personalities, you know, has been

1:40:56the unfortunately with the um losing,

1:41:00you know, a popular director because I

1:41:02did like Randy too. Um this was not a

1:41:06personal thing. I think that um and I

1:41:10know there's been chatter about that as

1:41:12well. And that's unfair as well because

1:41:15I know Noelia has been doing a lot of

1:41:18really great things down there and I've

1:41:20heard about her long before and this has

1:41:23come to this point and I would really

1:41:26recommend for people to go down there.

1:41:28Um, and one of the concerns I do have is

1:41:31the this $630,000

1:41:35that I I was kind of blown away when I

1:41:38heard the number get to that number. I

1:41:40had originally had only heard it was

1:41:41like 450 and to my knowledge then when

1:41:44we got the spreadsheet and we see how it

1:41:46was spent down all the years and I do

1:41:48have concerns why it wasn't spent down

1:41:50because when I talked to some of the

1:41:52folks that were on the boards and they

1:41:54we talked about the kitchen and we

1:41:55talked about some of the bathroom issues

1:41:57and supplies and um the tables um many

1:42:03things that they wanted to get funding

1:42:04the the um raises for the the staff um

1:42:09the volunteer um position, the volunteer

1:42:13coordinator position that was left

1:42:15unfunded and we were told that there was

1:42:17no money because that's what well that's

1:42:19what these folks had told me. So I think

1:42:22that this is really great that um I see

1:42:25this as a really good um merge and I

1:42:28stand fully behind it and I agree with

1:42:30the parks and wreck you know piece of it

1:42:32too. I think we work out the details.

1:42:34Um, but I think it's very forward

1:42:36thinking and I think you're taking

1:42:39libraries and seniors and eventually if

1:42:41we bring the veterans in, you know,

1:42:43three uh entities that are a small

1:42:47small group, you know, um, alone,

1:42:50they're small, but if you merge them,

1:42:52you have a stronger department. And I

1:42:55think under the leadership of Dawn, who

1:42:57is not going to be down there bothering

1:42:58everyone, she's going to let them do

1:43:00what they do best. and they are doing

1:43:03the work. Um I I just really can't say

1:43:07enough, you know, good things about um

1:43:10what I think that this with these people

1:43:12involved. I think it's um

1:43:15I just fully um have my support behind

1:43:18it. So, thank you,

1:43:20>> Mr. Canon. Then, Miss Bryant.

1:43:22>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh thank you

1:43:23everybody for all the work that has

1:43:25happened behind the scenes. I appreciate

1:43:27that. Um your initial proposals, Mr.

1:43:30mayor called for things like reduction

1:43:31in library hours and the reduction in

1:43:34public services,

1:43:36decisions that are very difficult that

1:43:37other communities long ago had to make

1:43:39and they were very painful for us as we

1:43:41discuss them. So I I appreciate the fact

1:43:43that you've gone back and found

1:43:45solutions that don't impact public

1:43:47facing services or the staff that uh

1:43:49delivered them. Um,

1:43:52Framingham, you know, I'm a little I'm a

1:43:55bit heartened because Framingham and

1:43:57this council has always supported both

1:43:59its libraries and its senior center. You

1:44:01were on the uh council, I think

1:44:03councelor King, myself and you, um, when

1:44:05there was a plan with the previous

1:44:07administration to carve up the senior

1:44:08center. And it we we were not shy or

1:44:11hesitant to speak up about a bad plan

1:44:13that would harm our seniors. and you and

1:44:15councelor King and I and a number of the

1:44:17people in this room worked to craft an

1:44:19ordinance that protected the senior

1:44:21center. So I also feel confident that if

1:44:23there was something that was going to in

1:44:25you know put at risk uh our services for

1:44:29our older adults there would be uh no

1:44:32hesitation in discussing them.

1:44:34Uh I also I think you know what has

1:44:37always bothered me about where our

1:44:38senior services kind of sat in the

1:44:40existing org chart they were very very

1:44:44low. You had the mayor, the COO, the

1:44:47director. I mean it was layer upon layer

1:44:49upon layer. And I I felt that that

1:44:51didn't give our seniors enough of a

1:44:54voice that they should have in a

1:44:56community of this size with the with the

1:44:58growth that our senior population is

1:45:00having. So, I appreciate the fact that

1:45:02in this plan, and none of this stuff is

1:45:04easy. And by the way, kudos to you if

1:45:06nothing else. The easiest thing for you

1:45:08to do would have been nothing. Kick the

1:45:09can down the road and make, you know, it

1:45:11just would have been, why have a a

1:45:13meeting where, you know, it's it's

1:45:15contentious. So, I applaud you for for

1:45:17courageous decisions.

1:45:19But this eliminates two administrative

1:45:22managerial layers between the delivery

1:45:24of our seniors, senior services, and the

1:45:28mayor's office. I think that's really

1:45:30important because my frustration and

1:45:32I've probably sat in more council on

1:45:34aging meetings and probably more library

1:45:36trustee meetings. Councilor White Harvey

1:45:39may have me beat there because she

1:45:40served on both, but I've been in a lot

1:45:42of these meetings and it just took so

1:45:46much time and effort for an idea to

1:45:48happen in a conference room or in the

1:45:49senior center to actually reach someone

1:45:52that could make a meaningful decision. I

1:45:53think this makes huge strides in the

1:45:56right direction there.

1:45:59And I my my kudos and and sympathies in

1:46:02many ways to to the CFO because I think

1:46:04every time you hit refresh on your email

1:46:07or look at new numbers, there is some

1:46:09new layer of the onion. So, you know, I

1:46:11question a lot of the decisions that

1:46:12have been made over time. Um, we've had

1:46:15a number of CFOs that didn't notice that

1:46:17didn't seem to notice a trend. I I I

1:46:19trust that we'll figure that piece out.

1:46:21And then what I believe we should have a

1:46:23public-f facing process. If we have more

1:46:25funds than we anticipated having, well,

1:46:28the folks in this room should have a

1:46:31voice in saying, well, do we want to do

1:46:33we want to invest those funds on

1:46:35public-f facing services for our

1:46:37seniors, things that have been on so

1:46:38many wish lists for so many years that

1:46:40perhaps seemed unaffordable, or is the

1:46:42priority administrative management? Now,

1:46:46when I talk to I want to leave names and

1:46:48faces out of this because in this role

1:46:51and a lot of the roles that so many of

1:46:52us had formally or informally, we get to

1:46:54know a lot of people really well. But

1:46:56it's difficult when you talk about

1:46:57long-term strategic structuring to

1:47:00separate the individuals from that. When

1:47:02I talk to seniors that use our our

1:47:06Callahan Center that are not, for lack

1:47:10of a better phrase, in the weeds,

1:47:12they're not on the committee. They don't

1:47:13know who's on the committee. They

1:47:14probably don't know the name of the D.

1:47:15They go to the Callahan Center as our

1:47:17core customers and and they enjoy it and

1:47:20and they get value out of it. When I

1:47:22talk to them

1:47:25and I ask where the the the priorities

1:47:28lie, it's oh no, I'd love to have this

1:47:30program. I'd love to have this, you

1:47:32know, can we this staff person years ago

1:47:34they did it's the priority has not been

1:47:37in the conversations that I've had. We

1:47:39need more administrative management

1:47:40between the mayor and the delivery of

1:47:42services facing our largest growing

1:47:44sector of population. So, I I think

1:47:47there's some value there as well. Um,

1:47:51you know, it's interesting. I I'm a bit

1:47:52of a history nerd and I think it's great

1:47:54that our libraries are being the library

1:47:56piece of this plays into my history nerd

1:47:58thing really well here. There was a time

1:48:00and it wasn't all that long ago, you

1:48:03know, some would say, "Oh, you libraries

1:48:05and senior, what are you doing?

1:48:06Libraries and seniors." I I don't have

1:48:08that objection. I think this that's a

1:48:10natural fit. But there was a time when

1:48:12people said you can't combine

1:48:14administrative leadership for things

1:48:16like the water department and

1:48:18sanitation. Yeah, sure. They're really

1:48:20really important, but they're they

1:48:22couldn't be more different. And I can't

1:48:24remember a time in Framingham when we

1:48:26didn't have some sort of public works

1:48:28entity that combined that. So, you know,

1:48:31we haven't in Framingham had to make the

1:48:34difficult decisions with libraries and

1:48:35senior services that other communities

1:48:37have had to make. And I think it's a

1:48:38credit to so many of the people in this

1:48:40room. Um, but I don't know how

1:48:43sustainable that would have been long

1:48:45term if we didn't start making difficult

1:48:47decisions that I think solve financial

1:48:49challenges but also better align us to

1:48:51deliver better uh and and more uh

1:48:55services.

1:48:56Um, I hope the veterans piece comes into

1:48:59this. Um,

1:49:01I think there's a natural and I'd be

1:49:02remiss. I said I was going to to to I

1:49:04said I was going to keep names out of

1:49:05it, but what Dawn, what Mr. Delosant has

1:49:08done in in bridging and breaking silos

1:49:11with our veterans community is really

1:49:13remarkable because we had a veteran

1:49:15service office for a long time that you

1:49:17come in, you fill out your form, you get

1:49:18your benefits. We were pretty good at

1:49:20that, but there was no community

1:49:21building. Uh, I was at the McAuliffe

1:49:24Library Friday. Um and there is a

1:49:27gentleman who you would never believe is

1:49:29in his 90s, but he's in his 90s and one

1:49:31of his favorite things every month is to

1:49:32go to this um at ease coffee hour that

1:49:36and there's a group of people and they

1:49:37they for an hour every third Friday I

1:49:39think it is at the Mclliff Library they

1:49:41kind of hold court and I sometimes like

1:49:42to go as a fly in the wall because I

1:49:44like to walk away with some homework

1:49:45assignments. stuff like that wasn't

1:49:47happening. And when I look at that, I

1:49:49see a microcosm of other things that are

1:49:50happening that could happen with

1:49:52specific kind of micro populations that

1:49:55gather in the Callahan Center that have

1:49:57very particular needs that I think our

1:49:59library community is also serving very

1:50:02well and I think there could be more of

1:50:04that. So I I think this wouldn't be

1:50:06possible if we didn't have a really

1:50:08exceptional team at the Callahan Center,

1:50:10which we do and I promise I'm wrapping

1:50:11up, Mr. Chairman. uh a really

1:50:14exceptional team at our library. Um and

1:50:17I I could say the same thing about um uh

1:50:20you know our public facing parks staff

1:50:22and facilities. I think Mr. Palini has

1:50:24developed a great uh uh bench. I think

1:50:27like Mr. Delisanto who started as a

1:50:30library page. What a a great Framingham

1:50:33success story and now is a great you

1:50:34know a very wellrespected throughout the

1:50:36Commonwealth library director. I have my

1:50:38eye on Brendan Wilkinson um who's in our

1:50:40facilities department who came in as an

1:50:42entry- level role and now plays a really

1:50:44substantial role in our facilities. I

1:50:45think there's a real opportunity there

1:50:46and he's done some great work with um

1:50:49with making sure that accessibility

1:50:50continues to be in the foreground of the

1:50:52decisions that we make in this building.

1:50:53So I feel really good about the team and

1:50:55the people. It it took us some time to

1:50:57get here. No decisions are are easy in

1:51:01terms of the someone had said and this

1:51:04will be my last point. Someone had said,

1:51:06um, well, there's not enough detail in

1:51:08the plan. I'm I'm comfortable with the

1:51:10broad strokes of the plan, and here's

1:51:12why. At a very senior level,

1:51:16the the broad strokes are what you need

1:51:18as long as you have good, you know,

1:51:19you're confident in the leadership and

1:51:21the team that they're going to oversee.

1:51:23The broad strokes are there. You're

1:51:24going to learn things like I pointed to

1:51:26the CFO earlier. We're learning new

1:51:27things every day. And, you know, if

1:51:29you've ever if you own a business or put

1:51:31a you know, you plan over the weekend

1:51:33what your Monday is going to be like. I

1:51:34got the greatest plan for Monday.

1:51:36Something is going to happen 20 minutes

1:51:37into your day that throws that plan out

1:51:39the uh you know out out the window and

1:51:42you're going to have to be nimble. So I

1:51:43think having kind of the broad strokes

1:51:45allows for people to fill in the

1:51:47details, work together and success or

1:51:49failure. I see success here. If we're

1:51:51really good at this, I think those

1:51:52customers that I talked about, the ones

1:51:54that don't know who's on the committee,

1:51:55the ones that don't know that we're

1:51:57having this meeting, but they really

1:51:58rely on the Callahan Center is an

1:51:59important part of Framingham being their

1:52:01their community, they probably don't

1:52:03notice anything other than over time

1:52:06we'll have more to offer them and we'll

1:52:08do so more strategically. So, um I

1:52:11probably the easiest and smartest

1:52:12political thing to do would be to say,

1:52:13"Hey, change sucks. We shouldn't do

1:52:15anything." Um, but I think this is a

1:52:17really thoughtful series of of things

1:52:19that you've put together and I think

1:52:20you've identified the right people to

1:52:21make it happen and it's a credit to the

1:52:23team that we have in all of those places

1:52:24that I've mentioned uh that can make it

1:52:26happen. So, however um the council can

1:52:28help move these things forward um I'm

1:52:31hopeful we'll get there collectively.

1:52:32Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Thank you, Dawn.

1:52:33Thank you, everyone.

1:52:34>> M Bryant,

1:52:36>> thank you. Finally. Um so, I want to I

1:52:40want to thank Mr. Delesand too and and

1:52:42everyone. Um but at the same time I

1:52:46don't want to push it forward too

1:52:48quickly and um I was the one that said

1:52:51um I I was concerned about um the lack

1:52:54of detail as is so much of Framingham

1:52:59Framingham Heights. Uh one taxpayer said

1:53:02it's yet again um you know it's like the

1:53:05the council's being asked to approve

1:53:07like a blank check and we'll figure out

1:53:10the details later. We'll let you know

1:53:12later. And often um the details matter,

1:53:16right? Um later and we're already

1:53:19committed and we've already given the

1:53:20money. And I will give one example of

1:53:22that. uh one of the budget cycles uh

1:53:26actually Mayor Spicer was still the

1:53:28mayor then, but uh the council uh ended

1:53:32up voting to cut um the human resource

1:53:36director position in half salary wise

1:53:39and um another position in half

1:53:41salary-wise and zero out um the e I

1:53:44think the economic development uh

1:53:46position, whatever position Kevin Sheay

1:53:48had. Um, oh, and the mayor's salary too

1:53:51was cut in half, right? Uh, something

1:53:54with the city solicitor either zeroed

1:53:55out or cut in half, right? And the

1:53:58justification was, oh, um, we've been

1:54:01paying too much. We don't need it. We

1:54:03can get just as good just, you know,

1:54:05good services. The services won't

1:54:07change. Um, you know, it'll be better

1:54:09economically for Framingham or whatever.

1:54:12But what um occurred, it seemed, I don't

1:54:15know, a little irrational to me, but you

1:54:18know, we voted it in. It is that's the

1:54:20way it went. But then on um our

1:54:23inauguration day, at our inauguration

1:54:25meeting, the mayor came forward um just

1:54:28as some Framinghams said probably they

1:54:31didn't know it would be at that meeting,

1:54:33but they said um you're going to watch

1:54:35and you're going to see I've lived in

1:54:37this town so long and I've been involved

1:54:40and I've seen it. You know, financial

1:54:42people um were saying that there's no

1:54:44way, okay, they're going to come back

1:54:46for the money after, okay, because you

1:54:48guys already did it. They there's no way

1:54:50you can operate a city like that. Um

1:54:54there's no human resource and I had

1:54:56researched that too. Human resource good

1:54:58human resource director you're going to

1:54:59get for half of the price of what we you

1:55:02know the salary we were paying and these

1:55:04other positions. And sure enough, um the

1:55:08uh the mayor came back to our inaugural

1:55:10meeting the day our inauguration day and

1:55:13requested um uh like the human resource

1:55:16position not only be like full-time but

1:55:20um and the salary be increased and that

1:55:23and as we went along that's what

1:55:25happened, right? So we actually ended up

1:55:28paying uh you know the salaries more and

1:55:31stuff because it wasn't even feasible uh

1:55:34the other way right it wasn't feasible

1:55:36and after Mayor Spicer um left office

1:55:39and we had a new mayor of course right

1:55:43that salary was increased back up right

1:55:46like that no long they did not leave it

1:55:48at half price so um uh so those kind of

1:55:52things happen and the public

1:55:54>> excuse me a second that that's just not

1:55:56True. The rest of the salary is

1:55:58whatever, but the mayor's salary is set

1:55:59by charter. The initial mayor's salary

1:56:01was 180 whatever thousand. We cut it as

1:56:04a city council to 165,000 for the

1:56:07subsequent mayor. And the subsequent

1:56:09mayor has earned that the whole time. So

1:56:11>> this subsequent may but when Mayor

1:56:13Spicer was you guys cut it more than

1:56:15that.

1:56:15>> You have to cut the mayor's salary by

1:56:17charter before the next term. So she

1:56:19received the 180 something,000 salary

1:56:22the entire time. The new $165,000

1:56:25salary came in at the beginning of his

1:56:28first administration. Hasn't changed.

1:56:29So, he's been paid at $165,000 the

1:56:32entire time. She was paid at 180

1:56:34something,000 the entire time and we

1:56:36never have to ever because we can't

1:56:39there's a requirement in charter how to

1:56:41do it. So, I mean, I don't want to

1:56:42interrupt you, but that that the rest of

1:56:44>> Well, I will come back on that um with

1:56:46um

1:56:47>> the rest of the statements I don't

1:56:48totally agree with, but that's just a

1:56:49key charter issue.

1:56:50>> Okay. So you say, but that's what was

1:56:52said at the time. Um, so I will come

1:56:55back with the actual, you know, find out

1:56:57with, uh, financial details on that, but

1:57:00yes, that's what was said. But the human

1:57:02resource director position, um, the

1:57:05economic director position was zeroed

1:57:06out completely. So that was just a

1:57:08convenient way to get rid of that person

1:57:11because then you did restore the

1:57:13position after, right? But so again, the

1:57:16public is like, you know, just just

1:57:19level with us, right? So there's that

1:57:21right but in this case in these things

1:57:24here right now I do like some some of

1:57:26the improvements with the details you

1:57:28know like that a little bit of the

1:57:30details information but um I do not

1:57:35agree like these this is wishes and and

1:57:38hope hopes that um wishful thinking and

1:57:41hopes that um we will not diminish any

1:57:44services we would we would like that's

1:57:46what that's what the goal is right we

1:57:48will not diminish any services blah blah

1:57:50But to use another old adage like I

1:57:53always like to do, many hands make light

1:57:55work, right? So the the having why even

1:58:00risk it? If Noella is going to be doing

1:58:02the same work that she's already doing,

1:58:04right? And running the center that is

1:58:07that that presupposes that the director

1:58:10position the person wasn't doing

1:58:13anything valuable, right? And I would

1:58:15have thought in in a normal process

1:58:18prior to um the reorb the details that

1:58:22um Dawn was asked to look into and all

1:58:25that that should have been done even

1:58:27before. So so that what you brought was

1:58:30like okay so this is what we know we can

1:58:34we can consolidate and where we can um

1:58:36save money and then that then you could

1:58:38show me that there would be no reduction

1:58:41in services or nothing falling through

1:58:43the cracks. And also a big component of

1:58:46what the senior center and council on

1:58:49aging does is not just the day-to-day

1:58:52services. Okay. And normally if you're

1:58:55going to transition somebody out like at

1:58:57a director level or really any position,

1:59:00you usually have them you make sure that

1:59:03knowledge, information, background gets

1:59:06transferred um too. But it's not just

1:59:09the seniors. The library is an essential

1:59:14institution and service for a great city

1:59:18or town. Okay? And no, no matter how you

1:59:22cut it, mathematically speaking, if if

1:59:25the either our directors didn't have

1:59:27enough to do prior, which I don't I

1:59:30don't believe, right? I think s workers,

1:59:33they're always going to give 100% or

1:59:35more in the work they're doing. And that

1:59:38was good for the library, right? But you

1:59:41do have to cut. You do have to cut. Now

1:59:43you can save some. You can make some

1:59:46efficiencies. Okay. But there is a point

1:59:48that you cannot um like just

1:59:53categorically say, oh yeah, we're not

1:59:54going to be we're we're not going to um

1:59:57cut anything any services. And also

1:59:59there are always improvements and new

2:00:01things that come up that are needed.

2:00:03Okay. And just like many hands make like

2:00:06work also the creative the minds and the

2:00:10creative all of that goes into that. Now

2:00:12I too am a fan of Ms. De Losat you know

2:00:16is it I do think she's great and

2:00:18everything like that but I am not a

2:00:20believer in building um an

2:00:22infrastructure around personalities. I

2:00:25think you need great people but you also

2:00:27need great plans. And I don't see any re

2:00:31I think that we just need to um

2:00:36get the details in place. Show me right

2:00:39um where I can really see what are the

2:00:41plans. what how are you where are you

2:00:43going to save this and that and I

2:00:45believe Noella we're going to be able to

2:00:47keep and not her alone but the staff is

2:00:50going to be able to keep some the

2:00:52functioning the basic functioning going

2:00:55but like I said there is a lot of other

2:00:57things in play right that also need to

2:01:01be kept going and if she's going to be

2:01:03doing those too and again this stuff

2:01:05wasn't she wasn't given like training in

2:01:09that ahead of time or there wasn't a

2:01:11brain brain dump from one to the other,

2:01:13which I know the former director would

2:01:14have been happy to do. Um,

2:01:18then that's a learning curve she's going

2:01:21to have to do. And I love that you like

2:01:23the mom, you know, mom's aid thing too,

2:01:26like that. Yes. And I would do that,

2:01:27too. But then the library doesn't have

2:01:30your full attention either, right? You

2:01:32know, you're you're you're expanded.

2:01:35Yes. But either you're going to be

2:01:36working more um and Jim Paleini I

2:01:41suspect that he was busy before. So now

2:01:45um you know it I think it's looking at

2:01:47the director's position is just like a

2:01:49little bit of oversight you know

2:01:51oversight and everything and and of

2:01:53course I don't believe in micromanaging

2:01:55um your staff. you help them, but there

2:01:58is still much much work. If if if you're

2:02:02paying the people because they are good

2:02:05and they do the work and we like the

2:02:06work, then they must have been doing the

2:02:08work. And then that means that it's not

2:02:10so easy to cut out another person. And

2:02:12considering the director of senior

2:02:14services position can be paid for out of

2:02:17that uh money and would not cost the

2:02:20city more, why risk it? we could get the

2:02:23get the new formula in place with a

2:02:26director in place and then you could

2:02:28phase out right um as you get the new

2:02:32plans working and you see it working you

2:02:34could phase out the director position or

2:02:36whatever. I still do not understand why

2:02:39when both of um the um the parks and

2:02:43recck director position and the um

2:02:46seniors uh center director position they

2:02:50their reappoint time was coming at the

2:02:52end of June, right? Their contract is up

2:02:54June 30th. Why why fire them May at the

2:02:58end of May, right? Um it seems I don't I

2:03:03don't I just think that I don't think

2:03:05that's like the best um

2:03:08uh it doesn't seem wonderful to um do

2:03:13that is in terms of pol process and um

2:03:17again I just think that um and a lot of

2:03:22people a lot of people um people who

2:03:25love the library like I love I love the

2:03:28library.

2:03:30I went to the library when it was in

2:03:32this building as a child. I walked to

2:03:34the library three three to four, five

2:03:37times a week, okay? Um, you know, back

2:03:39when it was dark downstairs, okay, at

2:03:42the library, right? Um, and this what

2:03:45the library is nowadays is so much more

2:03:48modern and expansive and everything, but

2:03:52I just say the talents for that. Let

2:03:56them do that. Do that. let the seniors

2:03:59do that. Um I again I'm not complete I'm

2:04:03open-minded about the reorg but I think

2:04:05that we have we need the the details and

2:04:09the working out of you know part like I

2:04:11want to be sure more sure about details

2:04:15and so does the public. They want to see

2:04:17like what are you really planning so we

2:04:19would know where the money's you know

2:04:21how the money would be spent and then we

2:04:23could like you know kind of back it

2:04:25justify like yeah it's a good plan the

2:04:27details it would be like this it'll be

2:04:29like that um again Jim Palini don't you

2:04:33you guys all have to work out how you're

2:04:35going to you know do this or whatever

2:04:37and I'm sure there are good people under

2:04:39it and then as to um and then two uh you

2:04:44know people have thrown around you know

2:04:47uh like I guess rumors about people's

2:04:50job performances and things like that

2:04:52but where weren't there job performances

2:04:56evaluations like on regular jobs there

2:04:59is the annual and sometimes semianual of

2:05:02that to be able to again back up these

2:05:05things right um I just it just the model

2:05:10I've seen many re reorganizations really

2:05:13usually they're downsizing on in

2:05:15companies and um organizations, colleges

2:05:18and stuff too. And the really good ones

2:05:22always have um long they've been

2:05:24long-term plans and long-term even imple

2:05:27like models implementing and you start

2:05:31implementing some slowly. The people

2:05:34know in advance it's not a shock uh that

2:05:36kind of thing. So yes, the people I'm

2:05:39sure that the senior city the senior

2:05:41center hit the ground running they had

2:05:43no choice. Okay. it they had no choice.

2:05:46They had to do it. The commitment's

2:05:48there. It's always been there, but um

2:05:50they had no choice. And then asked for

2:05:52the money that the money um from the

2:05:55grant that was kind of stored up. Well,

2:05:58when I investigated that and that the

2:06:00amount seemed to increase like you know

2:06:03recently too um I was told from some

2:06:07very several sources that um the the

2:06:11projects that they were working on first

2:06:13someone was working on it. They were

2:06:15told that person from the center

2:06:17couldn't work on it. Then two people

2:06:19from the Council on Aging were working

2:06:21on the project with the bus stops for

2:06:23seniors and things like that and I

2:06:25forget what else because I can't

2:06:26remember all the detail that they gave

2:06:28me. Um then uh the director was told

2:06:32they couldn't work on it. Then the

2:06:34director took it up himself and he was

2:06:36told he couldn't work on it that a

2:06:37position would be put in place come down

2:06:40the pike just for that not to have any

2:06:43of the staff work on it. But he could

2:06:45not use the money. Not all the money cuz

2:06:48some of the money went to like repairing

2:06:50one of the rooms and different things

2:06:52but you know some of the basics but um

2:06:55you know waiting for that position to be

2:06:57approved to come down the pike to give

2:06:59some of that money to and of course

2:07:01money kept coming in because it wasn't

2:07:04it wasn't happening. Now those are

2:07:06details and who knows you know

2:07:08specifically only the people really

2:07:10involved but that was there were people

2:07:12involved that did say that. So, um I

2:07:16can't fault I'm not here to judge on

2:07:20that level. All I know is that people

2:07:23the seniors um there is a petition and

2:07:27um that only covers one part of town. Uh

2:07:30some people maybe even one district of

2:07:33like almost 800 people who um did not

2:07:37feel the process included them. yet

2:07:40again just like they didn't they thought

2:07:42some of our big decisions um you know to

2:07:45change things did not include them early

2:07:48enough they felt left out of it and

2:07:50these are people who have always tried

2:07:52to stay involved and they have always

2:07:55asked questions come to meetings if

2:07:58necessary all of that so they they're

2:08:00very concerned and then the other ones

2:08:02who can't come

2:08:03>> you almost finished I mean you have went

2:08:04longer than I I know but you went longer

2:08:06than anybody else

2:08:07>> have I was I longer than Mike too That's

2:08:10my question.

2:08:11>> It's hard to do. It is impressive, but

2:08:13you were longer than Mike.

2:08:14>> Never happened.

2:08:15>> Okay.

2:08:16>> No one speaks longer than me.

2:08:17>> Well, since I haven't been here in so

2:08:18long.

2:08:19>> I know. It's good to have you

2:08:20>> and I waited. So, um and and remember

2:08:23you promised me at the other meeting.

2:08:25So, and I'm not going to I'm not going

2:08:27to talk multiple times, but on this I

2:08:29have to represent all the different um

2:08:32like I had to literally drop so many

2:08:35other things because of all the input

2:08:37from people. But I'm not going to deny

2:08:39our seniors. I'm not going to deny the

2:08:41people who in some ways um there are

2:08:44some for some families and some children

2:08:46the library being able to have the

2:08:48library has actually you know saved

2:08:51their lives in some in some ways right

2:08:53changed their futures and that kind of

2:08:55thing. So that's important. And same

2:08:58thing that C um Council on Aging Senior

2:09:02Center, there's a lot more seniors that

2:09:05need access to that and everything. And

2:09:08um even the driving to get people and

2:09:10trying to get the the the uh buses and

2:09:13stuff like that at the time. I was aware

2:09:14of that struggle too. So for these

2:09:18reasons and um just I won't go into all

2:09:22of these things. I think that was the

2:09:24volunteer thing. I just think that we

2:09:26need to start as a council um just

2:09:33con staying within making sure our

2:09:36process is uh and helping the the

2:09:40administration's process just be good

2:09:43process that satisfies um the public or

2:09:46that we can even justify to the public.

2:09:48But it's always like now they feel like

2:09:50they're always being asked to take a

2:09:52leap of faith. just just trust us, just

2:09:54believe, and we'll see what happens

2:09:56after. And they're really sick of that.

2:09:58And they have a right to be. And I'm

2:10:00done.

2:10:00>> Thank you very much. All right. Unless

2:10:03there's anything else, I I'm going to go

2:10:04to the audience um for the public

2:10:07hearing portion. It's three minutes per

2:10:09person. I have four people who signed up

2:10:11for publication on reorganization. I'm

2:10:14going to call them first, then I will go

2:10:16to three people who are on Zoom, and

2:10:18then I will take um any other hands we

2:10:21may have. So I would ask you you have up

2:10:23to three minutes. Please don't feel

2:10:25obligated to take the three minutes. Try

2:10:27to keep your comments directly on the

2:10:29issue which I know some of us did not as

2:10:31well like myself of reorganization.

2:10:34Okay. And not and try to that's that's

2:10:36the issue of the public hearing

2:10:38reorganization. So um obviously we want

2:10:41to keep all personalities and people out

2:10:43of it. So with that I will start out.

2:10:46Mr. Kivad I think that's you. Your

2:10:49writing is a little difficult. It looks

2:10:51like my writing, but I figured out that

2:10:53it was you.

2:10:56>> Thank you. My name is Steve Kivette. I'm

2:10:59a member of the Friends of the Callahan

2:11:01and a former member of the Council on

2:11:03Aging. I'm also a senior and there's

2:11:06nothing more important to me than fellow

2:11:08seniors. That's why I do this. The

2:11:11proposal to reorganize the library in

2:11:13the Callahan Center is very

2:11:15forwardthinking and it looks to the

2:11:17future of our Framingham seniors. We

2:11:19have leaders in place already who are

2:11:21more than capable of guiding this new

2:11:23endeavor. Just give them the chance.

2:11:25It's not educational degrees that make a

2:11:28good leader. Compassion and managerial

2:11:30skills are far more important, as well

2:11:33as an understanding of Framingham's

2:11:35diverse community. The triilingual skill

2:11:38of our current Callahan leader is also a

2:11:40huge plus. Most members of the senior

2:11:43council spend little time at the

2:11:45Callahan Center and thus have no idea

2:11:48how it is currently functioning and how

2:11:50it was led in the past. Many of those

2:11:52who recently signed petitions do not

2:11:55realize that the Callahan Center had

2:11:57been run through fear and intimidation.

2:12:00The previous director used human

2:12:02resources department as punishment for

2:12:04staff.

2:12:05>> Can we just try to keep it on

2:12:06reorganization? Okay. It is. That's what

2:12:09this is,

2:12:10>> but I want to stay away from the

2:12:11personality aspect of it.

2:12:13>> Thank you.

2:12:14>> Well, I I understand, but

2:12:18>> that's part of what this is all about,

2:12:20why the reorganization is being is being

2:12:23considered, and I really think that

2:12:25needs to be mentioned here. If you don't

2:12:28want me to, I won't. But I will say that

2:12:30the crew that's in place right now is

2:12:33tremendous, and you need to back them up

2:12:35and go with them. Come visit us at the

2:12:38Callahan Center and you'll see what's

2:12:40all about. Thanks.

2:12:42>> I appreciate your

2:12:45Okay. Um,

2:12:48Carol Lock.

2:12:56>> Good evening and thank you for the

2:12:58opportunity to speak. Um, I appreciate

2:13:00Mayor Sysk's uh, explanation of this

2:13:04whole reorganization. Council members,

2:13:07um I would like to thank you for being

2:13:10conscientious about our budget and its

2:13:12impact on the residents, especially our

2:13:14seniors. Our property taxes are a large

2:13:16part of our expenses. Um I forgot to

2:13:20introduce myself. I'm Carol Lockach, a

2:13:22resident of Framingham for 38 years, an

2:13:25active member and volunteer at the

2:13:26Callahan Center, and a board member of

2:13:28the Friends of Callahan since 2021.

2:13:32Now, I really appreciate the creative

2:13:34and logical approach to reorganization

2:13:36of the city's departments that resulting

2:13:39in cost savings for us.

2:13:43And it doesn't matter if every little

2:13:44bit helps.

2:13:47Now, while the director of senior

2:13:48services provided a personable and

2:13:50welcoming touch to the center, the

2:13:51day-to-day management of the services

2:13:53and activities offered were handled by a

2:13:55team of highly qualified individuals.

2:13:58The large increase in activities can be

2:14:00attributed to the wonderful and creative

2:14:02work done by our program's manager over

2:14:04the last few years. In the last month, I

2:14:07have noticed a far more relaxed

2:14:09atmosphere at the center, and it has

2:14:11been functioning like a welloiled

2:14:12machine. Activities have continued as

2:14:15planned and have been well executed by

2:14:17staff members. Decisions have been made

2:14:19in a timely fashion by the assistant

2:14:22director who has listened to

2:14:23recommendations,

2:14:25fostered teamwork, delegated authority,

2:14:28and supported staff, providing resources

2:14:31where necessary.

2:14:33Since the arrival of these two capable

2:14:35managers, the collaboration between the

2:14:36friends of Callahan and the center have

2:14:38blossomed. The organizational structure,

2:14:41moving the Callahan Center under the

2:14:43opaces of the library rather than parks

2:14:45and recreation really makes sense. Think

2:14:48about how much better the services

2:14:50offered to our community are now

2:14:51aligned.

2:14:54Change is always difficult. It's easy to

2:14:56jump on the bandwagon and to accept

2:14:58limited information as the whole

2:15:00picture. Our mayor has proposed a novel

2:15:02solution, has listened to constituents,

2:15:05and is willing to improve an antiquated

2:15:07organizational structure with cost

2:15:09savings, and we need to support him.

2:15:11Thank you.

2:15:12>> Thank you.

2:15:14Uh, Heather Clish.

2:15:23>> Hi everyone. Um, my name is Heather

2:15:25Clish. I'm the chair of the board of

2:15:27library trustees and this is the board's

2:15:29statement regarding the proposed

2:15:30reorganization.

2:15:32Excuse my voice. The board of library

2:15:34trustees remains committed to working

2:15:36collaboratively with the mayor, with

2:15:38city administration and library

2:15:39leadership to ensure the continued

2:15:41success of the Framingham Public

2:15:42Library. As you consider the proposed

2:15:45reorganization, the board wishes to

2:15:46offer the following concern and

2:15:48recommendations.

2:15:50First, the board is concerned that a

2:15:52single individual will be expected to

2:15:53fulfill the responsibilities of two

2:15:55full-time leadership positions through

2:15:58the role of library and community

2:15:59services division head, serving as both

2:16:01the library director of the Framingham

2:16:03Public Library and essentially the

2:16:05director of the Callahan Center. While

2:16:08day-to-day responsibilities can be

2:16:09delegated, executive leadership and

2:16:11accountability cannot.

2:16:13The board believes that the success of

2:16:15this model will depend in part on

2:16:18empowering the library assistant

2:16:20director to assume an expanded

2:16:22leadership role in support of the

2:16:24library director.

2:16:26Second, the board encourages the city to

2:16:28review the job classifications,

2:16:30compensation, and organizational support

2:16:32for the library director and the library

2:16:35assistant director. We believe these

2:16:37positions should be appropriately

2:16:38classified and that those serving in

2:16:40them should receive the compensation,

2:16:42support, and recognition their expanded

2:16:45responsibilities require. Third, the

2:16:48board recommends that the mayor meet

2:16:49with the board of library trustees on a

2:16:52quarterly basis during the

2:16:53implementation of the reorganization to

2:16:55re to review progress, discuss goals and

2:16:57performance measures, identify

2:16:59challenges, and ensure ongoing

2:17:01communication with the board as it

2:17:03fulfills its advisory responsibilities

2:17:05under the Framingham charter. Finally,

2:17:08the board requests that it be kept

2:17:10informed of and consulted before

2:17:13significant decisions affecting the

2:17:14Framingham Public Library are made so

2:17:17that it can effectively fulfill its

2:17:18responsibilities under the Framingham

2:17:20charter to advise the mayor on matters

2:17:22concerning the library.

2:17:25In closing, the board also wishes to

2:17:27emphasize that it has full confidence in

2:17:30the library director and deeply

2:17:32appreciates her leadership and

2:17:34dedication to the library. Regardless of

2:17:37the outcome tonight, the board remains

2:17:39committed to supporting the library

2:17:40director and working collaboratively to

2:17:43ensure that the Framingham Public

2:17:44Library continues to provide outstanding

2:17:46service to the residents of Framingham.

2:17:49Thank you.

2:17:51>> Okay. Thank you. Um, Eliza Williamson.

2:18:00>> Hi there. Um, my name is Eliza T.

2:18:03Williamson and I'm a resident of

2:18:05district 2. In full transparency, my

2:18:08wife Heather is also the chair of the

2:18:10board of library trustees. However, I

2:18:13can assure you I'm speaking solely for

2:18:15myself, voicing my own concerns and

2:18:17perspective exclusively.

2:18:19She'd rather I not be speaking, I

2:18:21believe.

2:18:23I want to begin by saying that my

2:18:25concerns about any of this are not about

2:18:28our library director, Dawn. Dawn is an

2:18:30exceptional public servant who has

2:18:32earned the respect and admiration of the

2:18:34community. This conversation should

2:18:37never have become a referendum on her,

2:18:40her experience, her education, her

2:18:42abilities. Um, and I just hate that that

2:18:46happened. The real question is not

2:18:48whether Dawn is capable. The question is

2:18:50whether any one person can effectively

2:18:53lead two large complex public

2:18:55institutions and where the information

2:18:59to support that the reorg will benefit

2:19:02both. Where is that information that

2:19:05needs assess that that research? Our

2:19:07library serves a city of 75,000

2:19:10residents through multiple branches,

2:19:12large staff, extensive programming,

2:19:15technology, literacy initiatives,

2:19:17collections, and community partnerships.

2:19:20That's already a full-time leadership

2:19:22position. The Callahan Center is equally

2:19:25vital. It serves more than 20,000 older

2:19:27adults through programming, outreach,

2:19:29benefits assistance, volunteer

2:19:31coordination, transportation, community

2:19:33partnerships, and services that help

2:19:36older adults remain healthy, connected,

2:19:38and independent. And that too is a

2:19:40full-time leadership position. While

2:19:43there are certainly opportunities for

2:19:45collaboration between the library and

2:19:47the senior center, collaboration is just

2:19:49not the same as consolidation.

2:19:52These organizations have different

2:19:54missions, different strategic

2:19:56priorities, and require different

2:19:58professional expertise and experiences.

2:20:01Neither should be treated as though it

2:20:04can be absorbed without consequence.

2:20:07With all due respect um to councelor

2:20:09Canon, this isn't like combining the

2:20:12public works divisions. It's more like

2:20:14asking the superintendent to also run

2:20:17the public health department because

2:20:19they both serve the community.

2:20:22The mayor has assured us earnestly that

2:20:25there's not going to be any change to

2:20:27any rules, no cuts, no significant

2:20:31additional responsibilities added. And

2:20:34that doesn't make sense. Um, and while

2:20:38this was presented initially as a

2:20:40cost-saving measure, the savings appears

2:20:42to be limited to eliminating a single

2:20:44director position, two director

2:20:47positions before fundamentally

2:20:49restructuring two cornerstone public

2:20:51institutions. The city should be able to

2:20:54demonstrate

2:20:55>> seconds. Okay. Not only this financial

2:20:57impact but why this model is

2:20:59operationally better, why we have no

2:21:02comprehensive organizational plan, no

2:21:05demonstrated needs assessment, no

2:21:08meaningful community engagement, and no

2:21:10clear explanation of how services for

2:21:12either department will be strengthened.

2:21:15So I just encourage the

2:21:16>> Your time is up. Okay, I let you go 10

2:21:18seconds over, but your time is up.

2:21:21>> Thank you.

2:21:22>> Thank you. I I I just encourage the city

2:21:26council to take the extra time.

2:21:29>> Everybody has three minutes. I'm not

2:21:30>> sure. With all due respect, given what

2:21:32we've listened to tonight, the fact that

2:21:34you won't let me finish is a little

2:21:35ridiculous.

2:21:36>> I I understand, but if I was is

2:21:38ridiculous with everybody, we'd be here

2:21:39till tomorrow morning. So, our rules

2:21:41clearly say three minutes for public

2:21:43participation. Mr. Avani, this is a

2:21:45point of information or

2:21:46>> Well, a clarification if that's okay.

2:21:48Sure. Um I I couldn't watch the meeting

2:21:51last night, but I thought that did the

2:21:53library the the board take a vote a

2:21:56position on the um I thought I was I was

2:21:58told they took a position on it.

2:22:00>> I heard they did too, but

2:22:01>> So can we get a clarification on that

2:22:02and just what the vote was

2:22:07>> the board did not take a position on

2:22:08this and we just the statement um that I

2:22:12read to you was the statement that the

2:22:13board decided to uh give to you.

2:22:16>> Okay. So what was the vote? There was a

2:22:18vote that was 10 to one.

2:22:20>> Yes, there was a vote, but the vote was

2:22:22to um to whether or not to give this

2:22:25this statement or not. It doesn't

2:22:27doesn't have anything to do with the

2:22:29actual whether we were for or against

2:22:32this. I mean, I will tell you if you

2:22:34would like to

2:22:36think if you didn't take a vote. If you

2:22:38did not take a vote on a recommendation,

2:22:39I guess that answers the question.

2:22:40>> That answers my question.

2:22:42>> Yeah. Thank you.

2:22:42>> It's just a statement. Okay. Thank you.

2:22:46>> Thank you. All right. So now there are

2:22:48three people on Zoom. We will go there

2:22:50starting with Mr. Wette. You have three

2:22:52minutes.

2:22:57>> Uh thank you. Um I might just open my

2:23:00comments with that we previously uh

2:23:03talked about zoning and my hand was up

2:23:05to talk about zoning. Uh I would hope to

2:23:09see what the motion uh that has been

2:23:11approved by the city council was on

2:23:13zoning. um it's not in the background

2:23:16material. Uh so maybe that can be

2:23:18provided in the minutes. That's my

2:23:21comment on the article on zoning. On

2:23:23this article on reorganization,

2:23:26uh I wondered if the mayor can provide

2:23:29us the job description of the two

2:23:31positions that were eliminated and how

2:23:34those require those uh tasks in the job

2:23:38description are being reallocated to

2:23:40other other staff positions. So you

2:23:43using just saying that the position is

2:23:45eliminated um it saves the money but it

2:23:49hasn't look looked at what the job

2:23:52descriptions of those positions were and

2:23:55what uh incorporating those in other the

2:23:59job description other people. Uh

2:24:02something that's not been me mentioned

2:24:04which is in but is in the community

2:24:07services area is the new community

2:24:10center. uh is it's the new community

2:24:13center funds have been spent to build a

2:24:15building, enhance the building. Um and

2:24:18it's it's not yet in our budget, but I'm

2:24:21wondering um under what what division in

2:24:25the city will the new community center

2:24:28um come under? Thank you.

2:24:31>> Thank you, Mr. Wette. Uh next would be

2:24:34Mr. Dunn.

2:24:41Patrick done.

2:24:50Okay. Well,

2:24:54Mr. Dunn,

2:24:54>> is that me?

2:24:55>> Yes. Yes, it's you.

2:24:56>> Thank you.

2:24:57>> Well, my name is Patrick Dunn. I've been

2:24:59a resident of Firmingham maybe 45 years,

2:25:02number of positions in town and city

2:25:04government, and I'm currently on the

2:25:07board of the council on aging, and we're

2:25:09now down to seven members, and we have

2:25:12not had the opportunity to even hear

2:25:14from the mayor about his plans, which is

2:25:17unfortunate because one of our roles is

2:25:20to advise the mayor on matters involving

2:25:23senior citizens. So this finally became

2:25:27evident the details when the agenda for

2:25:31this meeting today was posted. I would

2:25:34say that our acting director

2:25:39and you may call her the deputy director

2:25:42has been very good at doing the position

2:25:44showing initiative and we're all for

2:25:47her. I'm speaking as an individual

2:25:50because the board was not able to take a

2:25:52vote without any background material and

2:25:55we barely have a quorum now. We're down

2:25:58seven out of 11 positions. So, there's a

2:26:02lot that could have been done by the

2:26:04former director that weren't done. And

2:26:07you know, we could get into the details

2:26:09when we meet as a board with what

2:26:13happened, but I think uh there was a

2:26:16mention of a A12 Framingham that sort of

2:26:20died in the van vine and faded away. We

2:26:23used to have a very active uh

2:26:26transportation and travel program that

2:26:29actually the funds came from the friends

2:26:32and we paid for a travel director.

2:26:35that's gap is gone and it was a major

2:26:38attraction for many of us and that's

2:26:40what got me after I retired from NATIC

2:26:43to get involved with Callahan and then I

2:26:46served on the friends with my late

2:26:49friend Mark Goldman and I think we can

2:26:53survive this but like if he is getting

2:26:57these job descriptions straight and

2:26:59making sure people are compensated and I

2:27:02was amazed when I look at the salary

2:27:04structure of the director ctors and I

2:27:06saw that the director of the senior

2:27:10center or elder services director was

2:27:14pegged below the other ones and we're

2:27:17not recognizing that 22% of the

2:27:20population in Framingham are over 65 and

2:27:23we need to go above and beyond the kind

2:27:26of services we have now more

2:27:28transportation we see other communities

2:27:31smaller have two vans and they take

2:27:34people to interesting places. Our van

2:27:37cannot leave Framingham to serve all the

2:27:40people within Framingham except to take

2:27:43them to Market Basket to shop twice a

2:27:45week. So, there's lots that could be

2:27:47done, should be done, and like councelor

2:27:49Ward mentioned, impacts when you got

2:27:52nine employees going to eight is

2:27:55certainly going to be bigger than the

2:27:57library which has over 50. And I'm a big

2:28:00fan of the library, long-term user of

2:28:02libraries from my youth, member of the

2:28:05the the

2:28:07friends of the library. And there are

2:28:10synergies that could be done, but I

2:28:12share some of the concerns and the mayor

2:28:15did show up to talk to the board of

2:28:17library trustees. Unfortunately, we

2:28:19didn't have

2:28:19>> You have 15 seconds, Mr. Dunn. So, in in

2:28:22all honesty, I hope you won't rush

2:28:24through this until you really have a

2:28:27handle on getting good job descriptions

2:28:29for these two deputy positions that are

2:28:32going to take more duties and I would

2:28:35say they deserve more salary

2:28:38and uh I say this is a federal employee.

2:28:41>> Mr. Dunn, your time is up. Okay.

2:28:43>> Okay.

2:28:43>> Thank you. Appreciate it.

2:28:47Mccarthy, you have three minutes.

2:28:56Hi, Kathy McCarthy here.

2:28:58>> Yes. Three minutes. Go ahead, Miss

2:28:59McCarthy.

2:29:00>> Yes. Thank you. Um,

2:29:05I just have a couple of notes down. and

2:29:08I don't have paired speech but I want to

2:29:11prep preface my comments that I am I'm a

2:29:15past as you know um COA member I am a

2:29:21very frequent

2:29:23u library trustee

2:29:27attendee and I just want to say you know

2:29:32we are very lucky and blessed that we

2:29:36have amazing amazing people like Don,

2:29:40Noelia,

2:29:42Jim Palini that have outdone themselves

2:29:46in the work that they have done and

2:29:49Randy um in in what they have given to

2:29:53our community. So, I thank them for

2:29:57that. But it's very concerning as a

2:30:00senior, as an advocate for the disabled.

2:30:05And there was many things you talk about

2:30:08the age well program that was hoping to

2:30:11be revived.

2:30:13Um many times when people were going to

2:30:17be hired then they had they didn't they

2:30:20said oh you have to have less than you

2:30:23know the halfime or whatever. but to ask

2:30:27these very professional people to take

2:30:31on an additional full-time job. And you

2:30:36have to realize we collaborate so much

2:30:40between the library, parks and wreck and

2:30:45um uh everything.

2:30:49But the point is it's specialty and I

2:30:52don't know is PE people should have

2:30:56degrees and knowledge for the outreach

2:30:59in the state that um you have for

2:31:03geriatrics

2:31:05and

2:31:07you know a a past speaker said well this

2:31:11is a small group let me tell you

2:31:14seniors is not a small group it's the

2:31:18baby boomers and we don't just slay

2:31:21around and do nothing. We are very

2:31:24active and very outspoken, probably too

2:31:27much at times, but um I do not support

2:31:33this. The very fact that the plan was to

2:31:36include veterans and it didn't get put

2:31:40on the legal notice

2:31:43says that's a red flag for me. You have

2:31:4615 seconds, Miss McCarthy.

2:31:48>> That I'm sorry.

2:31:49>> You have 15 seconds. Yep. 15 seconds.

2:31:53>> Oh, it's a red flag that it's not ready.

2:31:57So, please, I beg you,

2:32:01this is rushed through. The seniors

2:32:04weren't even respected enough to be

2:32:07contacted and all of the stakeholders

2:32:11that wouldffect be affected. Thank you,

2:32:14M. would have been Miss McCarthy. Miss

2:32:16McCarthy, time's up. Thank you.

2:32:19>> All right. Anyone else in the room like

2:32:20to be heard? Seeing none. Okay. Two.

2:32:25Okay. Sam first then. Sorry. No. Sam

2:32:28first.

2:32:38>> Thank you for listen. Thank you for

2:32:40listening. My name is Sam Mercurio. I'm

2:32:42a

2:32:44listening here to Mary Kate all the

2:32:45time. So

2:32:48my my only concern is not to look at the

2:32:51details yet. This is a first a first run

2:32:54through on all this. I appreciate what

2:32:56the mayor is trying to do. I

2:32:58particularly like the fact that the

2:33:00mayor has said that we're going to try

2:33:02and get more services out of the monies

2:33:05that we have. So, I'm just going to ask

2:33:07him the question I ask him every year,

2:33:09which is, "Can I expand the concert

2:33:11series?"

2:33:14>> I agree with that.

2:33:15>> And and he's grinning because he knows

2:33:16I'm going to ask him again and again and

2:33:18again. But I'm the host of the largest

2:33:22organiz well, the largest group of

2:33:24gathering people in this community every

2:33:26week in the summer. And we could expand

2:33:30that and have those people meet even

2:33:32more often. And I hear from people all

2:33:35the time, we would like to have more

2:33:37entertainment in more places. So we

2:33:40bring a stage to different parts of the

2:33:41city. Now we bring entertainment to

2:33:44different parts of the city. We're twice

2:33:47in your district.

2:33:50We don't have any place to go in your

2:33:51district.

2:33:53John's going to figure out a way for us

2:33:55to get into his district.

2:33:56>> We have electricity now.

2:33:58>> Common is in my district. Sam,

2:34:00>> it's split.

2:34:00>> Yeah, I know.

2:34:04Can you try to address

2:34:07Could you try to address reorganization,

2:34:08please?

2:34:08>> Yeah. Well, this is my this is the point

2:34:10is we we've been reorganiz reorganizing

2:34:13bringing entertainment to many different

2:34:15places. And the way that we do this is

2:34:18by raising funds. We do get some art

2:34:20grants. We get grants from different

2:34:22places. I raise money from local local

2:34:25businesses and from the community. All

2:34:27of this goes towards something that when

2:34:29I ran for council was my slogan, which

2:34:32is to make Framingham an entertainment

2:34:34destination. Once again, talk about all

2:34:37these empty buildings. Why not consider

2:34:40making some of them an entertainment

2:34:42destination? There are things that can

2:34:45be done that the mayor is looking at the

2:34:47big picture of. And I think that this is

2:34:49a great first first shot.

2:34:52the details, they're going to come and

2:34:55every time you flip a page, there's

2:34:57another detail. So, as we go along, I

2:35:00think that we'll see more and more that

2:35:02there are details that we all think of

2:35:06that we bring to his office and all of

2:35:08this works out for us. Hopefully I see a

2:35:12lot of you this Friday at Butterworth

2:35:16and maybe on Thursday at the McAuliffe

2:35:19Library because they have entertainment

2:35:22as does the Callahan Center. So we have

2:35:25entertainment and cultural needs in the

2:35:28city that are being addressed in this

2:35:30whole initiative and that I think is a

2:35:33positive. So let's hope that we can get

2:35:35more of this going on and more of it

2:35:37happening on a regular basis. Thank you.

2:35:39>> Thank you. Kathy, you

2:35:47>> Hi, I'm Kathy Hawk, um, district 3 chair

2:35:51of park and wreck. Um, in regards to the

2:35:54reorganization, our primary concern is

2:35:56not the organizational chart, it's the

2:35:58resident experience. We gather input

2:36:00from community partners, youth, sports

2:36:02organization, and residents. As a

2:36:04commission, the consistent message was

2:36:06that park and wreck is much more than a

2:36:08maintenance function. It's a quality of

2:36:10life service. It's really important that

2:36:13we keep that quality of life. Preserving

2:36:16its mission, expertise, and commitment

2:36:18to the residents should remain our

2:36:20highest priority. And one thing I'd like

2:36:22to mention is that Allison hasn't been

2:36:24mentioned here much tonight. Don has

2:36:26done a great job. I al also like to

2:36:28thank Allison for stepping up and doing

2:36:30everything she's done um in the midst of

2:36:33stuff. Had totally hold the fort down.

2:36:36We have a lot going on with Mary Dennis

2:36:38and everything. So, I'd like to also

2:36:40make sure that she gets acknowledged for

2:36:42everything she's doing and hope that we

2:36:44can maintain park and wreck as we've had

2:36:47it.

2:36:48>> Thank you. Okay. So, seeing no other

2:36:50comments from the audience or on Zoom,

2:36:52I'm going to go back to the council for

2:36:53any brief comments and then we will have

2:36:56to we do have other business. So,

2:36:57>> Mr. Chairman,

2:36:58>> Mr. Aani first and Mr. Stephanie,

2:37:00>> just uh for Sam who spoke earlier, um

2:37:03the finance subcommittee, Mr. And you

2:37:04brought up the fact that we were doing

2:37:06less concerts and that how we could

2:37:08interact more and he talks about

2:37:10fundraising. In the past, they'd send

2:37:12out. We were told they sent out, but I

2:37:13went through all my email. I used to get

2:37:15asked to donate to the concerts. Then we

2:37:17didn't get asked. It was infrequent. I

2:37:20think if you went out there to the

2:37:21general public and to the business

2:37:22community, I've said this a hundred

2:37:23times. We did it at the Veterans Park

2:37:26and everybody, we got selective amnesia

2:37:28in this room sometimes. Veterans Park.

2:37:29We were told

2:37:31by the former director, "We're never

2:37:34going to get it done by August uh by

2:37:36November 11th. Never going to get it

2:37:37done by November 11th." Bob Downey took

2:37:39charge of it after Judge Fabrey said it

2:37:41was the worst park in Framingham. They

2:37:43never had a sign. We raised $120,000.

2:37:46This guy bought a flag pole. This guy

2:37:47bought a flag pole. This guy bought a

2:37:48bench. This gal bought a pole. This the

2:37:50barbarians bought one after their

2:37:51father. And we raised 120,000. And

2:37:54because they didn't use some COVID

2:37:55money, they put it in for overtime. And

2:37:57the mayor was nice enough to put that

2:37:59extra money in. You had Schultzy from

2:38:01the fire department, Deputy Chief

2:38:02Schultz, banging the bricks in the

2:38:04ground on his own time. And we need to

2:38:06be in the solution business. Okay, when

2:38:08I sit up here some days, I go shaking my

2:38:10head cuz there's a solution. And Mike

2:38:11Tino, I'll say it again, Fred Bray's a

2:38:14good debt building commissioner. Mike

2:38:15Dino was a great building commissioner.

2:38:17Okay, Mike Dino was in the solution

2:38:19business. You go to his office.

2:38:21>> Point of order. I thought we were going

2:38:22to keep names in person. Let's let's be

2:38:24very careful here because there's a

2:38:26portion of the community that would

2:38:27disagree with that and I don't want to

2:38:28adjudicate that tonight.

2:38:29>> Well, all I'm going to say is we need to

2:38:30be in the solution business. We need to

2:38:32help our residents and help the

2:38:34community figure out how to get things

2:38:35done, not how we're not going to get

2:38:37things done. So, maybe we need a little

2:38:39crash course on how to go raise money.

2:38:40>> Okay. So, can we talk about

2:38:41reorganization, please?

2:38:42>> Well, we're talking about he wants more

2:38:44concerts. He said,

2:38:45>> I get it, but that's really not on the

2:38:46subject of

2:38:48it's a stretch, but it works.

2:38:49>> Anybody else in the council?

2:38:50>> Chairman, Mr. Stephanie,

2:38:54>> some people,

2:38:55>> what's the topic?

2:38:56>> Reorganization.

2:38:57>> Okay. Just making sure.

2:38:59>> Yes, it is.

2:39:00>> Um,

2:39:00>> I know you wouldn't realize it some of

2:39:01the time.

2:39:04>> Um,

2:39:08let's be clear, the process here has

2:39:11been less than stellar. We haven't

2:39:14communicated clearly. We haven't

2:39:16communicated to the right people. And I

2:39:18think the council needs to use its 60

2:39:21days to make sure that we are having the

2:39:24conversations.

2:39:26And contrary to some of the sort of

2:39:3020,000 square feet discussion, the

2:39:33reorganization and the council's job is

2:39:37details.

2:39:38This is about details. The job

2:39:41descriptions matter. the savings or

2:39:45supposed savings. It'd be interesting to

2:39:48see how much of that gets absorbed in

2:39:50the reclassification of all the

2:39:51different positions we talked about

2:39:53reclassifying and keeping there. And

2:39:56we've lost track of some of this

2:39:58conversation in some of this and a few

2:40:01speakers have made this clear. This is

2:40:04about the delivery of services in a four

2:40:07in a $398 million budget. This is 0.003%

2:40:1203%

2:40:13of our budget.

2:40:15Our budget went up 4% this year. We're

2:40:18not having a fire sale. We got to figure

2:40:21out how we deliver these services. And I

2:40:24think there are some compelling cases

2:40:26for some of the synergies and depending

2:40:29on whether we talk about collaborating,

2:40:31coordinating, or controlling.

2:40:35But there are some opportunities here.

2:40:37And I do appreciate the mayor bringing

2:40:39this forward. I do think it is a little

2:40:42concerning that nobody has done some of

2:40:44these. Um the capital facilities and

2:40:48parks are really an odd combination.

2:40:52It's a very large department with a

2:40:53smaller department with people that do

2:40:56very different things. I think the

2:40:58details on that are going to matter.

2:41:02We're talking about licensing

2:41:03controlling our parks.

2:41:06That means you need to understand the

2:41:08laws and rules and regulations around

2:41:11our parks and how that works. And I was

2:41:13comforted by the mayor's answer to that

2:41:14question in terms of who's going to be

2:41:17accountable. But I do think that we need

2:41:21more process. I do think we need to do

2:41:25the details. The ordinance put forward

2:41:28has a bunch of things we need to include

2:41:30that the mayor talked about the reserve

2:41:33funds and making sure they're clear in

2:41:35terms of who is responsible dealing with

2:41:38the job classifications and job

2:41:40descriptions which have to be approved

2:41:41by the council. They shouldn't be

2:41:43approved tomorrow or the next day. They

2:41:44should be approved as part of this

2:41:46process so we all know upfront what

2:41:48everybody's job description is, what

2:41:50their roles and responsibilities are,

2:41:52and what their compensation is. So we

2:41:55all know what it is that's going on

2:41:57because this isn't just about dollars

2:42:00and cents and it isn't about the

2:42:03personalities. As much as we all like to

2:42:05say that and it's hard to get away from

2:42:07I like this person or I don't like this

2:42:09person. I try not to look at it that

2:42:12way. I try to look at it as what are we

2:42:15doing that helps us. And I can say this

2:42:18now because the person is is just

2:42:21retired, but the deputy director of the

2:42:24park department and anybody in that

2:42:26position has always had a

2:42:29um tur relationship with all of the

2:42:33sports constituencies because they want

2:42:36to protect the fields and everybody who

2:42:38runs the the programs wants to be on the

2:42:40fields immediately. And as one of the

2:42:42people who ran the lacrosse program for

2:42:44years, I always wanted to be out there

2:42:45in March. And he'd say, "Well, you won't

2:42:48be out there in June if you're out there

2:42:49in March because you'll destroy the

2:42:51grass." And it was good that somebody

2:42:53who had a degree in turfology

2:42:56was in charge of our grass. Not someone

2:42:59responding to political whims, not

2:43:02somebody who was just doing a management

2:43:06function, but someone who actually

2:43:08appreciated and understood that grass is

2:43:10more than something that gets cut. It's

2:43:12something that enables athletic

2:43:14competitions to occur because this is

2:43:17about people and our community. And I

2:43:20think this will be judged by time. We'll

2:43:24figure out with time whether this works

2:43:25or doesn't work. But I think in the

2:43:27interim, I think we owe it to everybody

2:43:31to take our time to work through a

2:43:34process and to work the details. There's

2:43:38a lot of good things in what has been

2:43:40proposed and I think we've got to figure

2:43:43out how we incorporate them into an

2:43:45ordinance to make sure we're not all

2:43:48worried about our concerns. I would

2:43:50therefore move that the organizational

2:43:52plan with draft ordinance be sent to a

2:43:54five member select committee appointed

2:43:56by the chair with said committee to

2:43:58report back its findings to the council

2:44:00at our August 18 meeting.

2:44:03>> Second,

2:44:05>> so a couple things. Um, first of all, I

2:44:08just want to remind everyone that we

2:44:10have an up or down vote on this. We do

2:44:12not have the right to amend this and we

2:44:14do not have the authority to amend it,

2:44:16>> Mr. Chairman. So

2:44:18>> that's true of the of the organization.

2:44:20It's not true of the ordinance,

2:44:22>> right? But that but right now

2:44:24>> they're they're part and parcel to each

2:44:25other. We also get to look at the job

2:44:28descriptions and and approve the job

2:44:30classifications. There are a lot of

2:44:32while we don't change the organizational

2:44:34structure. We do have the ability to

2:44:37influence and impact the ordinance which

2:44:40by the way sets the parameters for parks

2:44:42and for seniors and for everybody else.

2:44:45We do have the ability to set the

2:44:46parameters on job classifications and

2:44:49others. The council sets those positions

2:44:52and we should know those things upfront

2:44:55as part of this. That's not a herculean

2:44:58task. We've been talking around this

2:45:01period of time.

2:45:02>> Your point is made I'll stop.

2:45:04>> But the reorganization is the up and

2:45:06down vote. Those other things there are

2:45:08no job classification changes at this

2:45:10point to come before us. If they do,

2:45:12they have to come before us. an

2:45:14ordinance has been submitted as

2:45:15required. So as of now, if there have to

2:45:18be other changes made in the ordinances,

2:45:19we can look at that later on down the

2:45:21line. But as of now, the reorganization

2:45:23is um

2:45:26is what is at issue here. It has to be

2:45:29decided within 60 days as stated and um

2:45:32that's what we're looking at. But we

2:45:34have to all keep in mind we cannot amend

2:45:37it or shape it the way we would like to

2:45:39shape it. So may or may not like to

2:45:42shape it. I'm happy personally with the

2:45:43way it is now. But anyways,

2:45:46>> okay. Um,

2:45:48>> question. So, you're saying we vote yes

2:45:50or no um on the current reorg plan and

2:45:54then if they but if they come back with

2:45:56more details then we would do vote yes

2:45:58or no on that. Is that correct?

2:46:00>> Well, I mean they come back at a later

2:46:01date with other things. It's not a reorg

2:46:04plan, but it's regular things we

2:46:07consider. We could vote yes or no or

2:46:08amend those. We just can't amend the or

2:46:11plan.

2:46:11>> But they could come back with another

2:46:12reorg plan too.

2:46:14>> Sure. And if they come back with another

2:46:15reorg plan, then it's the same thing. He

2:46:17has to know in 60 days.

2:46:18>> Okay.

2:46:22>> So, um,

2:46:23>> Mr. Cani,

2:46:26>> Mr. Canon was before me. Council,

2:46:27>> I'm sorry. I have a bias to my left

2:46:29hand. I apologize. I'm kind of leaning

2:46:31that way. So, Mr. Canon, Mr. Adani.

2:46:34>> Uh, thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you,

2:46:35Mr. Adavani. So, I I I worry about the

2:46:38timing here because I think they're

2:46:41going to learn new things as they peel

2:46:43away layers of the onion, and I think we

2:46:47need to be somewhat nimble in allowing

2:46:48them the freedom and flexibility to do

2:46:50that. I I suspect there are going to be

2:46:52reclassification issues. I certainly

2:46:54think more compensation. We're asking

2:46:56people to do more. All of that stuff

2:46:58needs to be figured out, but I think

2:47:00what we will know in coming weeks is

2:47:03more than what we'll know today. So, I I

2:47:05liked the idea that was talked about

2:47:06earlier, referring it to an ad hoc

2:47:08committee. I don't know that five makes

2:47:09sense. Three might be a little more

2:47:11nimble considering if we're allowing

2:47:13them to figure things out as they're

2:47:15going, which I think is helpful rather

2:47:18than us almost dictating, bless you,

2:47:20decisions on the front end. I I think

2:47:23there's a a balance there. So, that

2:47:26would be my preference. Um, I worry

2:47:30sometimes because

2:47:32the guy that was elected twice

2:47:34overwhelmingly to make these decisions,

2:47:37this is that plan and I I don't know how

2:47:40much we want to micromanage

2:47:43that. So

2:47:44>> again, we can't micromanage it,

2:47:45>> right? And you're absolutely right. It's

2:47:46the yes or no thing. And and if we if

2:47:49the committee work is a little too

2:47:51micromanaging, which sometimes we do, it

2:47:53could result in in an outcome that I I

2:47:56don't think is consistent with the

2:47:57interest of the community. Mr. Davian,

2:47:59did you have something else you wanted

2:48:00to bring up?

2:48:00>> Well, the only thing was the about the

2:48:02ad hoc. I you had mentioned it. I think

2:48:04council Stephanie was kind of the same

2:48:05point just so we could hear from folks

2:48:07and get some more input and then come

2:48:08back. So, if the timeline had to be

2:48:10quicker, you know, I think that is a

2:48:12good idea. What your suggestion was the

2:48:14ad hoc. You you're the chair. I know

2:48:16when I was the chair, you can don't

2:48:17aren't you allowed to make an ad hoc

2:48:19committee put on whoever you want.

2:48:20>> The rule states that it can be done by

2:48:22this the council chair. That's correct.

2:48:26>> Mr. just to say that um we um he was

2:48:30elected to do to for that position, but

2:48:33at the same time we were elected to um

2:48:35represent the people and to be a

2:48:39boundary for um that for the

2:48:42administration too on behalf of the

2:48:44people.

2:48:48>> Okay. All right. Miss Lebron.

2:48:52So I I also agree that you know we need

2:48:55to this has been going on now for a

2:48:57while and I I you know if we've been

2:48:59listening to the people that have been

2:49:02in the you know in the workings of this

2:49:04now you know from all the names and you

2:49:07know whether it's Don or Jim or Noelia

2:49:12and Allison we know that they have been

2:49:14working you know day and night on this

2:49:16and I think that we need to also be

2:49:18cognizant of not wait you know without

2:49:22rushing it. I don't I don't think it's

2:49:23rushed. I think that um I think that

2:49:27it's been, you know, I said earlier that

2:49:30I wish it had kind of started out a

2:49:32little different, but that makes um no

2:49:36difference to me now where we're at now.

2:49:39And it's been a matter of weeks. And I

2:49:41think that I would also um be in favor

2:49:44of an ad hoc committee to put one

2:49:46together and then you know this is going

2:49:50to go yes or no in 60 days automatically

2:49:52but I would like to try to see if we can

2:49:54get it the ad hoc committee formed. I

2:49:57would think that three would be a number

2:49:59that I would be more comfortable with

2:50:01over a five number. Um and then report

2:50:05back at the next meeting and then you

2:50:07know take the vote in August. I I think

2:50:10prolonging this um just kind of stops

2:50:13what they're in the process of doing and

2:50:15I think that they have been you know in

2:50:18a moving forward pattern but stopping

2:50:21and moving forward and then you know so

2:50:23I I would like to you know just add that

2:50:27um my thoughts on that.

2:50:30>> Can I

2:50:31>> Yes, Mr. K. I don't know if this is an

2:50:33issue, but it it came up at the finance

2:50:35committee meeting. The reason between 3

2:50:36and 5, there was a counselor who had um

2:50:39who really couldn't speak and

2:50:40participate in the meeting because it

2:50:42would have triggered the sixth vote. And

2:50:45as a reason to do I don't want to see

2:50:47that happen again because I think

2:50:49everyone has a you know a meaningful

2:50:51role to play. So as a why three versus

2:50:54five that to me is the reason because it

2:50:57it allows a little more freedom and

2:50:59flexibility for the entirety of the

2:51:00council to participate in the discussion

2:51:02should they choose instead of us

2:51:04treading into not unticky OML open

2:51:07meeting law related waters.

2:51:08>> Mr. Chairman

2:51:10>> Stephanie uh I chose five because this

2:51:13is a major issue and we have 60 days.

2:51:17It's a short period of time and I think

2:51:19that five is a representative group of

2:51:22this people because there are different

2:51:23disciplines. We're going to need

2:51:25somebody on finance. We're going to need

2:51:26somebody to look at the ordinances.

2:51:28We're going to need someone to look at

2:51:29the job classifications. We're going to

2:51:32need someone to look at all these

2:51:33things. It doesn't become an issue for

2:51:35the most part for the finance committee

2:51:36with a group of five. And in fact, we

2:51:39get more input into the conversation.

2:51:41groups of three tend to be a uh chair

2:51:45driven discussion and they tend to be

2:51:47less

2:51:49uh focused and they work well I think

2:51:51with in some instances I think this is a

2:51:54good opportunity for five members of the

2:51:56council to thrash this out because there

2:51:58are a lot of details and discussion that

2:52:01needs to take place. Yes, the reorg is a

2:52:04yes or no vote, but all of the other

2:52:07components which are part and parcel to

2:52:09the reorganization are not yes or no

2:52:12votes and they require a discussion

2:52:14relative to the details. I'd like to

2:52:16know is there savings here which is

2:52:19issue relative to the job descriptions

2:52:21and the classifications which by the way

2:52:23exist today. I'd like to know on the

2:52:26ordinances how we look at some of the

2:52:29things the mayor talked about as

2:52:31protections and the way it will operate

2:52:34and how we incorporate those into an

2:52:36ordinance which by the way we do all the

2:52:38time as a matter of our policy setting

2:52:41rules and regulations. So I think that

2:52:45um having five people gives two more

2:52:48counselors a voice in that process and

2:52:50that process is going to be important as

2:52:52it comes back to us in August and then

2:52:55again ultimately in September.

2:52:59>> What's September?

2:53:00>> Well, the ordinance will require two

2:53:02votes and if we refer it to a

2:53:04subcommittee, it's going to have to go

2:53:06there and follow the normal process that

2:53:08we follow to have it come back and voted

2:53:10on.

2:53:10>> I don't believe it requires two votes.

2:53:12requires two readings.

2:53:14>> The ordinance will require two votes.

2:53:17>> Two readings.

2:53:18>> No, the ordinance will require two

2:53:20votes. The um reorganization plan

2:53:25requires one vote.

2:53:26>> No, I agree with that. But ordinances

2:53:27require two readings.

2:53:29>> Two votes.

2:53:31>> Okay. Well, we can check that.

2:53:32>> We can figure that out.

2:53:33>> Figure that out.

2:53:36>> Every ordinance we've done since we've

2:53:38been a city has had two votes.

2:53:39>> I agree. So, if all of a sudden we're

2:53:41going to change our rules, that's not a

2:53:43good look.

2:53:44>> I don't think we're changing our rules,

2:53:45but I think uh it's always seemed a

2:53:47little redundant to me in in preparation

2:53:49for this uh hearing and this whole

2:53:51subject. I looked at it and I think it

2:53:53requires two readings, which would be

2:53:55tonight and then the other night and

2:53:57when we vote on it. So, I don't think it

2:53:59requires two votes. I think it requires

2:54:00two readings, but we can check that out.

2:54:02We can get in we have time.

2:54:05But Mr.

2:54:07>> So I would like to make a um a motion to

2:54:11put a three member ad hoc committee

2:54:13together. Um basically what I stated

2:54:16before which I didn't make the motion

2:54:17and just

2:54:19>> so that's an amendment to Mr.

2:54:20Stephanie's motion vote is a motion.

2:54:23Okay.

2:54:23>> Point of information.

2:54:24>> Yes.

2:54:24>> You don't need a motion. You get to do

2:54:26it by charter by vote motion. So the

2:54:29motion

2:54:29>> on your we're going to vote on your

2:54:30motion but the chairman I thought can

2:54:32make this committee up by himself.

2:54:33>> Well I could. is nothing.

2:54:35>> I could well it's or it's not. I mean, I

2:54:37could sit here and say I can make the

2:54:39committee. We won't even vote. But I'm

2:54:40not going to do that. But I I do also

2:54:42think a three-member committee makes a

2:54:44little more sense. My intent would have

2:54:45been to appoint a three-member ad hoc

2:54:47committee, but I don't want to just

2:54:50usurp that under the rules. So, um,

2:54:53we'll put it to a vote. So, it's, um,

2:54:56the amen the amendment is for three.

2:54:59>> Is there a second to that?

2:55:00>> Is there a second to the amendment for

2:55:01three?

2:55:04Okay,

2:55:05>> I'll second it.

2:55:06>> Okay, Miss Long. Well,

2:55:08>> I mean, if everybody wants five, I mean,

2:55:11I just thought that three was I'll go

2:55:13with whatever.

2:55:16>> I seconded that.

2:55:20>> Well, thank you.

2:55:21>> I think three makes more sense for a lot

2:55:23of the reasons that I think it's more

2:55:25manageable for some of the reasons, Mr.

2:55:26Cannon, whatever. But

2:55:30>> the yeah, that's the OML thing was my

2:55:32because I remember it was it was

2:55:34difficult. Tracy had good thoughts um

2:55:37and wanted to participate in that way.

2:55:39And while I appreciate councelor

2:55:40Sephanini's argument that it gives two

2:55:42more counselors an opportunity to

2:55:44participate. What I saw the other night,

2:55:46it really prevented more counselors from

2:55:49being able to participate. Okay. Now, in

2:55:50theory, none of it matters because it's

2:55:52all going to come back to the full

2:55:53council. But if someone has something to

2:55:55offer in a public forum, it allows the

2:55:58entirety of the council to weigh in in

2:56:00the ad hoc process. This is very in the

2:56:02weeds, and I appreciate that we're

2:56:03spending a little time on it, but I

2:56:05think ultimately we'll be successful

2:56:06either way.

2:56:09Given the choice, I think three makes

2:56:10sense for the the reasons I mentioned

2:56:12and others have chimed in on. But is it

2:56:14the end of the day if it's five? No, I I

2:56:16don't think so.

2:56:17>> Okay. So, Miss Bryant, then I'm gonna

2:56:19take a vote. Um I um I liked his

2:56:21thinking at first, but I originally did

2:56:23think that five was was better because

2:56:26for the reasons that council Stephanie

2:56:28stated and um I although I did um I did

2:56:33come with the mandate to that meeting

2:56:35from some residents in my district,

2:56:37right, to make a and it was just a a

2:56:40positive statement, whatever. Um but I

2:56:43wouldn't have been speaking at that

2:56:44meeting as a counselor anyway um as a

2:56:48resident and I think that um we can see

2:56:50on this issue the residents um are well

2:56:54represented you know um from the public.

2:56:57So I would I would prefer to be um to

2:57:02have a a a subset like a five when I

2:57:04think to get comprehensive at this point

2:57:07and I think it would actually the

2:57:10details I think we it would move it

2:57:12along like there'd be less dis um less

2:57:16chance of dissatisfaction when it came

2:57:18back to the whole of us. That's what I'm

2:57:20thinking.

2:57:21>> Um

2:57:22>> you realize that the open I'm sorry Mr.

2:57:24Go ahead. Put that away when I vote.

2:57:26>> You realize that the because I looked

2:57:28into the open meeting law thing. You you

2:57:30can't the the

2:57:31>> I was just speaking as a resident

2:57:33doesn't forgive I mean it it really is.

2:57:36So if you're comfortable with that, I'm

2:57:38fine with that. But it it doesn't

2:57:40>> I'm not going to I won't even I'm won't

2:57:42even come as a resident on on this. I

2:57:45will watch the meeting.

2:57:46>> All right. I don't think we need to have

2:57:47this discussion now.

2:57:48>> Well, thank you Mike.

2:57:49>> I think we should have it though, but I

2:57:50don't think we have to have it now.

2:57:52>> Yes.

2:57:52>> And I do know that. So the amendment is

2:57:54for I'm going to take a vote first on

2:57:55the amendment for three and then I'm

2:57:58going to take a vote in the main motion

2:57:59for the ad hoc committee to report back

2:58:01at our August meeting. And because of

2:58:04the way my scorecard works, I am first

2:58:06in line. So um I'll vote yes on three.

2:58:10Miss Leo,

2:58:11>> yes.

2:58:12>> Miss Long,

2:58:13>> yes.

2:58:14>> Mr. Ward,

2:58:15>> no.

2:58:16>> Miss Feny,

2:58:16>> no.

2:58:17>> Mr. Cannon,

2:58:18>> yes.

2:58:18>> Mr. Alexander,

2:58:20>> yes.

2:58:20>> Mr. Aani,

2:58:22>> yes. Miss Malik,

2:58:23>> yes.

2:58:24>> And Mr. Stephanie,

2:58:26>> no.

2:58:26>> Miss Bryant,

2:58:27>> no.

2:58:28>> So that is seven to four.

2:58:32>> So now the question comes on the main

2:58:33motion.

2:58:34>> You actually don't need to take a vote

2:58:35on the main motion because the amended

2:58:37motion carries the motion.

2:58:41>> Well,

2:58:41>> I disagree. I think you have to take a

2:58:43vote on the main motion. That was just

2:58:44amended the number, but we still want to

2:58:46charge to the ad hoc committee. So I'm

2:58:48going to vote the main motion. Perhaps I

2:58:50could have done it that way, but I

2:58:51didn't make that clear. So, for that

2:58:52reason, I'm going to do the main motion.

2:58:54Miss Lebrono.

2:58:56>> Yes.

2:58:56>> Miss Long.

2:58:58>> Uh, can you just repeat what the main

2:59:00motion is now?

2:59:01>> Just send the send it to the ad hoc

2:59:03committee for report back at our next

2:59:04meeting.

2:59:05>> Mr. Wood,

2:59:06>> yes. Miss Feny,

2:59:07>> yes.

2:59:07>> Mr. Cannon,

2:59:08>> yes.

2:59:09>> Mr. Alexander,

2:59:10>> yes.

2:59:10>> Mr. Aani,

2:59:11>> yes.

2:59:11>> Miss Malik,

2:59:12>> yes.

2:59:12>> Mr. Stephanie, Miss Bryant,

2:59:14>> yes.

2:59:14>> Myself, yes. It's unanimous. Okay. Thank

2:59:17you all for coming tonight. Thank you

2:59:18for all making it a very orderly

2:59:20session. really appreciate it and uh

2:59:22thanks for your time.

2:59:25>> Okay,

2:59:25>> we ready to adjourn.

2:59:27>> Was that close?

2:59:28>> Hey, did you want to adjourn before the

2:59:29mayor's report and all the other stuff?

2:59:30>> 959. So

2:59:32>> So should we make a

2:59:34>> We should wait a minute and make the

2:59:35motion.

2:59:36>> Okay, we'll wait.

2:59:41>> Okay, make this thing down all night

2:59:42tonight.

2:59:43>> I'd like to

2:59:44>> I feel the same way myself

2:59:47>> being that the hour is break.

2:59:49>> Okay, two. Okay, you I could use a

2:59:51little

2:59:53>> stretch.

2:59:53>> Recess stretch.

2:59:56>> Our community, a unique and diverse

2:59:59place. Founded on land granted to a

3:00:02farmer from England.

3:00:04We've produced heroes of the American

3:00:06Revolution and Civil War.

3:00:09The home of journalists, abolitionists,

3:00:12inventors, and furniture makers,

3:00:14industrialists, and the entrepreneurial

3:00:16spirit that produces world-class

3:00:18products and services.

3:00:21A stretch of Route 9 called the Golden

3:00:23Mile featured international performers

3:00:26and headline entertainers,

3:00:30where groundbreaking medical treatment

3:00:31for our wounded warriors was developed.

3:00:34And the most comprehensive study of

3:00:35cardiac care continues.

3:00:38The birthplace of major league

3:00:40competitors that fill us with local

3:00:41pride for our home teams and a teacher

3:00:44and American icon that soared above the

3:00:46stars.

3:00:48Framingham, how do you stay informed?

3:00:58>> Mr. Mayor, if you would mind uh trying

3:01:00to maybe be a little brief, that would

3:01:02be great.

3:01:04>> Mr. Chairman, I'll be very brief.

3:01:06There's no mayor's report tonight. Oh,

3:01:08okay.

3:01:09>> I make the motion to move past 10

3:01:10o'clock.

3:01:10>> Yes.

3:01:11>> Um, I'd like to make a motion to move

3:01:13past 10 o'clock.

3:01:14>> Second.

3:01:15>> Okay. All those in favor, Miss Long?

3:01:21>> M. Long, are you here? Okay. Therefore,

3:01:23all those in favor?

3:01:24>> Yes.

3:01:27>> Yes.

3:01:29>> Mr. Wood?

3:01:31>> Yes.

3:01:31>> Miss Feny? Yep.

3:01:32>> Mr. Cannon?

3:01:33>> Yes.

3:01:33>> Mr. Alexander.

3:01:35>> Mr. Aviani?

3:01:36>> Yes. Miss Malik, yes. Mr. Stephanie,

3:01:38Miss Bryant, myself. Yes. Mr. Le Bruno.

3:01:42>> Yes.

3:01:42>> Okay. So, it's 902. There's 902 people

3:01:45out of the room.

3:01:46>> Okay. Um, next is the request of

3:01:50licensing coordinator Hawkins Pedo's

3:01:52license for Nelson Lopez Garcia and

3:01:54Ingred Alvarez Marita Dva Grainades

3:01:59Chapenz Inc.

3:02:00>> Motion to second.

3:02:02>> You said that very well.

3:02:03>> Not bad. Okay. Um, all those in favor

3:02:08starting back to my list. I'm sorry. Mr.

3:02:10Ward,

3:02:12>> yes.

3:02:12>> Miss Feny,

3:02:13>> yes.

3:02:13>> Mr. Cannon,

3:02:14>> yes.

3:02:14>> Mr. Aani,

3:02:15>> yes.

3:02:15>> Miss Malik,

3:02:16>> yes.

3:02:16>> Mr. Stephanie,

3:02:18>> yes.

3:02:18>> Myself, yes. Miss Leam Bruno,

3:02:20>> yes.

3:02:20>> Miss Long,

3:02:21>> yes.

3:02:22>> Unanimous. Two people out of the room.

3:02:26>> Uh, request of council fenian update of

3:02:28613 Pleasant Street from the director of

3:02:30planning and community development.

3:02:39Good evening. Um, I'm here tonight to

3:02:42give an update. I hope you received the

3:02:44memorandum that should have been in your

3:02:45file regarding this property. Yes, this

3:02:48is one of the homes that saw the

3:02:50American Revolution and um I know

3:02:53councelor Afeni um it's dear to her

3:02:55heart to see this home restored. I want

3:02:57to give you an update on some of the

3:02:59action that we've taken. Um, I have gone

3:03:01before the CPC and they've been very

3:03:04supportive of this project. They

3:03:05actually, um, funded an appraisal. We'd

3:03:07like to get the property appraised and

3:03:09see what the property is actually worth.

3:03:11Um, it's not your typical appraisal

3:03:13because of the historic nature of not

3:03:16only being historic, but it's also in

3:03:18its own historic district. Um, if you,

3:03:21um, go through the memorandum, you'll

3:03:22see the history of this site where the

3:03:24this community actually put a historic

3:03:26district on top of this property. Um,

3:03:29this property is owned um by Fred

3:03:32Lapman. Um, I've been dealing with Fred

3:03:35since I started here for four years. And

3:03:38um, he has a family issue right now

3:03:40regarding the property. Um, and I asked

3:03:43would he be interested in selling it,

3:03:45either selling it to the city or selling

3:03:47it to a private developer. I then took

3:03:49an initiative to bring the contractor

3:03:51who's actually doing the AANAM

3:03:53restoration work. If you guys have had a

3:03:55chance to go down there and take a look

3:03:56at that, it's pretty impressive. and I

3:03:59wanted to get an update from someone who

3:04:01actually restores historic structures.

3:04:03So, we walked the site, he looked at the

3:04:05property, and he looked at me and he

3:04:07goes, "Sarky, there's nothing that

3:04:08scares me about this building. This

3:04:10building can be safe from the outside.

3:04:12It needs a lot of work." Um, and there

3:04:14are other creative things we can do, but

3:04:16we don't want to create what I what I

3:04:19want to say is add value to this

3:04:21property until we know what the endgame

3:04:23is with this property. Now, that could

3:04:25be an ADU. If you remember a couple

3:04:26years ago, we talked about an ADU, but

3:04:29right now I think the first thing we

3:04:30need to do is what the value is. Um, the

3:04:33good news is I actually find found an

3:04:35appraisal who's actually appraising 100

3:04:37Prospect Street. That house was built in

3:04:39I think the late 1600s. So, I have

3:04:43someone who has qualifications who can

3:04:45do this work. I do need a little bit

3:04:47more funding, but I'm going to take that

3:04:48funding for my budget because CPC gave

3:04:51me $1,500 for this appraisal. I do have

3:04:54some funds in my budget so I don't have

3:04:55to go back to CPC and get this appraisal

3:04:58done and then we'll see what it's worth

3:05:00and I'll be back here and give you more

3:05:02of an update um as this goes. um this

3:05:05this this structure I mean we c our

3:05:08celebration this year um I think it's

3:05:10important it's important to a lot of

3:05:12people Helen Le Moine uh just stopped me

3:05:14what she's trying to do she wants to get

3:05:16interested get behind this um I actually

3:05:19have someone who lives in California

3:05:21that's following this property and wants

3:05:24to see this property restored so um and

3:05:28I think it's important that if we can

3:05:29come together we have a tool in the

3:05:31toolbox with CPC funds so at least

3:05:34Hopefully, I'll be in this grant round

3:05:36to make some type of a commitment to a

3:05:38restoring this home.

3:05:42>> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you so

3:05:44much for this update. So, this for me

3:05:47has been an issue since day one. Uh it

3:05:49is the one of the top issues in district

3:05:523. The neighbors are really frustrated.

3:05:54So I am glad to hear that we're doing

3:05:56the appraisal process that there is that

3:05:59a person a professional person who does

3:06:02historical buildings it says that it

3:06:04doesn't scare them.

3:06:06We've been asking the neighbors a lot to

3:06:09wait this has been nine years I think uh

3:06:13for where we're at and I hear about this

3:06:16weekly for concerns about public safety.

3:06:19um after every storm there's some sort

3:06:22of the wind some wood on a window or a

3:06:26door or even the shingles itself come

3:06:28off and so it is just an accident that

3:06:30is waiting to happen considering we're

3:06:33also in a bit of a drought. Um there is

3:06:36concern that the neighbor the neighbors

3:06:38are concerned that it's going to go up

3:06:39as up as a tinder box and you know

3:06:43there's city property right next to that

3:06:44and then there are houses next to that.

3:06:47So I my big concern is urgency. I know

3:06:51government does not move fast, but we've

3:06:53asked a lot of the neighbors for the

3:06:55past nine years on this. Um so this is

3:06:58more progress than I've heard in a long

3:07:01time. So I I appreciate that. Um just

3:07:04for my colleagues, I added uh on

3:07:07background a letter that I wrote Mr.

3:07:09Sarkeesian um back in January just with

3:07:13two other ideas. The attorney general

3:07:15has a neighborhood um division that

3:07:19looks at it's a renewal division that

3:07:21looks at getting a receiver for

3:07:24properties that um uh that have blight

3:07:29that's negatively impact and it's worked

3:07:31in Worcester and other communities. And

3:07:33then just also, you know, if we're

3:07:35looking for more people, which doesn't

3:07:36sound like we're looking for people to

3:07:38be developers, but to take this, but you

3:07:40can always work with Preservation

3:07:42Massachusetts to put it on their

3:07:44endangered list. And I really hate to

3:07:47see that there is a property in

3:07:48Framingham that's on the end would be on

3:07:50the endangered list. Um, I do also

3:07:53wonder with the Sarah Clay's house a a

3:07:55number of years ago, it seems like that

3:07:57was a very community driven

3:08:00uh project as well. that house was in

3:08:03very dire

3:08:05uh shape and now it's gorgeous and

3:08:08someone's living in it. Um so I'm

3:08:10wondering if there is something like

3:08:12that campaign that we can also do for

3:08:14this house as well. I don't know if

3:08:15you've also seen 110 um Edge Hill Road,

3:08:18the historic preservation that that

3:08:20house is on gone, but you know, trying

3:08:22to find someone who really has the

3:08:24passion towards historic preservation

3:08:26is, you know, that's the key, right? To

3:08:28find the right property owner. And

3:08:31again, um you know, the town did the

3:08:33right thing years ago. You know, they

3:08:35tried to work with the property owner.

3:08:36They gave they gave a variance. They

3:08:39needed a frontage variance so that they

3:08:41would be allowed to build a house in the

3:08:42back. and in turn obviously preserve the

3:08:45home and unfortunately you know you know

3:08:48the followup and what have you it just

3:08:50didn't happen. Um and I think now

3:08:52there's more eyes looking at different

3:08:54projects and um again you know we'll get

3:08:57the appraisal done and I'll be back. Um

3:08:59I got to talk to the mayor um you know

3:09:02about what our steps should be with with

3:09:04with with our city solicitor. Um that's

3:09:07something we haven't really pursued yet

3:09:08but we will.

3:09:10>> Well, I asked just if you can just keep

3:09:11me in the loop. I know you're you're

3:09:13good at that, but um I'd really like to

3:09:14be more in these conversations and know

3:09:16what's going on. So,

3:09:18>> thank you, Mr.

3:09:21>> Just I appreciate this being brought up,

3:09:23but nine years ago, Dennis Gianetti was

3:09:25the chair of the city council. He came

3:09:26to the zoning board. I was chair of the

3:09:27zoning board. They begged us to give

3:09:29this person a varian so he could get

3:09:31another lot and they promised to

3:09:33preserve it. Here we are nine years

3:09:35later. It's the worst looking house on

3:09:36the street. It's probably one of the

3:09:37worst looking houses in the

3:09:38neighborhood. And then just to

3:09:40piggyback,

3:09:42it's it's expensive. This stuff isn't

3:09:44going to happen overnight. And then the

3:09:45Sarah Clay's house, it all depends who

3:09:47the builder and the developer is to be

3:09:48honest with you because that house has

3:09:49vinyl windows. Okay? Cuz there was a

3:09:51local Framingham contractor that wanted

3:09:53to buy it and they want they told me he

3:09:55had to use these special windows. He had

3:09:57to do this, he had to do that. It had to

3:09:59be architecturally significant. The

3:10:00windows in my house are better than the

3:10:01windows in the Sarah Clay's house. Okay?

3:10:03Sarah Clay's got vinyl windows. There's

3:10:05nothing historical about vinyl windows.

3:10:07Okay? and it was done and it's okay.

3:10:10It's a lot better than it looked, but I

3:10:12went to that auction. It it's it's vinyl

3:10:14windows, okay? They they were given

3:10:16preferential treatment on that rehab on

3:10:17that one, let me tell you. We'll just

3:10:19leave it at that. Vinyl windows.

3:10:21>> So, I would just have a comment. I mean,

3:10:22I certainly understand the frustration.

3:10:24I was on the city council nine years ago

3:10:26when it first came to us. I thought we

3:10:27had a good solution. It didn't work out.

3:10:30But now, this place looks like a wind

3:10:33would blow it down. Okay.

3:10:35>> Oh, less. Right. Right.

3:10:37>> I really question whether it's a public

3:10:38safety danger. I'm I'm slightly

3:10:40surprised that the building inspector

3:10:42hasn't ordered it be taken down to be

3:10:44honest with you. So, I would be

3:10:46interested in what the building

3:10:48inspector says about the uh safety of

3:10:51the house as it stands now because it

3:10:52really really it's stunning to me how

3:10:57how brittle it looks. And I agree what

3:11:00Mary Kate said about if it catches fire,

3:11:03it's gone in five minutes.

3:11:04>> Yeah. The vinyl fence will come down

3:11:06behind it too to the new neighbor.

3:11:07>> And just a point of information, Mr.

3:11:09Chair,

3:11:09>> you said it best, but here's what

3:11:11happens. If they condemn that house and

3:11:12it gets torn down, you just rewarded the

3:11:14guy that owns the lot. That's the

3:11:15problem. That's the problem. That lost

3:11:16400,000 empty.

3:11:18>> Just for the record,

3:11:20>> I do recognize I'm not advocating for it

3:11:22to be torn down. I'm simply asking

3:11:25whether it's a public safety hazard. I

3:11:27understand. I do agree with you that if

3:11:30if it were to tear down, fall down, burn

3:11:34down, however it got down, I agree that

3:11:36it's kind of rewarding bad behavior.

3:11:38There's no question about that. But I

3:11:40just I don't know how you get around

3:11:42that sometimes, too. But I I agree with

3:11:43that.

3:11:44>> Mr. Chairman,

3:11:46>> Mr. Stephanie,

3:11:47>> I would just make a suggestion. I I

3:11:50don't often believe that we should use

3:11:53the

3:11:55legal force of our community against a

3:11:58property owner, but this property owner

3:12:01has clearly for a very long period of

3:12:03time employed a strategy of hoping it

3:12:06falls down for the reasons Mr. Adavani

3:12:08mentioned. And I think we need to

3:12:11consider commencing legal action against

3:12:15this person for on a host of of

3:12:17different opportunities, including

3:12:19violation of the zoning piece to protect

3:12:23ourselves. But we're going to wake up

3:12:25someday, it's going to be, oops, it fell

3:12:27down, and we're going to turn around and

3:12:28see, you know, it sold for $400,000.

3:12:32Um,

3:12:35>> yeah.

3:12:35>> And and I think we're going to be

3:12:36disappointed.

3:12:40Yes.

3:12:42>> Uh I I didn't want to hog this, but I

3:12:44you know, one of the things that

3:12:45residents have asked about is fines. If

3:12:48there's anything we could do about fines

3:12:49and finding this developer to get to get

3:12:53moving. Um I I appreciate again the

3:12:58assessment, but we need to do more

3:13:00quickly and um this developer does need

3:13:03to be held accountable.

3:13:05>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Skeesi. Uh next on

3:13:08the agenda is Mr. Hayes from the traffic

3:13:10commission is here still here uh

3:13:15regarding uh parking amendments for

3:13:16Union Sang Street and Buckminister

3:13:18Street parking.

3:13:21>> Uh good evening. Good evening Mr.

3:13:23Chairman, members of the council. Uh

3:13:25Matt Hayes, director of traffic and

3:13:26transportation. Before you tonight are

3:13:29two changes to the Framingham traffic

3:13:31and parking regulations. Uh first is at

3:13:36um New Life Church at 73 Union A. Uh

3:13:38they have requested on street accessible

3:13:41parking spaces. Uh this has become

3:13:43necessary due to the ongoing

3:13:45construction of the Firmingham Regional

3:13:48Justice Center and namely their impact

3:13:50on parking on Pearl Street. Uh so what

3:13:53the church has requested is four spaces.

3:13:56two spaces on Union A in front of the

3:13:59church and two spaces on Sanger Street

3:14:01at the common and the park.

3:14:04>> Motion to approve is recommended.

3:14:05Second,

3:14:06>> is there more than common?

3:14:08>> Um there Sundays only is for those

3:14:10spaces. That's the last bit.

3:14:14>> M Bryant.

3:14:15>> And so um the the spaces um you say

3:14:18they're Sunday only and what they can't

3:14:21park there now. Is that it? Well, the

3:14:23spaces get taken um and they don't have

3:14:26access to those spaces on Sundays. Um

3:14:28and they have a they stated that they

3:14:31have a large handicap population that

3:14:32does attend the church and parking on

3:14:35Pearl Street was the uh was their best

3:14:38option previously.

3:14:39>> Yeah. Parking lot and stuff and um yeah,

3:14:42they can just tend but they do need some

3:14:44right around there. But I mean I thought

3:14:46they parked on I' they park anyway

3:14:49there. Um, so what you need to mark the

3:14:53spaces and is it going to say just for

3:14:54that church?

3:14:56>> Uh, no. Uh, they don't need to be marked

3:14:58um by markings on the pavement itself.

3:15:00Just the signs need to go in. The signs

3:15:02will say Sunday only.

3:15:04>> Okay. So, when it's not Sunday, no one

3:15:06can park along that way. Is that what

3:15:08you're saying?

3:15:08>> No, it'll be a standard parking space.

3:15:10Okay.

3:15:11>> When it's not Sunday.

3:15:12>> Okay. It's been moved and seconded. All

3:15:15those in favor? Get back to my list.

3:15:17Sorry. Um, Miss Feny,

3:15:20>> yes.

3:15:21>> Mr. Ken,

3:15:21>> yes. Mr. Alexander.

3:15:23>> Mr. Aani?

3:15:24>> Yes.

3:15:24>> M. Malik, yes.

3:15:25>> Mr. Stephanie, yes.

3:15:26>> M. Bryant,

3:15:27>> yes.

3:15:28>> Yes. Miss Leo,

3:15:29>> yes.

3:15:29>> Miss Long,

3:15:30>> yes.

3:15:31>> Mr. Ward,

3:15:32>> yes.

3:15:32>> Thank you.

3:15:33>> And the uh the second regulation change

3:15:35is for Buckminister Street, one-way

3:15:38street between Union A and Walnut

3:15:39Street. Uh is currently under the odd

3:15:42even parking regulation. Uh the change

3:15:44in front of you uh would place parking

3:15:46on the odd side, which is the north side

3:15:49of the street. Uh this is the side with

3:15:51an existing sidewalk.

3:15:53>> Um and it would it would be it would

3:15:55present a safer arrangement for drivers

3:15:57and pedestrians.

3:15:58>> So moved.

3:15:59>> Second.

3:15:59>> Second.

3:16:00>> Okay. Any further discussion?

3:16:02>> Just that I I did appreciate the picture

3:16:06>> with the parking sign.

3:16:07>> All those in favor? Mr. Canon?

3:16:09>> Yes.

3:16:09>> Mr. Alexander?

3:16:10>> Yes.

3:16:10>> Mr. Daviani?

3:16:11>> Yes.

3:16:11>> M. Malik.

3:16:12>> Yes. Stephanie, Miss Bryant,

3:16:14>> yes.

3:16:15>> Yes. Miss Lebron,

3:16:16>> yes.

3:16:16>> Miss Long,

3:16:17>> yes.

3:16:18>> Mr. Ward,

3:16:18>> yes.

3:16:19>> Miss Feny,

3:16:19>> yes.

3:16:20>> Thank you, Mr.

3:16:21>> Thank you very much.

3:16:22>> Thanks.

3:16:23>> Um, next on the agenda, chairmani, the

3:16:26finance subcommittee will comment on the

3:16:29Buckley Apartments request for

3:16:30affordable rents.

3:16:32>> Yeah. Order 2026 064001. Upon the

3:16:35request, the finance subcommittee

3:16:36recommendation to take no action uh upon

3:16:38the affordable housing rents and incomes

3:16:40for the Buckley Apartments. It was a

3:16:41unanimous vote. Um the time had already

3:16:43lapsed like the previous um applicant.

3:16:46So we requested to take no action on

3:16:48number 22.

3:16:49>> Okay. So the same any objections or

3:16:51alternate motions. I won't take a

3:16:52motion. We'll just move on.

3:16:53>> Okay.

3:16:54>> Motion to

3:16:56>> No needed.

3:16:57>> You said you I thought you said you

3:16:58>> alternative motions unless you disagree.

3:17:01>> I I heard I'll take a motion.

3:17:03>> I'll take a motion alternatively, but I

3:17:04don't need to take a motion to take no

3:17:06action and take another roll call vote

3:17:07for that. Okay. Seeing none. Order 2026

3:17:110720001.

3:17:13Upon the request of the finance

3:17:14subcommittee recommendation to vote upon

3:17:15the FY27 community development block

3:17:17grant committee CDBG and home

3:17:18allocations presentation. Last finance

3:17:21subcommittee we were presented with the

3:17:22CDBG um program block grant and the

3:17:25allocations and it was voted unanimous

3:17:27to support the uh recommendation.

3:17:29>> Motion to approve as recommended. Motion

3:17:32>> to approve.

3:17:33>> Okay. So it's moves. Move to approve.

3:17:35Any further discussion? Anybody want to

3:17:37see the presentation?

3:17:39Mr.

3:17:40I don't need to see the presentation,

3:17:41but I have some comments.

3:17:43>> Yeah.

3:17:45>> Uh so appreciate uh Nate and Sari being

3:17:47here and appreciate the uh community

3:17:49development committee for their work on

3:17:51this um which I know is um yeah an

3:17:54intensive project uh process every year.

3:17:57Um

3:17:58the program

3:18:01is designed to support and I'm

3:18:02specifically talking not about the

3:18:04public uh services component. And I'm

3:18:07talking about the the second portion

3:18:08here um is designed to support you know

3:18:11lowin medium- inome neighborhoods with

3:18:14addressing blight um creating economic

3:18:16opportunity supporting downtown um

3:18:20supporting downtowns and uh this is the

3:18:22second year in a row that I've seen us

3:18:24uh set funds aside for construction

3:18:27projects for the city. Um and this is

3:18:29not a comment on either the the the

3:18:31merits of those projects. Last year it

3:18:33was a kitchen in the fire department uh

3:18:35fire station which I support the project

3:18:38but not the funding source. Um and this

3:18:40year funding's been set aside for an

3:18:42archive room at the library. And um I

3:18:46don't think it's um correct usage of the

3:18:49funds um to to use it to construct for

3:18:54construction uh reconstruction

3:18:56uh for buildings that are performing

3:19:00just general government functions. So,

3:19:03um I don't know if there's others on the

3:19:05committee who would uh be in favor of

3:19:07it, but I I would make a motion to

3:19:10um ask the administration to find other

3:19:13funds for that project and to ask the

3:19:16community development department to come

3:19:18back with a different plan for those

3:19:20$49,000 worth of funds. So,

3:19:24is there is there a second

3:19:26>> um question where

3:19:28>> Hold on for a second. Is there a second?

3:19:30Hold on for a second. Is there a second

3:19:32to the motion?

3:19:33>> I'll second the motion for discussion.

3:19:35>> Thank you.

3:19:38>> Okay, Miss Bryant, did you have a

3:19:39question?

3:19:40>> Yes. Um, you said for an archive room in

3:19:42the library.

3:19:47>> Oh, okay. No, we're not on the CDBG

3:19:50thing.

3:19:51>> We are on the CDBG.

3:19:52>> That's what I thought. And

3:19:53>> the third the third item down on the

3:19:56background material FY27 budget

3:19:58recommendations.

3:20:01third item down because I did look at

3:20:03them. I must have missed it.

3:20:05>> Okay. So, are there any other comments

3:20:07or questions?

3:20:09>> Okay. So, I'm going to take a vote. The

3:20:10first vote will be on the amendment to

3:20:12to take out $49,000 from the archive

3:20:15room. So, first uh

3:20:17>> chair

3:20:19is it do you have I mean can you respond

3:20:22to that

3:20:25>> of view in terms of sort of the use of

3:20:27intention of CDBG funds? Yeah, all all

3:20:30of these projects do take place within

3:20:32our lowincome um area benefit um CDBG

3:20:36areas. So, they are an appropriate use

3:20:40of the funds.

3:20:44It is in the neighborhood. I guess I

3:20:45would just respectfully disagree with

3:20:47the use of the funds.

3:20:49>> Okay. So, all those in favor of the

3:20:51amendment to reduce the $49,000, Mr.

3:20:54Cannon,

3:20:54>> no.

3:20:55>> Mr. Alexander,

3:20:56>> no.

3:20:56>> Mr. Aviani,

3:20:57>> no.

3:20:58>> M. Malik,

3:20:59>> yes.

3:21:00>> Mr. Stephanie,

3:21:01>> Miss Bryant,

3:21:02>> um, yes.

3:21:03>> Uh, myself, no. Miss Lro,

3:21:06>> no.

3:21:06>> Miss Long,

3:21:07>> no.

3:21:08>> Mr. Ward,

3:21:09>> yes.

3:21:10>> Miss Feny,

3:21:11>> no.

3:21:12>> So, it's eight, three, three in favor,

3:21:15eight opposed to remove it. So, it's not

3:21:17removed. So, the question comes on the

3:21:19entire package as presented. Mr.

3:21:21Alexander,

3:21:24>> yes.

3:21:24>> Mr. Alani,

3:21:25>> yes.

3:21:26>> Mr. Malik,

3:21:27>> yes.

3:21:27>> Mr. Mr. Stephanie,

3:21:28>> yes.

3:21:28>> Miss Bryant,

3:21:29>> yes.

3:21:29>> Myself, yes. Miss Lebron,

3:21:31>> yes.

3:21:32>> Miss Long,

3:21:33>> yes.

3:21:34>> Mr. Ward,

3:21:35>> yes.

3:21:35>> Miss Feny,

3:21:36>> yes.

3:21:36>> Mr. Canon,

3:21:37>> yes.

3:21:39>> Okay. Next on the agenda is the request

3:21:42of council Stephanie and referrals of

3:21:44the traffic commission consideration of

3:21:45an ordinance to restrict the speed limit

3:21:47on Winter Street. I don't know that we

3:21:49can actually refer things to the traffic

3:21:50commission, but uh

3:21:53>> yes, Miss Malik,

3:21:54>> uh councelor 7ini, the traffic

3:21:56commission has a petition process for

3:21:58when you want to make changes like that.

3:22:00I'm just curious um why that doesn't

3:22:03have to come through council. So,

3:22:06>> because the state statute involved gives

3:22:09the council the authority to set the uh

3:22:1325 mph speed limit on certain roads,

3:22:15which the council has done. So

3:22:18technically this could be done by the

3:22:20council without the the traffic

3:22:23commission's opinion at all. And I think

3:22:26I I I suggested that it go to the

3:22:28traffic commission because I think out

3:22:31of difference to them and their work, we

3:22:33should get their opinion and think about

3:22:35what they say because they may have a

3:22:36different thought on this. And I don't

3:22:38know that we have a subcommittee that

3:22:40has that expertise.

3:22:43>> I I mean I just think we should explain

3:22:44to the traffic commission what we're

3:22:46asking for that. I mean with that

3:22:47explanation if we're gonna do that

3:22:48because it's not really a referral like

3:22:50sub. Mr. Brian

3:22:52>> um I I would ask could we amend it to 30

3:22:55miles an hour? Winter street is

3:22:57>> the state law this that's part of the

3:22:59reason I want to refer it. The state law

3:23:01only allows us to do 25.

3:23:04We can designate 25. But if the if the

3:23:06fi if the traffic commission looks at it

3:23:08and says you know 30 is a better traffic

3:23:11speed limit then that could come back to

3:23:13us and we could adopt that under a

3:23:14different statute.

3:23:15>> Right. They have speed limits now that

3:23:17are varied on that street and that's so

3:23:19you're trying to get a uniform speed

3:23:20limit.

3:23:21>> Yes.

3:23:21>> Oh. Oh yeah. See, I need to Yeah. Look

3:23:23at all that.

3:23:24>> But I want their but I want them to

3:23:25weigh in because they're the appropriate

3:23:26body.

3:23:27>> Can you make a motion?

3:23:28>> Maybe we should just send it to them.

3:23:30>> You want a motion?

3:23:30>> Yeah, I think so.

3:23:31>> I move that we refer this to the traffic

3:23:33commission.

3:23:34>> Second.

3:23:34>> All right. Just because it's not really

3:23:36a chairman referral since it's not to

3:23:37our subcommittee.

3:23:38>> Okay. I Whatever.

3:23:40>> Okay. So, all those in favor

3:23:43>> Yes.

3:23:44>> Miss Malik. Yes,

3:23:45>> Mr. Stephan.

3:23:46>> Miss Bryant.

3:23:47>> Yes,

3:23:48>> myself. Yes, Mr. Lro.

3:23:49>> Yes,

3:23:50>> Mr. Blog.

3:23:51>> Yes,

3:23:52>> Mr. Ward.

3:23:53>> Yes,

3:23:53>> Mr. Feny.

3:23:54>> Yes,

3:23:54>> Mr. Canon.

3:23:55>> Yes,

3:23:56>> Mr. Alexander.

3:23:57>> Yes.

3:23:59>> Okay. Uh, next one. Um, I can refer

3:24:03unless there's any questions, any

3:24:05reports. Is there a motion?

3:24:06>> Motion to adjurnn.

3:24:07>> Second.

3:24:08>> All those in favor? Miss Malik?

3:24:09>> Yes.

3:24:10>> Yes.

3:24:11>> Miss Bryant?

3:24:12>> Yes.

3:24:12>> Self? Yes. Miss Le Brown?

3:24:14>> Yes. Mr. Long.

3:24:16>> Yes.

3:24:16>> Mr. Ward.

3:24:17>> Yes.

3:24:18>> Mr. Feny.

3:24:18>> Yep.

3:24:19>> Mr. Canon.

3:24:19>> Yes.

3:24:20>> Mr. Alexander.

3:24:21>> Big Longhorn. Yes.

3:24:25>> Thank you.

3:24:26>> You say yes.

3:24:26>> Yes. Oh, yeah.

3:24:28>> I want to stay a little longer. I love

3:24:29you guys.