4.16.2024 City Council - Ordinances & Legislation

overcome

overy hey hey hey hey hey oh hey heyy

black

hey councelor kadim here councelor Hart here councel Roso here councelor Samson here chair Perera here pursuing to the open meeting La any person may make an audio or video recording of this public meeting or may transmit the meeting through any medium attendees are therefore advised that such recordings or Transmissions are being made whether perceived or unperceived by those present and deemed acknowledgeable and

permissible item number one citizen import anybody sign up for citizen input no okay item number two is the minutes from the April 3rd meeting motion to approve second motion to approve there's a second all in favor hi item number three proposed ordinance for handicap parking Broadway East 126 feet south of Griffin Foster Street West 51 feet south of Warren Street Harrison Street West 484 ft north of

Alden Street and Pine Street North 122 feet east of Rock Street motion for emergency Preamble second motion for an emergency Preamble in a second all in favor all right roll call have roll call on a preamble councelor Kadeem yes councelor Hart yes councelor Rosa yes councelor Samson yes chair Pera yes motion to pass to all readings second motion to pass to all readings as a first and a second all in favor I item

number four miscellaneous traffic prohibited parking at all times grenell Street North 132 feet west of Jefferson Street motion to pass through first read second there's a motion in a second pass first reading all in favor items number five and six are similar if we want to make a motion to take them together motion to take five and six okay there's motion to take item five and six together there's a second

all in favor by thank you item five is a discussion to amend the powers duties and responsibility of the Armory commission from the board of Park Comm is to the historical commission and the preservation Society to assist in future remediations of the bank Street Armory and that was adopted on February 15 of I mean put in on February 15th of 2024 and then there was a resolution that coroporation Council and City

administrator and representatives of the historic commission and preservation Society to discussed possible ordinance amendments and that came in in October 22nd of 2019 we have attorney foret with us who's versed on this and there are also members of the historic commission and preservation if the chair of each of those committees could come

down no right here well there that designate huh so this one's a c anyway you push that one to the

side Jim do you want Alex to come down too with you think he serves on both so that might help us and I have additional members from the hisorical commission if you and I have additional members from the historical commission if you need I if I if you put you all together here it's going to be a violation of open meeting law for you guys if you need like one

person but one person at a time anybody that wants to share okay we're absolutely willing to do that um if you want to start and tell us about these resolutions or what you feel would work better for the historic commission uh regarding item number six sure okay um and uh my name is Jason Bard nakaki uh I chair the historical commission um I think you need my address bigal little street thank you you're welcome item

number five or six item number six um regarding um changes the ordinance for City owned buildings um the the one glaring change that I can think of immediately at least with is with the Demolition delay ordinance uh currently any property that is on the city's register significant structures uh carries with it a six-month demolition delay known as the um the demolition uh bylaw and um so so any uh

any property once a permit has been pulled for a uh for demolition uh whether it's an whole or part thereof um uh there is the automatic Delay from that period of six months um so the applicants do meet with the historical commission we do feel the six months is not enough um with the example of the uh former bordin school on Morgan Street um and we had uh at the time we didn't have

the requirement for applicants to meet with the historical commission um but we have made it a point of anyone uh requesting a waiver or to um demolish a historic building uh they should meet with the uh historical commission um but with the case of that particular property um we never had contact with um the building owner and subsequently the building was demolished after 6 months

um and having an additional 6 months would allow for additional time to especially for City own property uh any um possible grants that would be available for an updated feasibility study structural assessment um the state of Massachusetts with the historical commission has uh the ability to uh there are Grant funds for um preservation work there as a cap but uh there there are Grant funds for that to

at least assist in that matter um so right off with that the thee extension if I can just mention a few my name is James soul I 577 Rock Street the president of the preservation Society uh I concur with what uh Jason is talking about we had proposed this a few years back ourselves and um just I thought I just want people to know that we didn't make this up uh this is actually um an

ordinance that's used in other cities and towns um I think even New Bedford we use as an example uh and uh not to shoot ourselves in the foot but just because we think it's important for us to consider I mean even the notion of assigning the the oneyear demolition delay to City properties facadas would be a good place to start if uh if there wasn't an appetite to uh adopt it and

hold Alex if you want to give your name and address Hello Alex Silva 148 Purchase Street also board member of the preservation Society uh yeah just to Echo what Jason and Jim said it's kind of hard to believe that we introduced this 5 years ago already um there were more historic uh buildings in the city's inventory at the time but it's never too late to fix a problem uh essentially I

think the bigger portion of the New Bedford demolition delay ordinance that we should mimic uh isn't necessarily the time extension it's a matter of the process uh the NB boarding school is a really good example that exposed a lot of flaws with fall River's process and fall River's ordinance um so the the biggest thing is rather than having uh it kind of sit at the Historical commission um we should Elevate the demo

Del demolition delay requirement to the city council level similar to new bedford's demolition delay ordinance uh essentially the process starts the same where they uh submit their demolition uh application to the building inspector he kicks to the historic commission uh then the historic commission meets to decide if that building is historical if it's worth saving if there are better

approaches that could be made than just you know wantonly demolishing things for the sake of it um and then if the historic commission deems that uh the city should enact its demolition delay bylaw uh that gets kicked up to the city council so there will actually be a city council agenda item where the public at large because not as many people watch the historic meetings they wouldn't even

know it was happening similar to the NB booring school um so it would elevate it to the discussion to the city council level uh the applicant would be required to come the applicant would be uh required to appear before the city council uh whereas they didn't have to for the historic commission they could essentially say whatever they want no not have to prove anything and then just

do whatever they want after they wait the six months didn't even wait the six months for uh Dan B Bor and schools important to note um they they uh so I think that's really important because it would give the community the chance to as a whole decide if that something is worth saving uh the best courses of action for that and it adds a lot more protection for the cultural resources of

the city that Everyone likes to talk about pretty much I advise you to uh review demolition delay bylaw for New Bedford It's relatively short the S the uh six month or the 12th month is that based on the date of submittal for the application or is that after it goes to a review process when when's that kick in uh it begins once notice is received uh once I receive notice from

um licensing or from the building yes so okay all right how you for now thank you uh this is just on property that the city owns as well Y and it's important to note with New Bedford that the delay doesn't begin immediately as it doesn't far over with the the submitt uh the historic commission has to meet first and then the city council has to meet first and then they decide whether to

enact the demolition delay that's the vote of the city council in the end okay so so it's not necessarily the application to the building yeah well that's what starts the process that starts it to the historic commission and the historic commission could either say this building can't be saved this building isn't worth saving you know not even enact the demolition delay bylaw or

uh kick it up to the city council for a larger discussion where the city as a whole can you know talk about the resources that really belong to the whole city in the end for the historic and cultural ones that we all love does anyone else have any questions is that the only thing that you I'm sorry did you have a question I just just the uh what what's the

criteria to um what to deem it whether it's uh savable or you know if it's if we can save the building and I get it can be maybe 50% condemned or something that's along those but I just want to hear you from you guys what how does that process work um I mean it really depends on um one having a proper uh structural assessment done to see if whatever proposed use is if the pro if

the structure can withstand any changes to the interior um if there's any um uh uh existing conditions that uh might be just um I don't know uh not not restorable I guess for lack of better word um you know an example being um we reviewed a demolition delay for demolition permit for um Sagamore Mill number one on a street it was a Brick Mill um that had fallen into extreme disrepair the roof was buckling the

floors were buckling um and we don't have the ability to request uh the property owner to have a um an updated assessment to see whether or not and whether or not it's uh worth the ability to save it um but you know if we we have that ability to say okay have you do you have an updated structural assessment do you have um eligibility for historic tax credits to rehab it um we don't have

that ability but to go back on that um it really depends on what a proper structural assessment it it says on that okay yeah yeah uh with the revamped approach the city could actually require evidence that proves that demolition is required whereas right now currently someone with no experience can look at it and be like I think this can't be saved and then you kind of have nothing to push back on uh

the city could not Grant the demolition delay waiver you know to get the project going unless evidence is provided yeah I I would prefer kind of a that push back kind of thing and that way you know it's done in a community Forum where people can actually see it and it's not kind of Hidden Away in a not a lesser commission meeting but a lesser viewed Commission meeting okay that's all I have Council

Samson so the current demolition bylaw you said it's six months um my question is you said that the board in school was demolished less than six months which was that what were the ramifications how did that happen so if you really want to get into it it's it's a bit of a story so they initially applied for a six-month demolition delay and that one lapsed they didn't take any action on it

so they had to reapply and then it was during that that second demolition delay that they essentially made the I I won't you know say what they made to do uh the building became dangerous and the owner did not take measures to make safe the building so the building inspector waved the demolition delay in the safety of you know firefighters not having to go into an expose you know there were the

windows were left open they didn't board the windows things like that that could have been fined for until fixed in which you know the city receives revenue and not the loss of a cultural resource for no reason without proper evidence how long was that building empty for was it a an abandoned building technically no because they used it as quote unquote storage how long was it used for storage

for I believe years yeah since it was it was originally purchased with the promise of redeveloping it into housing uh that never materialized for one reason or another and it was I I think in less than two years or a year and a half they went to the zoning board to request uh you know relief the owner you know I won't you know name but as a as a private own not the city yeah at that

point it was sold via you know the real estate Committee in the city council um but they were requesting relief and they changed use uh you know to storage commercial use I believe even though at the meeting they say the parking and the driving wouldn't work I think the chair of the zoning board said that's their problem if the business isn't successful you could actually look at that it's

2014 that happened in 2014 yep zba meeting is on YouTube thanks to the preservation society that you said nobody watches yeah so YouTube people watch um interesting and so I guess um I I'm just curious to see what the city's take is on um moving to a 12 month demolition thank you for the leading so and to any members of this Council I haven't met I believe first time I me

and you Mr gim um of course we like to prepare for these hearings as best we can and uh what I was presented was the uh agenda and then uh off that agenda went to the 2019 uh ordinance and missing in all that is any suggestion that the demolition was going to be the topic of tonight's conversation so I didn't research it okay I have very little to say and I wouldn't

even attempt I app to make an answer up that was not thoroughly researched but uh so I don't I I really don't have any U I think positive or negative input on this issue as it stands right now yeah but moving forward absolutely if this is was the concern of the city-owned properties then then we certainly will have an opinion to render we just don't have one tonight okay and my ask my last

question I just want to New Bedford has a 12month demolition ordinance is what you're saying there's there's a couple they have a little bit of a difference um so there's some changes if the property's in a registered 40c historic district um if if so like if it's not in a district and the historic commission there accepts the findings that it should be saved and they issue a demolition delay that could

be 9 to 12 months if the city council you know in the event the city council thinks it should be saved but the historic commission disagrees I think it's 6 to 12 months so they have wiggle room and it could be at the Leisure of the city for you know the links thank you I think the process is more important than than the length but the length is certainly if if anything is

done in good faith I mean I think we know construction schedules and stuff you can't really make any miracles happen in six months I yeld thank you do you y Council Kadeem uh so the only thing I I do want to I guess reiterate as the statements I concur with what you're saying I think the the process is the most important part of this um just for my colleague I think the city of

Newton they have an 18month uh waiting period And I think that goes back to like 1985 um so newon tends to be a a very historical community so I you know it's it's not unrealistic to to see 12 months or 18 months out there so um so I I would support an extension or or something along the lines even if it's just on the on the city city property however I think the process itself needs

to uh be outlined a little bit more so that everybody understands what the process is um and that we can make sure that it's being followed and abided by um because I don't disagree I think it's a little concerning when you don't have that mechanism in place or or there is a mechanism in place and it's just kind of ignored um in terms of the demo usually typically the build inspector will have

uh an group of Engineers coming in to to do an uh an assessment of a building as to whether or not it needs a full Dem demolition a Mak safe demo um and making sure that all the hazmats uh testing is done to to assure that the demo is going to be safe so I know that a process in terms of what takes place for for demolition so um you know I would

support something along the lines of making sure that we have this established process now what that looks like um I think we need probably a little bit more of a conversation with uh you know Corporation Council and things of that nature so with that I yield okay is there anything else that the historical commission feels needs to be changed in in your in the ordinance um one other um one other thought um for

city-owned buildings especially if city- owned buildings are in the process of being sold um there should be a requirement at least um to make sure that there is uh some sort of a if the building is salvageable and can be rehabed um if there is a requirement to ensure that there is a deed a preservation restriction placed onto the property at the time of sale um just to ensure that um in that Clause

that the building cannot be demolished even if it goes through the the delay um that all avenues are checked because I believe that was the other situation with with the Morgan Street School was that there should have been a um preservation deed restriction built into the um purchase and sales but that that's a whole other that's a whole other issue that's a whole other issue because quite frankly we couldn't even

find the de corre I think all Deeds or any contract should all a copy from any Department should be at the water dep at the legal department because they were all over the place and nobody had them I put that resolution and I don't know if they are being sent there but every contract so we know where to go for contracts but attorney for that how long will it take for you to write this

ordinance um to give them the the uh 12 month am I hearing a consensus of the committee that 12 months I know Council Kadeem talked about 18 months do we have a consensus I just mentioned 18 months was no no okay all right but I I was just saying that it's not unusual to see something of that that one that's all so if the committee has um you know a consensus

for the 12 uh 12 month period um to do that in an ordinance when would you have that ordinance completed because I don't want to say okay we're going to have you work on this and we're going to table it and it's going to come back in three years I want to know that it's going to come back so in my short time I I've seen just how long tabling something can

result in yes ultimate action on the other hand I don't want to give a date that that would not because there's more than simply myself and Mr Rumsey involved in this there's going to be other members up there in the sixth floor to research the issue and to draft an ordinance um is essentially stating at this time that the legal department is uh for such an ordinance and I don't

know that to be the case yet not until I speak to the person I work for Mr Rumsey uh as well as some other influencing so my suggestion is the council should pick a date for us to have an answer on that not that far out one to two months out doesn't seem to be that uh unreasonable to me we're dealing with an ordinance that sat dormant for five years it

appears but I think if we were given a couple of months it would seem a reasonable period of time to come in with something and to let it be known whether whether the U if we're being ordered to craft an ordinance that's one if we're being asked for input as to what a possible ordinance would be that's probably okay pretty legal so I'll look for a motion to order that I'm

sorry Council h i just what do you Gentlemen Prefer is it the 12 month is is it preferable or Beyond 12 months okay so just councilor reposa I was going to make a sorry need a microphone here I'll make the motion to uh refer to Corporation councel for drafting and give him a 30-day window to get it done second okay there's a motion on the floor um to send the item to Corporation Council

to um prepare an ordinance with a 30-day time window have it within 30 days there was a motion made and a second by Council Samson can I just can we just I just want to say that it's just not the time and they were it's the process and it's the whole process behind it and I just want to make sure that that's very clar it's just not the 12 month it's the

entire process and I think that's the probably the most important thing just what um Council Dean was saying so I want to just make sure that that's in there so there was a motion and a second do we want an all in favor or do you want roll call on this roll call roll call coun yes coun yes counos yes coun Samson yes yes now going to I item five on the agenda that is

um to take the bank Street Armory that has been dormant since 2015 and as such has deteriorated without proper oversight and where it is the will of the city council to move forward with a plan to restore the best use for the Armory um whereas the codes of the city of Fall River 20208 chapter 54 article 3 section 1 101 the the park uh Board of Park Commissioners exercises the power duties

and responsibility of the Armory of which historic property is not their area of expertise and whereas the bank Street Armory was placed on the national register of historic places in 1983 with a preservation restriction added in 2017 and the City of Fall River has an appointed historic commission with insight and expertise in the preservation development of historic properties and whereas the historic

commission and the city have the ability to apply for Grants funding for feasability studies and the emergency funds necessary to address and remediate deficiencies causing the damage and deterioration of the bank reom including but not limited to the roof window replacement repointing removal of vegetation and a heating system now therefore be it rev resolved that the committee on ordinance and legislation

convened to discuss amending chapter 54 of the code of the city of for River 2018 Which chapter relates to public facilities to reflect the current state of the property and to transfer the oversight of the Armory from the board of Park Commissioners to the historic commission and be it further resolved that the historic Commission in conjunction with the preservation Society of for River as the new managing

Commissioners have the ability to create a subcommittee to focus solely on the Redevelopment of the bank Street Armory including the creation of an updated feasibility study for future and best use consistent with the preservation deed restriction councelor Raposa so I don't I have no issue with the changing it from the park commission to the soral commission my only question is the end of the resolution regarding a

subcommittee who would establish that subcommittee if we this were to go I would think it would be the historic commission and the preservation Society so members from both sides yes chosen by whom themselves or internally or I would think they would do it internally okay how many members do you have in your commission and how many and they're all here tonight nine okay so just equal

representation no not all of them are here but some of them are here okay that's the only question I had how you counselor could um so I had a a question but I I think my colleague raised another question so I guess I would just have a little bit of a concern about the last statement um that the historical Commission in conjunction with the preservation Society of Far River as the managing

commission so I guess I don't have an issue obviously if the historical commission wants to consult with the preservation Society but the preservation Society is a not a municipal entity right so I I don't want to convolute the the ordinance when we're speaking to a a commission that's part of a municipal body so I guess I would eliminate that from any draft ordinance that we put in there um I

would hope that you obviously work together to to establish something the other I guess the other question I have and is the legality behind um what needs to transpire and I don't know if it's just a matter of changing the ordinance so uh for example you know this the school department owns land um It's All City owned lands but they have control and jurisdiction uh over that land so in

order for it to get transferred back over to the uh to the city uh the school committee would have to take a vote to declare it Surplus property and then that vote once that vote's taken it comes over to to the city uh no different than the Board of Trustees with the library so any type of um land or property that falls under their jurisdiction has to be a vote has to be

taken so would would a vote be required from the yeah the park commission to transfer that that right over or or can we just make an amendment to the ordinance so again Mr a simple question deserving of a simple answer and I'm not prepared to render it to you tonight so I guess if we could let's look into that yeah if we could get get that because I I just want to make sure we're not

trying to change an ordinance remove the um control and then you know we're two three years down the road that becomes an issue with it and then this becomes the uh sticking point for any type of decisions that might come out of a a court decision or anything like that so um I think that the park board had given the Armory to the Redevelopment Authority but the Redevelopment Authority then didn't take it so it kind

of stayed with the parkboard um I remember hearing something about that do you Mr Su is that ring a bell to you it actually does ring a bell I I don't know at what I thought and I expected the r development started to take control I thought at one point in time and I was actually surprised that it didn't come to fruition I don't know what the yeah real reason for that was

because the park board really when I asked them about the they said oh no Redevelopment has it when I talk to Sarah pige no we never took it so there was there was a hiccup there along the way councilor Samson did you have a question is it the will of your board to take this project on and is that something that you're looking to do looking forward to do I think the preservation wants to be in

a supportive role I think it's historic commission who uh uh we I actually agreed with um councelor kadim said so with the preservation Society wants to be as a supportive role as possible and but we're not a municipal uh agency so we agree that the historic commission is the right party and the historical commission is here yes that's right yeah a few members um so um back in late November we did um

have a meeting regarding uh forming an opinion on the the the pending sale of the Armory and we had voted to for the city to pause the sale which I understand that was not before you was either yes or no uh to sell or not to sell and um but with the information that we had received from as part of the RFP that was um received there there was a lot of missing information um one of

which there was not an updated feasibility assess or study on the building it was I think eight or nine years old at the time um the deed restriction that is placed on the property um there were a lot of questions so these are things that um you know if if at the end of what our hope is is that to uh get that missing information to um we are in the process

of applying for um a certified local government we should be actually receiving our final approval from uh the National Park Service in the next two weeks um so that would allow us to uh access additional Grant funds from the state um that only uh a very small amount of communities in the state have access to um and that can go towards additional studies like feasibility study structural assessment Etc and at

least then we have that that that um that guide to say okay what are the next steps um what is the building what can it be used for while also looking at the deed restrictions um because one of of the the the big sticking points on the Restriction um was the um uh the prohibiting of major alterations to significant historical spaces and the plan that was proposed called for the

carving up of the drill Hall into 17 uh about 17 or so units and um from my from my uh professional experience uh I don't think the plans for that would have been approved by the National Park Service in order to receive full historic tax credits um and uh so there's a lot of uh with that ability of being a certified local government we will have direct access to the staff at the mass historical

commission that can review this further to say whether or not we have the ability to make any type of alterations in the interior what the um you know what funding is available um so this is what we're hoping to do with you know having at least creating a subcommittee for the Armory that can Focus solely on this um on that that uh that property so I know I was for the sale of the

property because the building has sat dormant for years neglected not cared for nobody talked about it for 10 plus years maybe so I am all for putting it under um you know a department that is wanting to care for it look at the uses for it um and just not have it sit there so you know you've had some time is do you feel that there's something that can

be done about it you know my concern is that it's going to go to another board another study and then we lost a sale and it's not going to sale you know have you been in the building are you excited about the building is it like you know it's a beautiful building you know it's got a lot of work I'm not uh you know an engineer but it looks looks like a

nightmare to me whoever takes on the project but I'm hoping that whoever it falls under falls in love with that building and sees hope for it and I agree the the building especially where where it's positioned in right in downtown uh which you know hopefully once we have uh the idea with the the trains running and so forth we have more activity going on downtown um there are properties in

the neighborhood that are that have been and actively are being rehabed for mixed use so there will be an additional footprint of um of residents and pedestrians and just activity downtown um so it is a great building uh using the example of uh the Cranson Street Armory in Providence which is many times larger than the bank Street Armory um um one of the the the plans was to have it

um the drill hall for example open to the public and used for events used for you know a flex space a gym or something like that um and then the the head house which has uh individual rooms such as here um would be used for other purposes whether it was a mixture of housing or maybe office space depending on what the what the market holds and these are questions that we would like to have

answered with just having an updated U study done as to what we can do with this building I appreciate that I'm all for and in support of someone who's going to love the building take a look at the building see the uses which is why I was in support of it before no one has come forward so I'm glad you guys are here to see what you know and willing to take

that on I yeld you yield anyone else I'm going to tag tag along with what Mr pad said is that we Bend inside the property uh when we're not intimidated that the property has to be torn down that's clearly not a truthism and uh it's important for us to make sure that the best use happens it's you know it's an iconic building right downtown and it's important that the right rehab and use

occurs attorney for that uh this went over to you along with um other information that the clerk had sent about uh um you know the omry commission um and what do you feel needs to happen for the omry to be transferred to the historic commission well I'll accept that somebody may have told you they sent it there's been nothing received by me in the office for today's Armory at least that nothing was

provided to me in fact I'm not uh according to I was requested to be here for item six not five so I I don't know that to be the case there's I thought I was CCD on an email too did you send that email or was it just to me I sent it to you and on Thursday but I might I'm happy to confirm your email address yeah no I I I haven't received

anything and again I I uh pride myself on preparing as well as I can for issues I think when we came here on the tax related issues last time I had a wealth of information given the opportunity to research it but no the only in fact we saw each other last week at one point in the topic of the AR came up but but that discussion didn't extend into what might

be expected of me here tonight for this meeting so and that's why I said I want to make sure that you have the information so that you're prepared and I thought it was uh sent to you I thought I got it as well um but needless to say uh what is the will of the committee um to have attorney for debt look at transferring it to the historical society and look at the legal

of doing that I think we give a we historical commission and I think we give a four we uh time frame and put it on the agenda with this the other one oh a four we time frame okay you want to put that in the form of a motion put that in the form of motion coration C with four weeks with four weeks to tell us how uh what the procedure would be to transfer from the

park Department to the historical Commission you want to do four weeks or 30 days 30 days thank you both anyone have anything to add um I think uh Ashley had her hand up she wanted to add something Ashley yeah can you come down you have to give your name and address Ashley 51 Harvard Street um I just had a little bit of a concern with the switch here because per our ordinance of the historical

commission nowhere in here says that we are to manage any city property um rather monitor encourage review um create public awareness and conduct studies um so switching the property over kind of opens up a concern for me if like councelor Samson said it's been stagnant it's been sitting for8 to nine years in the city's responsibility so how many more properties now that we open open up this sort of a can of worms

that this is now going to be under under us to take care of and fix the issues that weren't fixed before how many more properties are going to then get turned over to us and the responsibility just continues to get kicked down the hill to be honest with you we don't have that many more historical properties in the city so I can't see that it would be a lot more but I know that property has

been turned over for example to preservation the fist CS Etc and they've done a wonderful job um at maintaining it and the armory reviewing it no the FIS property preservation has done that yeah um as well so we're gonna look into what are the um one of the policies and procedures to be able to transfer it over and if something needs to be changed in there then we will change that ordinance accordingly yeah but

thank you right now it just it doesn't seem to align that's all thank you I have a question um Mr Co you on the historical commission yes maam so that's that's important that within your own commission that there is some hesitation then with the turning the property over to you um if it's so if the ability is to form a Sub sub commit if the historical commission has the ability to create a subcommittee

that can focus on that and it's not directly I guess not directly managed by the historical commission but by a I guess a subcommittee of the historic a subcomittee of the historical commission um then I I I wouldn't have at that point but um you know having and that was my my mindset with having the Armory transferred over was that there would be a proper um uh commission created that

would be from the historical commission that would have the right um uh tools tools and individuals involved that can that can focus in on it so here here is exactly what I'm afraid of I we have a building that people are hesitant and your entire board is not and I get you're that's why you have a board and everybody's not on board but we have a building that has sat for so long um I guess

so um we'll put in a 30-day uh The Corporation Council is going to tell us what you know we'll find out what the procedure what the procedure is to do that and uh come back to it's it's it's it's concerning and and I and I understand and I respect that you concerned because are we just going to continue to pass the book you know I want to ask you um

it's been maybe what 6 months and all since all this commotion has started has a big large funding stream come down like oh there's you know $5 million to save it put a roof on it maybe there has maybe there hasn't it's just that I don't want a building to sit there for a long time and I don't think that's your will and I don't I don't and I and I and

I believe your passion I can feel your passion I just want you to know that I feel your passion I appreciate it um I just don't want the building to there right and um and if it if the historical commission is ultimately um without a sub commmittee you know I we have we're undertaking a number of larger projects right now but I we could we have the bandwidth I think to support this is a

massive it is a m massive project so yeah there's there's a number of uncertainties just trying to get um you we want to make sure that the exterior of the building is buttoned up um just to prevent any further uh deterioration on the interior um and just making sure that we have the ability uh you know working with um with the cities I there's a grant writer with the city

working with them to make sure that we have we have the funding in place to get the first steps done thank you councilor kadim so if I could just I guess make a suggestion and we we amend the well we don't have to amend it but uh resolution that's before us so as opposed to transferring the authority from the board of Park Commissioners uh we keep the authority with the board of Park Commissioners in

in the last paragraph then reads that be it further resolved that the historical Commission in conjunct I mean the uh Board of Park Commissioners in conjunction with the historical commission and then everything else Remains the Same so you know you just remove preservation you you insert commission keep it with the you put that in amended motion I'll second it okay do you want to amend it we got something on the

referring well I I was going to say we can just refer it to Corporation counsel and they can come back down and I would suggest that that potentially be one of the the Amendments that are made or suggestions that come down thank you anyone else that wanted to say something no where El that thank you oh there's a motion and a second for the referral I I all in favor item number seven on the agenda is

a communication from uh the mayor recommendation with the City Assessor Board of assesses on the uh elderly exemptions no problem you're hello how are you good it's been a while hey it's been a while see you in a few months though hey Richard Hi how are you Richard gonzal 78 Haron Street Far Over Mass thank you you're welcome does everybody have uh the limits in front of them on item seven Pon we do have the order

to vote the order from the city clerk is order that the attached recommendations regarding the Massachusetts General Law chapter 59 Section 5 Clause 41st C for the board of assessors B and the same are hereby approved um I'm glad to see we increase some of the uh the assets limits councilor reposa Mr gonzal Quick question so who do we how many many more people do we expect this is going to

impact in a positive way I wish I could tell you we don't know and I'll tell you why um we keep a record of the ones we denied and and I think for this year and I could be corrected but I don't think we did three problem is when the taxpayers come they grab the information they come home and if they're over the limits they don't come back and and that that that's

been a big problem if we go back and you people have some of you have been around longer than I have in this stuff um this is the beginning the the assets have never been increased as far as I know and the income has never been increased and and I remember coming to you guys last year and I thought we were going to get something where we were going to be able to do this plus maybe

even look at the amount of the exemption and I thought the state was going to take care of it and finally it's still in committee and I said you know we got to do something at least if we can go ahead and increase the assets and the income it's a stop it's a small start but then it's not bad because we can I can come back to you next year and I can say look

um with this in here x amount of people came through the door um I think we've got the assets to to afford this uh and then maybe look at the amount we give out so the people that were denied I'm assuming is because they were above the limit yep okay every one of them and how many denials were given do you know three three three were denied three were denied how many were

approved uh we have a couple hundred okay couple hundred but the the they're Old-Timers you know once once they get on they have to apply every year it doesn't change MH Council Kade do you y Council Kade so uh General law allows us to change the asset and income levels right without okay all right so it's just the so we're just waiting for the amount that's going to be allowed okay all right I I support

this to me it's no BR I think so too just for the general public that's watching the meeting a single asset limit is proposed now at 38,000 and married at 40,000 so for some um some individuals who own their own home and they may have just a small social security check that they're not bringing in 38 or somebody who's a widow and you know isn't bringing in that amount they would be eligible and the

income level of of you know whatever assets they have but the income level is 30,000 for single and 40,000 for married so hopefully this will help more people but on your asset your your home is not included in your asset no books accounts what you have Bank books bank accounts good okay is there a motion motion to is it adopt the order recommendation to adopt yeah motion recommendation adopt the order second

second all in favor I thank you you're welcome thank you sir thank you thank you great I a pleasure thank you thank you Mr gonzal you're welcome and item number eight on the agenda um has been here um for a little while it was a committee on finance to meet with various parties regarding FL River cannabis review commission and the process of approving marijuana licenses and the committee on ordinance and

legislation convene with the same parties to draft a commission I think we all know that we have plenty of cannabis properties around now so um if there would be a motion leave draw leave to withdraw motion made a second all in favor I did we take a vote on S yeah we do seeing no motion to adjourn motion to adjourn there's a second all in favor by

hey hey heyy hey

heyyy hey hey