7.30.2026 City Council - Committee on Public Safety

on Public Safety, July 30th, 2026, at 2 PM.

Clerk, call the roll.

Here.

Here.

Here.

Pursuant to the Open Meeting Law, 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 are deemed acknowledged and permissible.

Number 1 on the agenda, citizens input.

We have Michael O'Regan, 1198 Meridian Street, subject 1710 GIS study.

Good afternoon, Mr. O'Regan.

How you doing?

Back again.

So, uh, we've had some discussions, uh, in the past about the, uh, staffing, minimum staffing.

And so we had a fire on Hick Street the other day And I think this is one of the perfect examples of what a 1710 standard does.

Even though the city has not kept up with their agreement on boosting up our manpower, there hasn't been any movement towards completing that agreement, the extra manpower we did have did make an appreciable difference in that fire, where we stopped that fire where normally, I would say, 2, 3, 4 years ago, it would have been probably a different outcome.

Now, we did our own GIS study.

Now, the GIS study takes into account the hazards, the population, the square miles, and whether or not the city is safe.

And so the city of Fall River had a study, and they spent, uh, around probably $75,000.

The union, we had to study And it costs us nothing.

Um, and the outcome of those studies shows— and I, I believe that the city study actually was more favorable for the fire department than our union study— saying that we are not safe.

There are significant gaps in the city where there's no coverage whatsoever.

And I know we talk about New Bedford and how New Bedford's mayor's gutting them and, and creating some serious public safety issues.

We're on the cusp of doing that again.

Then we're talking about budgets and stuff, but like I said, public safety should not be a line item.

It should be funded first, not last.

And these studies show that.

And I'll have the both— to say we're doing a comparable study on both of those and the differences between them and where we need that work.

So that's in the progress now, and you guys are all going to get that the next, uh, next meeting, I hope.

But it shows that we do need to replace those pumps that we lost, and we do need to add a ladder truck.

If we're developing the entire waterfront, the numbers were— was 5,800 people within an 8th of a mile area, and it's already a mess.

It's a nightmare.

We don't have the ability with manpower or trucks to respond to anything like that.

And I, and I made the point that several— about a month ago, we were down to one actual functioning ladder truck in this city.

And if Gabriel House had happened during that time period, it would have been far different.

We have pumps that break down on the regular.

If they would have broken down at a fire like sometimes they do, the outcome of that wouldn't have been 10.

It would have been double or triple that.

And so here I am again to say that we do need to prioritize this stuff, and we need to get reliable trucks, and we do need to get that manpower so we can fill in those gaps, because there is no tomorrow for some people.

For someone that dies in a fire, there is no tomorrow, or they lose all their belongings.

We have to be there when we're called, and, and all the manpower in the world doesn't matter if we don't have trucks to drive in.

We've been underfunded, understaffed, and overwhelmed for a long time, and I think that this latest incident has shown just how bad it could get, and it could have got worse, and it can get worse.

40 seconds left.

I'm good.

Any questions?

Actually, I do.

Thank you, Mr. O'Regan.

Um, do you know how many spare pieces we have as frontline pieces right now, operating as frontline pieces?

We may be using both of them right now.

Yeah, we've got Engine 11 and Engine 5, and 26 might be in use.

I know Engine 5 is at the Globe, and that's got a blown engine, so we're just using that until It fails.

Thank you.

Okay, and describe the gaps in coverage.

When you say gaps, what, what do you mean by gaps in coverage?

So if you look at the south end, uh, the south end of the city, uh, it's how many pieces of apparatus can be on scene, uh, within 5 minutes.

And because you have one truck in the Globe and everybody else is up on Plymouth Avenue, and then the next station after that is either the Flint or the Center, that gap that's there down toward the bottom of Newhall Street where we do get fires, and we get— we just had a drowning down there.

Those areas where those apparatus and those men, that manpower can get there within 5 minutes, it doesn't fall, it, it doesn't pass.

And you got places out in the reservation, you got places in the North End as well.

I'm dealing with a place in Tiverton, so that would be— and we've had fires out there before too.

Yeah.

All right.

And lastly, you had brought up the 79 development and the increase in population there.

I have had discussions with the mayor's office about a developer-built fire station.

I don't know where that sits now that the state, I guess, announced that they're solely in control of the project.

That's another conversation I'm going to have to have with the mayor.

But I would— I don't know if there's entertainment from or appetite from my fellow councillors, maybe send a letter from the Public Safety Committee to the mayor's office just to keep that— we'll put it in writing and make sure that we entertain it now.

Motion for that, councillor?

I, I actually have one, if you don't mind.

Oh, absolutely.

Yeah, then we can wait.

That's fine.

I'll wait to, uh, to acknowledge you, which I'll do now.

I appreciate you, Mr. O'Regan.

Go ahead, councillor.

Um, so I would like an update on the current status of apparatus.

I know one I saw, I think it was online yesterday or the day before, that the new one is all pretty and ready to get shipped here.

Is that correct?

Is that Ladder 9?

Yes, I believe it's still a month or two out.

Okay.

So what I would like to know is what the status is on the current ordering of apparatus and what the game plan is.

I know the capital improvement plan was put out, but I would like to get a status update on what that is.

I think I'll make a motion at this point to send a letter to the administration, the fire chief, for an update on apparatus ordering and status, where they're at.

And then secondly, any plans on fire— any sort of fire protection when it comes to the development of Route 79 and what that status is as well.

I'll make that in the form of a motion.

Second.

I'll second that.

I know we just had the training division went over there, went to Taunton, because Taunton just built a new public safety complex for the replacement of the Stanley Street station, which is 100 and however many years old.

He did that feasibility study, and the chief may want to see what the feasibility is to do one on 79.

It's sorely needed.

We can't get down there now.

If we have a call, we have to go down anywhere on Duval Street, especially at certain times of the day, it's impossible.

It's a 2-lane road.

If you're going to put that many houses, uh, housing, shops, and whatnot, it's, it's, it's a disaster waiting to happen.

I agree.

It's been at the forefront of a lot of my questions that I've had with the administration, was the 79 and the fire protection.

And if I might add, uh, as far as the trucks go, I, I believe the estimation on ladder trucks right now is 1,600 days.

And that's from the time you order it to the time it comes in.

The new ladder 4 has been plagued with delay, delay, delay, delay, delay.

But even if you ordered every truck, 2 trucks every 2 years, by the time you get to the last truck in the fleet, the trucks at the beginning of the fleet are already starting to age out.

So it has to be— we can't buy them in bulk like we did last time because they all age out at the same time.

And these trucks that we got are horrible.

I mean, I've said it before that we're the kings of low-price lending.

You know, I mean, we just low-bid everything.

And if you buy quality trucks, you pay a quality price, but you get something that works.

Yeah, I think my point is too is that we want to make sure there's a plan going forward that every year, you know, we're looking 10 years out.

We're making sure that we know what trucks are aging out, what we need to order, and not kind of knee-jerking reaction to what we need to get taken care of in in a long-term sense.

So, right, in the interim, we do need reliable spare trucks.

We have Engine 26 that probably shouldn't be on the road.

I just had to address expired inspection stickers with it, and there are a lot of safety concerns, like the seats don't lock.

So when you're driving, your seat slides back and forth, which if, you know, the city had its way, you know, I mean, we would be on donkeys, for God's sakes.

They're unsafe vehicles, but we do what we have to do with what we got.

But it doesn't mean that something's not going to happen, a firefighter get hurt or killed because of these vehicles.

They have standards and NFPA standards for a reason, for truck safety.

These trucks are not safe, even some of the new ones.

We need reliable spares so those trucks can get into the shops and be fixed, and that means we have to have funding, and that means that it has to be more of a I would say a priority put on the fire apparatus as opposed to ambulances, because it seems our shop is filled with ambulances 24/7, and the fire trucks don't even get routine maintenance inspections.

I mean, most of these trucks were out of compliance and voided the warranties within the first 6 months, 3 months, 1 month, because we didn't do what we were supposed to do with those vehicles.

So now you can't go back and complain about the trucks breaking down because we didn't take care of them properly.

So there needs to be a systematic change from the city with the funding and the shops in order to get these vehicles to where they should be.

We wouldn't tolerate a police car, you know, with 3 tires and 1 light, but yet we'll tolerate a fire truck with no sirens and ladders that don't work.

I'm at a loss for why that's acceptable.

Mr.

Chair, if we could as well, can we add to that letter just an update on the turnover year?

As well?

Yes, sir, because that, that was also a conversation we had some months ago, and I know there were some processes going on, but I'd like an update on that as well.

Yeah, I appreciate you guys' support on that too as well.

Yeah, of course.

Motion made.

Yeah, motion so made and seconded by Councilor Canuel.

So it's to send the administration a letter as to a current update status on our apparatus, um, as ordering, ordering and current status of what's been ordered and what plan is going forward, an update on study of Route 79 and how the fire department plays a role in that, as well as an update on the current ordering of turnover gear and where that stands as of right now.

All right, thank you.

Did you get that, Clark?

One other thing, if we could add to that as well, is just some type of— I would like to see some type of communication between the administration and the state showing that there was dialogue opened as far as putting a fire station on this piece of property.

It is a very pertinent situation.

We can't load that area with more residents and have— keep the same trucks, especially after what we're hearing today, and have the same response.

It doesn't make sense.

So if we can add that as well, I'd appreciate it.

So maybe if you guys second on that as well.

Thank you, I appreciate that.

Mr. O'Regan, thank you.

Thank you, sir.

Thank you.

All in favor of the letter?

Aye.

No nays.

Number 2 on the agenda, minutes from June 16th to June 26th.

Motion to approve has been made and seconded.

All those in favor?

Aye.

No nays.

Is there a motion to lift item 3 from the table?

Motion to lift item 3 from the table.

Second.

Item 3, resolution convene with representatives from the MBTA, the City of Fall River, and other interested parties to discuss safety and noise concerns around the commuter rail.

This was tabled on 4/7/26.

All interested parties?

Mayor's office?

Mr.

Chair, do we have a, a representative from the MBTA?

Um, I did receive email correspondence from them stating that they had nothing that was of new importance from the last time they had come down, so they were not coming to this meeting.

Fair enough.

Thank you, sir.

I yield.

Thank you.

Mrs. O'Neill, how are you?

Good, how are you?

Doing well, thank you.

So I know we have entertained this and we have received emails recently, complaints once again about the trains in the North Main Street area.

One of the specific emails was It pertained to idling times, roughly 4:30, 5 o'clock in the morning.

They sit there, which I completely understand.

Have you heard anything back in the mayor's office regarding a plan?

I know they had one in place for noise mitigation.

Have we had any current updates to that?

I mean, I know the last email that we received with a complaint, it was from a resident who had received multiple notifications that they qualified for the hazard mitigation program but didn't take advantage of it.

So the state was going to work with them in that regard to see that they could try to assist them.

When we receive complaints regarding the MBTA, I mean, we send them to the state representative in that district in addition to the individuals from Keolis and from— to Jean Fox.

They've always been very responsive to us.

To handle the concerns that neighbors have.

So we work with them to try to resolve everything that we can that neighbors bring forward to us.

Okay, thank you.

Councillor Cannell.

Thank you.

In the last week, I've had a resident reach out about a horrible sewer smell up near the Weaver's Cove layover station of the North Main.

Really, that— he said it was the whole Steep Brook area of North Main.

And so I don't know if it's related.

Uh, he, he did want me to connect with potentially Keolis or whoever.

He thinks it's related to the train somehow.

So I did want to bring that up as well to be potentially— was that sent to the mayor's office as well, or just yourself?

Uh, this one was an online one, so it hasn't been sent yet.

I did just connect with him, I think, over the weekend.

I said bring it to this meeting.

I mean, I would refer that Mr. Furlan as well so that he could check, have his maintenance crew check in that area to see if there were any issues.

I know that there was a water main break in that area.

I don't know, I'll have to defer to Paul if it went down that far.

I know it was up in the area of the rotary on North Main Street.

I don't believe that it went down as far.

But I mean, if there's an issue, yeah, we'll absolutely look into it.

Okay, so I will get that sent over and let you guys pursue it.

Absolutely.

You also have council?

Yes, thank you.

The one thing— the question I have is, and I've noticed with a lot— some of the issues in the city, it's about the advertising or marketing to the neighbors.

And I understand that they were sent letters or emails regarding this program.

Is there any way to reach out to the MBTA representative and see if we could have a sit-down once again to explain the program, what they offer, and how they're to contact?

I mean, I'm— I certainly can check with Gene Fox, but I know a lot of those things had a time frame to them where people had the opportunity to take advantage of it.

I don't know if those things are still available.

I wasn't aware that there wouldn't be somebody from the MBTA here today.

To be able to answer the questions.

But we can look and see.

For some reason, I believe there was a deadline in which people could apply, and that there would be exceptions.

I mean, of course, if someone never got the, you know, the notifications and things.

Okay, because I can tell you, not pertaining to this situation, but another constituent complaint was the gentleman was emailing me.

But email was new to him.

It was an elderly gentleman in his early 80s.

So my concern is the people down there that may fit into that category as well, where they're not really email friendly or social media friendly.

How can we go there and let them know that this exists so they don't have to suffer through this, you know, the noise and the early morning wake-ups and whatnot?

I appreciate that.

Anything further on the topic?

I got nothing.

I'm gonna do a motion to table this.

Yeah, I was just thinking that.

Uh, motion to table for further discussion.

Second.

First and second.

All those in favor?

Aye.

No nays.

Item number 4, resolution convened to address long-standing flooding issues at Stafford Plaza, Pleasant Street, and Quarry.

This was adopted on July 14th, '26.

All interested parties.

Mr. Furlan, good afternoon.

How's it going, councilors?

Paul Furlan, Administrator of Community Utilities for the City of Fall River.

Thank you.

So it's been a little while.

I'm just going to have Kevin Jacob, Project Manager, Community Utilities.

Thank you, Kevin.

So I just want to— I did a PowerPoint presentation for you guys just to kind of update you.

It's been a while since I've been in front of council talking about this.

But we'll start off, we'll run through a little history of the square, history of what we've been doing, and then what the plan is moving forward.

So, so again, just we'll go through an introduction, existing conditions, affected population, the recommended improvements, the cost estimates to date, funding and implementation plan.

So as you can see, uh, from the picture there to the left, Stafford Square has been flooding for a long period of time.

This isn't something new that's come up, uh, you know, or anything.

Does it occur more often potentially because of the intensity of the storms that we get nowadays?

Yeah, uh, you know, that, that could be said.

But you can see that picture's from the 1960s.

So this area, Stafford Square, it's the intersection of Pleasant Street, Quarry Street, and County Street.

It's the low point of a 373-acre highly urbanized area.

So that watershed stretches back as far as Eastern Avenue and Locust Street all the way up to Oak Grove Cemetery.

It takes sewer from beyond there, the President Ave pump station and other areas.

All that sewer comes down through that intersection as well.

You have the shopping plaza to one side, as well as, you know, a supermarket on the other side, large milk complex in the corner.

Right next to this— right next to it, you have Health First, a healthcare facility in the area as well.

So it's a busy area.

Know, Flint, the Pleasant Street running up the Flint.

That's, that's a, you know, once a very bustling and busy economic area, and hopefully will be rebuilt into that, you know, sometime soon.

There's lots of good things going on in that street, and we want to keep that moving forward.

So running right through this intersection, you have what's called the White Brook Tip Tributary.

That's kind of the main culvert that comes through this area.

It was way back before the city was here, White Brook.

It flowed down into the Quicker Sand River.

There's multiple other culverts that also come through this intersection.

A quarry drain from the quarry back up where behind where this small—I still call it the small school—but the school up over there.

You know, there was a quarry, so the quarry drain comes down through this area into the same intersection.

And the area that all this drains out to is out to the Quicker Sand.

So all this stuff was identified in many plans that we've done.

So our stormwater master plan, our hazard mitigation plan, our other, you know, improvement plans that we have.

So we've been looking at this for a while as well.

Next slide.

So again, just to kind of COVID the area, if you look at that map there on the left-hand side, that blue outlined area.

And I know the screen back there is a little squiggly, but, you know, the blue outlined area really gives you a sense of how big this area is and all the drainage that comes down to that one point.

Highly urbanized area, very few green spots.

So you think about that, you got, you know, Columbus Park, and there's not many other, you know, and Lafayette Park.

Other than that, you don't really have a lot of big green spaces, you know, highly compact multifamilies in a lot of these streets that run through this area.

So this is all, you know, a lot of the flooding, and we've been here 1,000 times and talked about it, is undersized pipes, pipes that were put in in the early 1800s.

You know, late 1800s, early 1900s.

They served the purpose at the time for what they needed, but they don't serve the purpose for how the city has grown and built up and become.

You know, wet weather frequencies have changed, and that overwhelms the infrastructure, closes the road, causes service disruptions, and, you know, sanitary sewer overflows that could occur.

So Where all this drains to, it comes down into the intersection.

It actually goes underneath the strip mall plaza there, Flint Village Plaza.

It's actually a channel that goes underneath the center of that building, comes out the back of that building, eventually makes its way down to the Kwikishan River.

From the Kwikishan River, then conveys itself down to Lower Kwikishan, through the 4th Street gatehouse, down through the sluice gates to down at Workout World and out either by Battleship Cove or to Firestone Mill Pond and out by the state pier.

So, I put this slide in here and talked a little bit about it because it talked about in a 1915 report on the Wethupper Ponds and the Quicashan River about the Whitefield— the White Brook culvert.

And it's how it's been causing some floods even back then, back in 1915.

And, you know, it was kind of undersized.

So this was talked about in this report and how it interacted with the Quicashan River and the flow of the Quicashan River out of the city.

So the existing conditions, about 162 stormwater catch basins in the whole entire area.

85 combined sewer catch basins, so that goes into the combined sewer within the drainage area.

There's over 70,000 linear feet of paved street within this encatchment area.

You know, that's a pretty large number if you think about it for streets that are paved 24, 26, 32 feet wide that don't let a drop of water infiltrate in.

The area should really have over 560 catch basins if you were to do it by today's standards to be able to capture all that water in it.

So what we have is going through there is the culvert from White Brook.

We also have the Quarry Street drain, which is a 28 by 36 stone box culvert that runs through there.

Has some connections into it, and the White Brook culvert that runs through there.

So all of that right now can take up to what's called the 2-year storm.

That's really what that can handle.

Next slide.

So existing conditions of the sewer.

So we talked a little bit about the sewer before, that it comes from.

So you have the present pump station.

That's over behind Newport Creamery.

That pump station actually goes— it pumps all that whole entire area, Valentine Street, everything, all that sewer eventually goes down to that pump station, including as far as Diamond, all comes back to that pump station.

And that pump station then pumps up the water into a force main that goes down President Ave., goes down Oak Grove to Oak Grove, and then ties into the sewer.

The sewer eventually makes its way all the way back down through the intersection at Stafford Square.

So again, some of the sewers in there, early to mid-1800s, 15 inches, 24 inches, some of them go up to 48 in some of the flat, low-lying areas.

But, you know, it just shows the extent of even the sewer catch basin and how much further it goes beyond just the water and catchment in this area.

So we talked— I mentioned about the 2-year flood, and I wanted to put this slide in here just a little bit to show you what we do.

You know, this is when we were doing the full hydraulic model and hydraulic study of this whole entire area.

This is kind of what ends up showing us.

So the top left-hand side, you can see So there's a green line, which is actually the surface, you know, ground level surface.

There's a red line below that, and that's what we call the hydraulic grade line as water flows.

The blue is, you know, the actual water as it comes through there.

But so what you really want to do is keep the red line below the green line.

That means that water isn't coming up above the surface.

So in the 2-year storm, the top one, you can see red line stays pretty much below the green line on the upper part of the encatchment.

There's a couple of spots, but the way the hydraulics work and the model works, it all works where it's— where it kind of stays in the pipe.

If you look at the lower one, it gets into— that one gets into it.

I think that's a 10-year storm.

Yeah, that's a 10-year storm on the bottom one.

So that'll show you You know, where that first red box is, moving from the right to left on there, that's the Stafford Square intersection.

So on a 10-year storm, that's where the water level would rise to above the red line that's above the green line.

And then as the hydraulic model goes out, it is— the red line is above the green line, but that typically doesn't come up to the surface in many of those those areas.

So let me talk a little bit— so, you know, we've gone through some studies, and I'll talk in a little bit about a lot of the work that we've already done in this area.

One of the things that we've looked at is the sensitive and vulnerable populations within this area.

This is something that we had to do for some of the grants that we applied for for the work in this area and some of the grants that we applied for in the area.

But it's really census tract 6412 as well as 6413.

Total population of a little bit under 10,000 people, roughly about 10% of Fall River's population.

Mixed commercial and residential, private homes, and there's sensitive populations within, within this area.

High social vulnerability index, that's, that's the rating that they have.

It's a 0.75 out of 1.

So, a couple of the plans that we've done that have looked at this, and, you know, our plans, we always look and we start, and I say we start at 90,000 feet, and then we start coming down, coming down, coming down.

And that's really where we need to get to, to be able to get into design.

So, it goes back to as far as 2011, 2013.

Part of the CSO abatement plan naturally looked at this area because of the impacts that it has with the local urbanized flooding.

Integrated wastewater stormwater master plan, that was completed in 2016.

I call that like the 90,000-foot view.

Then we had a stormwater management plan program that was done in 2019.

Facilities plan, Stafford Square was looked at.

'21 and '22 was really where we got into the nitty-gritty started to get into it in Stafford Square.

That was because of funding that was approved in November of 2017.

There was a loan authorization approved.

A portion of that loan authorization was to do the initial hydraulic study of the Stafford Square area.

So that was funding that we ended up getting to be able to move forward with that.

So that kind of started and kicked this off.

From there, this was all mentioned in our hazard mitigation plans that we've done and And also, there was an economic development and redevelopment plan done for that area along with— it was really the Flint, but that's kind of, you know, a portion of the Flint area.

So Stafford Square was included in that plan in 2024 as well.

So just a little bit about the specifics of the plan.

You know, you can see in there the President Ave area, the Oak Grove area, the Bedford Street area.

Stafford Square upstream area.

You know, this is right from the hazard mitigation plan, uh, labeled out right in there.

This allows us to reach out for certain pots of funding.

Without this being in this plan, it wouldn't allow us to move forward for some, some funding.

The urban renewal plan the city developed in 2024, uh, it, it included about drainage problems, the floodings, you know, it was mentioned multiple times through that whole entire thing.

And that plan had a lot of public outreach when that plan was developed.

So that was taking in a lot of what the public was saying, a lot of what everybody in the area had to say, and implemented into that plan.

So this area was definitely brought up by the public during this time.

So recommendations and improvements.

Current issues, really to control the flooding.

That's what we want to do in this area.

Reduce the runoff, which really includes increasing the pipe sizes.

What we want to try to do is get it to the 10-year storm point, where we can capture that 10-year storm.

You know, everybody says, well, we're going to fix the flooding in this area and it's never going to flood again.

You know, I've been here, every project that we've that we've ever done.

I've, you know, I've said, and my predecessor always said, we're not going to guarantee that it's never going to flood again because, you know, if you get the, you know, 20-inch in 1-hour storm, you know, there's nothing that we could build that, that can do that, you know, handle that.

But what we need to be able to do is handle it so it doesn't impede people's ability on a regular basis to be able to go through that area or enjoy that area.

Next slide.

So this is really where we are.

We're about 35-40% design right now.

The recommended improvements are up on the screen.

So the right-hand side kind of shows you the whole entire watershed.

And I know there's a lot on this slide and on the screen right now.

But all the green lines really are showing the sewer.

The magenta lines are showing the separated drainage in the area.

The left-hand side of the screen really zooms into the areas that we need to improve on.

So what we're going to be doing, what we're proposing, is coming through the backside, the backside of the building.

And sorry, I would be up there pointing, but the screen's too high on the wall for me to be able to reach it.

I like to stand during these presentations, but So really work through the Stafford Square, the whole entire plaza.

We're going to be running a large box culvert, 12 feet by 5 feet, through the parking lot of the plaza there, crossing over through the backside of the old Bank of America, and then crossing, going through the U-Haul parking lot over to County Street.

We're going to be running separate drainage all the way up County Street to to try to encapsulate a lot of that water before it gets down to the intersection.

We're then going to head up North Rowcliffe Street, and with new drainage culverts all the way up and through into Bedford Street.

What we really need to do is get further out into the system, capture this water into a separated drainage pipe, and convey it down and through the intersection so that it's not draining down to the intersection.

Intersection, and not coming— not overwhelming the existing culverts within the intersection.

So we saw the hydraulic grade lines prior.

These are the hydraulic grade lines after the improvements.

So you can see on the 2-year storm and the 10-year storm, the red line's well below the green line.

So this is what's proposed as of now.

So recommended sewer improvements.

Again, CSOs is always something that we always talk about in Fall River, because we're working so hard to reduce the amount of CSO discharge that we have.

This project isn't necessarily a CSO project, but any water, any stormwater that we can get out of the combined system helps us further down the line.

So to say that this is a CSO project, strictly CSO, No, but getting all of this additional stormwater, separating a lot of the catch basins that go into the combined sewer, pulling out of that combined sewer, putting it into the drain lines, will be a benefit for the CSOs overall.

One of the things that we like to do, and we're going to plan on doing on this project, is include green infrastructure into this project.

This is one thing that is definitely, you know, something that's more prevalent now, to be able to use green spaces that will be able to have plants that use the water and clean the water before it goes into the stormwater system and then eventually is discharged into the environment.

It's a very tough area to incorporate a lot of this green infrastructure because of the urbanized city.

So there's different ways that we've been able to modify some of these green infrastructures to be able to work in the city.

Like when on South Main Street near Middle Street, we have tree box filters that run that area.

On Middle Street running down next to the park, we have the bioretention area over there.

You know, some people think that, oh, those are all weeds growing in the middle, but those are specially designed plants to be able to absorb and use the water, rather than have it go into the drainage system, and help clean and filter the water as well.

So, the cost estimate as it stands for this project, as I said, we're about 35-40% design right now.

The estimate is $36 million, almost $37 million for the whole entire project.

So that's construction.

So as it stands right now, we are Uh, fully funded for design.

So we were able to get— we got authorized some money from ARPA from the council, Bristol County ARPA funds that we were able to use to start the design process.

And then we were issued a grant through the MassWorks program to bring it up to 100% design.

So when we're done in about 8 months, we'll have 100% bid-ready documents ready to go for this whole entire project.

Just go back for one second.

So just a little bit on this slide as well.

This is really going to open up, you know, different areas for people to be able to develop, I think, through this corridor and in this area.

One of the things for one of the grants that we applied for, we need to do a cost-benefit analysis based on FEMA's cost-benefit.

So if you look at the bottom of there, so when we did the cost-benefit analysis, you need to be above a 1.

We were at a 1.7.

So that's saying it's going to generate and help over $62 million worth of improvements for this area for the $36 million investment.

So where we're looking for the funding right now, and, you know, I just sat here and told you guys that we need $36 million, but I know we're not going to get $36 million to go into Stafford Square and do this project.

I'm not going to be able to get it from my ratepayers, you know, without— you know, I don't even want to go— so we're tracking down every lead to try to be able to get this funding.

The FEMA Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities program, the BRIC program, This is a program that was out— came out probably about 6 or 7 years ago.

There was a couple of rounds of funding that went out.

It is through FEMA, so we apply to MEMA, our local mitigation agency.

They take that, and they— if they approve our project, then they send it to FEMA.

So we applied for BRIC funding, I believe it was 3 or 4 years ago we put in an application.

Application.

It went to FEMA.

It wasn't chosen.

It's a national— it's a national program, so there's a lot of competition out there.

It wasn't chosen, but we got some good feedback from that one.

We put it out.

We applied for it a second time.

That second time was right when, you know, there was a lot of budget cuts that were happening in the federal government, and this program was one of the ones that was cut at that time.

This program did just come back out about 4 or 5 months ago.

We put together a full application again.

We submitted that application.

We're just— I think last week we just worked with MEMA to finalize, make sure everything was good with the application, and they're going to be submitting it to FEMA.

So that's one of the areas that we have.

MassWorks is another one that we have.

You know, if we go through the FEMA process and we get federal funding, they want you to be able to do the whole entire project.

They can't— they're not going to pay for just a portion of the project.

So they won't pay for us to do, you know, Phase 1 or Phase— you know, they want the whole entire thing fixed.

They don't want part of it fixed.

But when you get into some of the other funding sources, like MassWorks funding, we've designed this project where we potentially can break it up into some smaller phases.

So whether it be MassWorks or whether we do it in authorization small steps, take small bites out of it and be able to move forward, we will have the flexibility as we've designed this project to be able to do that as well.

But again, so MassWorks is always a great option.

And then we also have the Clean Water Revolving Fund.

But then again, Again, that requires an authorization.

That's a loan.

So just running through some of the funding that we have applied for.

The BRIC program, we applied June of '26.

Anticipated hopeful award would be winter of '26 into '27.

The MassWorks, again, we did apply this year, again, for a smaller portion of the project.

We'll see how that pans out on the MassWorks.

Scale.

We did put in a— it's going to be, whether it be a BRIC or whether it be a MassWorks, there is going to be a match that will be required, whether it be 10% or 20% of whatever we're funded.

So we did put in an application for the state revolving fund to be able to use their low-interest loan program for that match if we are approved, and we do need a match.

So we'll be ready with that if needed.

And that's kind of my basis— my basic presentation, kind of where we've been, what we've been working on, and what we're looking for for the future.

I appreciate it, Mr. Frollin.

Thank you.

Councilor Kendall.

Thank you.

Thank you for the history.

That was quite insightful.

So it looks like we've had about 7 studies over the last 15 years as I saw it.

You said that we're 8 months away from the current study being complete, the design phase specifically?

Correct.

So I guess my question would be first, once we go out to bid, from the time the bid is awarded, how long would it take to actually be for people to see an improvement?

Well, so we'll have bid-ready documents.

We can't go out to bid till we have funding in place.

If we were to— if tomorrow Brick came in and said, here's your money, go do it, we're looking at about a 3-year construction project.

Okay.

You know, it is a highly impactful construction project.

We've already been in touch with all the property owners within that corridor.

There are easements that are required, which much through the design phase, we are getting those easements set up and in place with those property owners.

So, um, you know, again, once we— we're bid-ready documents, we'll have everything in place ready to go.

We're just going to need the funding.

So then let's talk about the funding.

So there were obviously a lot of variables in play.

Under the best-case scenario, what do you think the local contribution might be?

And under the worst case, uh, what would it be?

So as it stands, if I was to get my— if I was to get, you know, out of all the programs that are out there and I was to get, you know, my dream funding scenario, BRIC would be $20 million, and that's what it's capped at.

The MassWorks program is capped at $5 million.

So they would chip that in.

There is a couple of other small funding sources that we could probably tap into, but I would expect an authorization needed by the city of about $8 million.

And again, I wouldn't say that— I'm not asking for that now, and that's not anything, but that would be if all the balls fell in place and stacked correctly, but there's a lot of moving variables all involved with that.

And that $37 million cost is today's dollars, right?

That wouldn't factor in inflation, given this is probably, you know, 5 years out?

When we built that, we looked at it, we knew we weren't going to be constructing it.

I believe we did it based on 2 years out.

So, meaningfully, though, we're looking at, I think, best case scenario, 4 to 5 years out before we would see any type of improvement for the situation.

For the whole construction project to be completed?

Yeah.

It's a lot of money too.

Without a doubt.

I guess my— I want to pivot to what interim solutions can we potentially deploy?

You know, I think about simple things, maybe like, you know, when railroad trains come by, you know, arms go down.

Have we Have we explored— like, it never ceases to amaze me, you know, how many cars still continue to get ruined trying to drive through that intersection.

Could we not, if we are— I'm sure you guys have sensors and things that you could potentially figure out that, hey, this is about to flood out.

Could we consider temporarily closing down that intersection, you know, so that people don't try and go through it from a safety perspective?

Because then we risk first responders going out trying to rescue them too?

Yeah, no, definitely.

You know, and, you know, I, I've been sitting at that intersection countless numbers of times, uh, you know, blocking the intersection along with, uh, along with my other staff, uh, as well as, uh, police department, uh, and other agencies within the city.

So, um, you know, the tough thing is, is it's tough to predict on these because it's the high-intensity rainstorms very quick.

It comes, it rains, probably within 20 minutes or a half hour after the high intensity stops, the intersection is, you know, back to normal condition.

So it's sometimes a short period, sometimes a long period.

What we do now, if we look— if we predict— if we see where we may be getting high-intensity rainstorms, with our staffing we have available, we'll deploy people to that area to, you know, if it does flood, to block off the intersection.

I know the police department is always a great help if they know something is coming.

Typically, they'll take— they'll bring barriers out to the area, the sawhorse barriers, so that those can be deployed as well.

One of the things that we're just work— that we just are working on, and we're still working on calibrating and maybe moving, We're working with a nonprofit out of Boston, Stone Living Labs.

They're a nonprofit organization.

They have— they do a bunch of modeling and stuff up in the Boston area.

They reached out to us about 6 months ago.

They heard about Stafford Square, and they were really interested.

So they came out.

They're partnered with another organization out of Woods Hole.

They came out and they mounted a sensor.

Actually in that intersection.

We're still working to calibrate that sensor.

It's currently mounted on the mast for the traffic lights.

We're talking whether we're going to move it potentially onto the mast arm that comes out for the streetlights, because it's a little bit more over the area where the flooding starts, to get even an earlier warning.

And then there has been talks of if there is something that we could do.

You know, I think the railroad arms that come down, you know, maybe a bit much, but some type of flashing signs or something prior to that area if the sensor is activated to be able to warn people ahead.

But I gotta tell you, some, you know, sometimes all the, all the times that I've been sitting out there, and I'm out there either, you know, in a, you know, Ford Explorer with blinking lights all over the thing, or I'm in my, you know, my own pickup truck with lights on it, you know, hazards flashing, and the amount of cars that just drive right around you and then drive into the water is astonishing.

Sometimes I wonder what people are thinking.

You know, they see trucks blocking every road into the intersection, then they still drive around you and go in.

You think if you sit in the canoe they'll get the message?

You know, I just don't know.

Sometimes.

Uh, just take me through the ROI a little bit.

Um, obviously, you know, $37 million, again, back to— that's a big number.

Yep.

Even on the city-side portion, your best-case scenario, we're looking at $8 million.

How do we get to $63 million rounded in potential benefits?

Yeah, so that's, uh, that's an interesting thing.

And again, that's a cost-benefit— that's, it's a benefit-cost analysis, uh, program that FEMA has for their projects.

And there's a lot of things that play into that.

Plays into the miles that people need to detour around on legal roadways.

A lot of times people end up cutting through the parking lot, but that's not a legal roadway to be able to detour around this intersection when it's closed.

It takes into losses within, within the intersection that are caused.

It takes into effect you know, the healthcare facility and rerouting out of that healthcare facility.

And this is Health First I'm talking about behind the plaza there.

That's actually considered a healthcare facility within the cost-benefit analysis, as well as the commercial inconvenience in that area.

You know, those are a lot of the things, and it's a, you know, it's a very sophisticated you know, format to be able to put into it.

All the documentation and backup that we provide within to, uh, to build the whole entire benefit-cost analysis gets scrutinized by MEMA as well as FEMA for, for that.

And what, what's the ROI period?

How many years did you guys use for that?

Uh, we didn't, we didn't run out the number of years on the ROI.

So when we're saying $62.5 million, that's $62.5 million benefits back in 10 years, 25, 50.

It's got to be a number to that, tied to that.

Yeah.

Um, maybe if you can get back to me on that.

Yes, I will.

All right, thank you.

I yield.

Thank you, Councilor Canuel.

Councilor Raposo.

Yeah, my only question, I actually— it's for, it's for, uh, the Chief of Police.

I guess to Councilor Canuel's point, if we know that there is an anticipated forecast of where it's going to be significant, is there a process that automatically takes place as far as automatic blocking of the street?

So to Paul's point, yes, we have deployed sawhorses over there.

But I was just commenting on yesterday's storm, it was like the perfect staggering of extreme water that allowed it to maintain it.

But typically in a storm when it's that bad, we'll either limit our calls to priority only, only for the safety of our officers responding.

And then we deploy police officers over there and then have the assistance of his staff to help block that intersection off.

Unfortunately, you know, common sense can't be taught in a rainstorm and even in a snowstorm.

So it's one of those things that our guys know that the dispatchers will send them out there to shut it down, and it becomes instinctual.

We had that crazy one a few months ago where we had Columbus Park area was flooded.

So that entire area, as you saw highlighted, was pretty much impassable.

For the record, Chief, can you just introduce yourself?

Yeah, I'm sorry, J.T.

Hoare, Chief of Police.

Thank you, Chief.

Yeah, that pretty much answers my question.

I mean, I think I'll ask one more actually.

As far as the detours that are set up for that, is there a— is there like a set map or plan of where the detours are set up?

It when it floods?

Because it's been so unexpected, it's really just to try to keep the cars from trying to navigate it, causing a bigger issue.

There were a couple tow trucks that were staged in that area over the storm yesterday, kind of waiting in lieu of something possibly happening.

Luckily nothing did happen.

I mean, those are the only things, but if a car is stuck and the water's above the kick panels, then a tow truck's not going to try to pull them either.

So typically, you know, in catastrophic situations where it's flooded as high as where Popeyes used to be, we just have to make sure that the person's safe in the car and try to get them out if we need to.

But over the course of about an hour, it really goes down pretty quickly once it catches up.

Fair enough.

Thank you, Chief.

And Mr. Furlan, thank you for the presentation.

Would it be possible to get a copy of that to the clerk?

Yes, definitely.

Sorry.

I was touching it up just before, but I'll let her— That's fine.

Thank you, Chairman.

I yield.

Thank you, Councilor.

So Councilor Canuel and, uh, yourself have brought up signage.

I think when I go down south in the summertime, you drive down 95, there's signage that is lit up or not lit up that says bridge freezes during winter months, use caution.

For now, and I'm looking at these numbers, I know that's your best-case scenario is $20 million, $5 million, but we have to be realistic too.

And then to get the difference on that from the city is— we don't have 8 cents, never mind $8 million, just to be completely honest.

So in the meantime, we have to, in my opinion, come up with some type of proactive measure to make sure that these cars aren't getting stuck any longer.

What I mean by that is, like I believe you just said, and I'll put it in my own words, we can't teach common sense.

You can't do it.

So when there's 3.5 feet of water in an intersection, and people are going around emergency vehicles, yellow flashing lights and getting stuck.

Now, if we set a precedent where we're putting signage in advance.

Doesn't even have to be a rainy day, but just telling people this is the intersection that floods.

Now we get on the business, the ownership of the plaza, and tell them you got to put up some signage so the obstruction of the roadway stops.

Because like you guys just said, within a half hour it depletes and it's no longer an issue.

What the issue is, is the motor vehicles that are left behind and we're waiting hooks and everything else to get them out of there.

Is there a way— and I don't like recommending this, but sometimes you have to teach common sense— we put up flashing signs, we let them sit there for a while.

I'm sure it's something we can direct from here, right, to traffic to entertain for the signage.

And then we wait a period of time.

And then is there a way to fine these people that just decide to drive their motor vehicles into the 3.5 feet of water and tie up city services.

I think that's a slippery slope.

I think there's a lot of distractions in that intersection with the amount of traffic that's over there.

So you can put as many signs up as you want and make them shoot fireworks out the top.

It's— people sometimes drive just beyond the tip of their nose.

So starting to fine for it, I would say that that's something that I'm not comfortable with, that because it's an unexpected expected thing.

I think there's been vehicles that got stuck there because they were traversing it and the water was actually coming up faster than they could get across.

So, um, again, I think it's a common sense thing.

Uh, at the end of the day, because of its unexpected nature and it's linked to Mother Nature, we kind of have to deal with the problem as it exists.

Yeah, it's unfortunate because I like like yourself.

I like answers now, and I'm looking at pictures that you provided from 1915.

Now, I'm a city historian.

That's not something— you know, I love the city, I love its history.

I don't love that.

Correct.

Neither do I. Yeah.

So at some point, we have to have an honest conversation.

Either this is going to get done quickly or it's not, and there has to be a funding source.

So that's, you know, set aside for this so we could do it little by little over the course of time.

We can't say that we're going to rely on $8 million from the city because I'm telling you, you're not going to find it.

So there has to be some plan in place as far as that piece.

Maybe the administration can put money aside little by little to kind of build a nest egg to get this done.

But to sit here and tell the people that— and it's no fault of your own either of you, but there is no immediate rectification for this.

It's going to keep flooding, and all we can do is keep telling the people, please don't drive and put your vehicle in 4 feet of water.

We don't want to have to— I remember a few years ago, I think it was, we deployed Marine One to that intersection to pull some person out of a vehicle.

Like, at some point, there has to be a common sense approach to this.

I'm not the fine you kind of person.

But we have to have some solution to keep these vehicles out of there.

Um, I don't know, I'm lost for a solution here.

I don't know if there really is one at this point.

Yeah, no, it's very tough.

And again, you know, we've talked a little bit about funding it, and, you know, a lot of the— this funding would be essentially going back to the sewer and the sewer rate and the stormwater fee.

You know, that's where I believe this funding should be made from.

So not the general fund side.

But again, that's up to everybody to figure out.

But, you know, I think stormwater— most stormwater and sewer issues have been funded through there.

Okay, this is definitely a conversation that's going to have to be tabled, in my opinion.

And so, yeah, further conversations with the mayor's office.

So with that motion made and seconded, all those in favor?

Aye.

I, I appreciate your time, gentlemen.

I do.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Motion to adjourn.

Motion to adjourn has been made and seconded.

All those in favor?

Aye.

No nays.

Have a good night, everybody.

Thank you.