8.31.2026 Board of Health

Good afternoon to everyone in the land of Zoom, and welcome to the Board of Health virtual meeting on Monday, August 31st, 2026, scheduled for 3:30 PM.

My name is Thomas Corey.

Present with me via Zoom is Michael Coughlin, Dr. Steven Gagliardi, Tess Curran, Agent to the Board, Sandy Nadeau-Souza, Secretary to the Board, various guests and participants in today's meeting.

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.

Tess, can we have a roll call?

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

We have the approval of the minutes of the meeting from Wednesday, May 18th, 2026.

Are there any additions?

No.

Approval of the minutes of the meeting from Monday, June 29th, 2026.

Are there any additions, deletions, or corrections to be made to the minutes of the meeting as printed?

No.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Can we have a roll call?

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Okay, next item is the approval minutes from the meeting of Monday, July 27th, 2026.

Are there any additions, deletions, or corrections to be made to these minutes as printed?

Nope.

Move to approve.

Second.

Can we have a roll call test?

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Mike Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Next, we have the application for approval of a tattoo establishment for Christina Fina at Christina Fina Aesthetics at Biomed Spa At 400 Rhode Island Avenue, Fall River, 02721. Who's presenting?

I'll be presenting that.

Okay.

So I did the inspection of the property on Thursday the 27th.

The shop's all brand new and everything's all brand new.

Checked the room there.

Good to go there.

Good to go.

Good to go.

Gentlemen, No, no questions.

Move to approve.

Second.

Jessica, we have a roll call.

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Christine Reichvogel, we would work on this quickly for you.

Thank you.

Next, we have the application for approval of a tattoo practitioner license for Christina Fazzina of 1985 County Street in Somerset.

To work for Christina Fazina Aesthetics and Biomed Spa at 400 Rhode Island Avenue.

Yeah, gosh, there you are.

Gosh, you keep moving on my screen.

Yep, I've checked all of her credentials.

Um, she actually has an active license in Rhode Island for their Rhode Island location.

So she's ready to roll at this location.

Okay, gentlemen, questions?

Move to approve.

Second.

Yes.

Can we have a roll call?

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Congratulations, Christina.

Good luck.

Thank you.

Next, we have the application for approval of a tattoo practitioner license for Andrea of 181 Tremont Street in New Bedford to work for Christina Fazzina Aesthetics and Biomed Spa, located at 400 Rhode Island Avenue.

Josh?

Yep, I'll be presenting that one as well.

Um, she has an active license in the town of Seekonk.

She's been licensed there for a few years.

Prior to that, she's had a license in Wilmington, and, uh, she's ready to roll at this location too.

Okay, gentlemen, any questions?

Nope.

No.

Motion to approve.

Second.

Cassie, we have a roll call.

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Andrea, good luck to you.

Thank you.

Operation— thank you so much.

Okay, next we have Isaac Silver of 1197 Robeson Street, Department 1401, Fall River, requests for an appeal of a 7/24/2026 inspection report.

Yes, sir.

Who's presenting?

I am Isaac Silver.

Oh, hold on, Mr. Silver.

Who's presenting for us?

This— Jay, is this one yours?

Correct.

Okay, if you would.

Okay, um, I did an inspection there in the 7/24, uh, because he complained about roaches.

When I arrived, I did inspect the apartment.

Um, I did notice a couple roaches that was dead, but I was informed by the management there was already an extermination in process.

Which they did send me the report the next day or so.

So I informed Silver that, you know, the extermination is already in place.

I think he was scheduled to get an inspection done the day before, the day after, and he wasn't on the schedule.

So I touched base with management and asked what happened.

They said he was scheduled for the following week.

So, um, at the time, like I said, I, I didn't find any violation due to those couple of deadbolts that were there.

And I sent them a report.

Okay, thank you, Jay.

Mr. Silva?

Yes.

Could you state your name and address for the record?

Yes, my name is Isaac Silva.

I live at 1197 Robeson Street.

Apartment 1401 in Fall River, known as the Cardinal Madeira Towers.

Okay, thank you for that, Mr. Silva.

We have, um, this request for appeal.

Yes, sir, of a, uh, what we would consider to be a positive report.

So please, you could— Yes, sir.

So I am refuting this report based on procedural noncompliance As well as factual errors.

I did submit exhibits to the board.

Uh, Tess Caron messaged me earlier this morning that they were dispersed to you.

So I'd just like a moment to review quickly.

So the first issue, if you look at exhibit number 1, which is billed as the late email, I have listed there that Friday, July 24th at 11:22 AM, I had emailed the minimum housing office.

Asking where Inspector Fernandez was because we had an 11:00 AM appointment.

But in his official report, he states he was present and doing the inspection at 11:15 AM.

So, second to that, after I submitted that email, I called also the office.

And if you look at my Exhibit Number 2, the phone log for July 24th, you'll see that I have circled in black The outgoing call I made to minimum housing, as well as the incoming call from Inspector Fernandez a moment later.

He mentioned that he was in the building and on his way to see me.

Um, the 2nd phone log, I just put that in as confirmation that that number is the valid number for minimum housing.

It has a small transcription of the message where Fausti is saying that he's calling me.

So that's just to confirm the phone number.

If we go on to Exhibit Number 4, which was the post-inspection email, this is where Inspector Fernandez and I differ in our findings.

I mentioned in the first paragraph that he arrived approximately 11:30 AM to do the inspection.

Under point number 1, for physical evidence of infestation and chronic omissions witnessed, I highlighted that he physically observed and verified dead cockroaches located behind the kitchen stove frame.

As well inside the lower kitchen cabinetry, which constitutes an active violation of the 105 CMR 410.550 for elimination of pests.

Next paragraph, it mentions I informed him that the housing management carelessly omitted my apartment from the scheduled extermination cycle, despite me requesting that earlier with Deputy Director of Housing Tim McCoy.

Um, so if you go on to the next subheading, number 2, As far as physical structural defects and non-compliant repairs.

I showed him the bedroom party wall cavity that I showed him with digital photos showing the large size, about a shoebox comparison to the cavity in that wall.

Uh, mentioned the materials used to repair it, and at the bottom I put, please note that unvetted temporary materials not meet structural integrity to seal off this pest vector.

The next paragraph, I talk about the kitchen stove frame, particularly that he did inspect the temporary non-vetted seals behind the kitchen stove using materials that were not appropriate.

And he did not document the substandard materials as being noncompliant, which requires permanent structural exclusion to eliminate pest harbors.

Uh, the next heading was the weatherproofing and humidity.

Uh, Inspector Fernandez advised me to vacuum up the dead roaches and to keep my living room window open, uh, to help combat the humidity, which was known to attract roaches.

And then on the 2nd page of that report, the first paragraph mentions, uh, that he stated if the defects are structural, to follow up with the building inspector, which I did.

Next heading, heading number 3, under the concerns of code conflict.

Inspector Fernandez informed me that he would consult with Supervisor Faust Fiori to determine if a report even needs to be made, because he claims that the building was actively treating the situation through the exterminator.

So I then submitted a message following that, that under 105 CMR 410.000, An official report is required, legally mandated, when violations are physically witnessed by a town inspector.

And then went on to say that an inspector does not have the administrative discretion to waive that report to shield the housing authority from citations based on a subjective determination, and that that was a concern that it was a violation of duty and compromises tenant safety.

That's it for the letters.

Then the next photo was of the postage.

When I did receive this report in the mail, it was postmarked August 5th, 2026.

According to the building code, I'm supposed to receive a report within 7 days.

I did check to see if that calendar days or business days.

I've learned that when business days are required, it is specified in the code.

And that other omissions are considered calendar days.

So, according to this postage mark on the envelope, this would be 12 days post-inspection.

So that is a form of procedural noncompliance.

The next photo I have is timestamp photo number 1, which is a close-up of my living room corner going into the bedroom.

There is a glue trap there with 6 roaches on it that Inspector Fernandez was able to see.

Uh, the next photo is of the living room in general.

As you can see, the piled up items.

Inspector Finandi asked me why my living room was in disarray.

I explained to him this was due to the exterminator needing to spray chemical treatment around the perimeter of the room, and that this was being done every 2 weeks, and I did not have the back health to move everything and put it back together.

For each visit.

Last photo is timestamp number 2, which is a glue trap in my bedroom right by the side of my nightstand, which has another 5 active roaches trapped in that.

And then finally, there's a photo of the report with the roach side by side on the floor saying that no violations were found.

This photo was a preview into a 1-minute, 3-second video that showed counting 15 roaches total around perimeter.

And this was after I had been away from the home for 5 days caring for a sick friend.

And also one last item I'm going to show you today, I found in my closet today.

I call these the 3 amigos that I found currently today in my closet.

So with that, I ask, based on all of this information, that since the report is inaccurate and non-compliant, that it be struck from public record and removed.

Thank you, gentlemen.

Are we going to hear from the Housing Authority?

I wasn't sure, but I, I would.

Good afternoon, members of the board.

I, I, um, I appreciate you giving me the opportunity to speak.

Uh, I just want to make note, uh, that this report— the Affordable Housing Authority works very well with minimum housing And we have a significant history with working with them in order to, lack of a better term, eradicate or assist with the extermination procedures.

As you know, we have 2,500 units throughout the city of, um, Mr. Silva is one of the residents of Madeira Towers.

We have several residents in that building.

There are no structural defects.

I don't know what structural defects he's talking about, and I don't have a complete package of what he was presenting today, so I can't speak to that.

But I do have a work order from the housing authority that he was refused entrance to the housing, to his unit on July 24th, which was the date of the report.

And that was— that report was found to be— there were no findings based on the observations made by the inspector.

We followed up with another treatment on July 30th, and he refused entrance again on that day.

So we can't provide adequate services for extermination purposes and work in conjunction with the city as well as the tenants without participation from the tenant.

Tenant is not participatory in allowing us access to his unit for extermination in order to eradicate any particular vermin or roach problems that we have.

Even though the House of the Board of Health or the Health and Human Services Minimum Housing Board has found that there were no violations, we agree with that because we keep accurate records.

We provided all of those records to minimum housing in order to make a decision and an informed decision with regard to the inspection of these premises.

That's basically all I can say now.

I don't have enough information in front of me just as a participant.

So.

Okay, thank you.

Gentlemen, gentlemen, Mr. Silver just asked for the record to be struck.

That's what he asked for, the record to be struck.

That's all you want from us, Mr. Chairman?

If I may interject, Mr. Silver, that's all Mr. Silver asked for, for the record to be struck as a public document.

What record?

I, I, I Jay's report, I guess.

Yeah, can we, can we do that?

It's a public record.

I don't know that we can.

I think that, as I don't— I mean, my inclination is to take no action on this and encourage the housing authority and Mr. Silva to work cooperatively to eliminate the roach problem.

The other question I have for Mr. Souza is, are there other complaints about roaches in that building?

I believe there are, sir.

I believe there are.

We've hired a contracted extermination company that comes in and does inspections as well, exterminates in the ordinary course of business several times a month.

So there are issues.

We— some, some of the residents have conditions that are— that exceed ours, but we try to control it with steady and, um, you know, compliant.

We keep pretty valid records of all the extermination activity that's done in the building in order to control the situation.

Mr. Silva?

Yes, sir.

If I may interject, he was mentioning, um, me turning away workers to do repairs.

The first time I turned away the worker, his name was Louis, um, he came 5 minutes prior to the designated time for Jay Fernandes' inspection.

So I asked Louis to return another time because the inspector would be actively looking at the work that was already done.

The 2nd time that Louis tried to do a repair, I was expecting the building inspection department to come.

So I told him it was again not a good time.

And when I found out that the building inspection department was refusing to acknowledge my request, on August 5th, I did go down to the housing management office.

I spoke to the office worker named Tita, and I told her to let Louis know that he could now come in and do that repair, and that was never followed up on.

Also, this was brought up in housing court because I do have an active case going.

And again, it was mentioned there, the judge ordered the counsel make sure that the building management staff gives me 24 hours to come in and do that repair.

So I have been compliant with all of that.

As far as records, I thought due to inaccuracies that records could be rescinded or amended to show that there is a condition with that report, because now, as it stands, it is factually inaccurate.

Thank you.

Can I speak to something that may add up?

So, pest control or pests is different from almost any other violation of the housing code in that If you have a broken faucet, process to fix that is probably a few minutes, just as an example.

Whereas pest control is always a much longer process.

So the housing authority, or any property owner, is in at least provisional compliance with the code if they're undergoing that process.

All right, so that's why, despite the fact that there are dead cockroaches, which No one wants to see them, but it's better than live cockroaches.

That the housing authority is in compliance with the code.

So, it's true.

I'll accept that it's true that there are dead cockroaches that have been in that apartment.

But it's also true at the same time that they're in compliance because the remedy required by the code is extermination.

And I'm just trying to— maybe I don't know if that's illustrating anything for Mr. Silva, but both of those things can be true at the same time, just because of the nature of extermination.

It's different from almost any other correction of a violation, if you will.

Now, if a property owner is not exterminating, then they're not in compliance.

If they are, they are.

I don't know if that helps, Mr. Silva, to explain.

How the code is enforced, but that is why you can have cockroaches.

It's actually a sign of extermination, although not definitive.

They could have died for other reasons, but that's why you can— both of those things can be true at the same time.

So, nothing changes the fact that they're doing the extermination.

Everyone acknowledges that.

And so now, if they just stop, And the cockroaches continue and not in compliance.

So it's not open-ended.

It's not, well, you know, try for a couple of months and then see what happens.

It's while that's going on, which is why we request the records.

And we know that.

I don't know if that helps or not, but I can respond to that.

I can go into further detail.

Basically, when I had these inspections done, I pointed out multiple structural breaches around the perimeter of the whole unit.

I did point those out to Inspector Fernandez.

And even when the exterminator came during one of his visits, they're always accompanied by a member of the building management staff.

Again, the member that came with the exterminator one day, her name was Tita.

She came in on one of those appointments, and I pointed out breaches to her and the exterminator about gaps in the COVID molding.

That were supposed to be filled with caulking, and she never put it down on a work order.

So this is a regular problem that communication's not where it should be at.

But also, you could spray roaches till the cows come home.

If they have open pathways, they're going to continue.

So without stopping the open pathways, the infestation will have lulls like there is right now.

But I went through 3 months of this.

Being quarantined to my bedroom, and I had over 350 roaches total from June 1st to present day.

And I'm expecting more because again, these voids, you can't just plug in one gap because they'll just make another one.

The whole base of the perimeter of the unit does not have proper structure to meet the flooring.

I know there's supposed to be an expansion gap for expansion and contraction, The gap sizes go well beyond that, and I did submit those images to Inspector Fernandez.

I showed him on my phone and videos.

So again, I fully agree that the exterminators have come and done their job.

I'm saying is it's not working because it's a much bigger problem that needs to be treated.

For that reason, again, I ask that this report is not fully accurate.

And should be rescinded or amended to include those facts.

Thank you.

Okay, so I just said one of them.

Hello, Jay?

We heard a little background noise, but, um, can you try and speak again?

Can you hear me now?

Yes.

Yeah, we can.

Okay, so like Mr. Silva said, so he— when I went there, he was showing me some structural issue with the building itself, which I informed him that I'm not a building inspector.

I can't determine those determination whether if the building has a structural issue or not, because I didn't want to give him false information.

So I advise him to reach out to the building department if he has any issue with the structure of the building itself.

So he kept asking me, you know, is this correct?

Is this— it is— I should be, but I'm not a building inspector.

I can't say this The spam's not right, or it is.

I'm just there for the cockroach problem, which is at the time my inspection, which has been rectified by, you know, being exterminated.

So I left it at that.

And then, like you said, I don't know if you reached out to the building department as far as the structure goes.

Folks, if I may interject one moment on that, my understanding was that if a sanitation or health violation is directly caused by a structural violation, that the health inspector does have authority to get the ball rolling on getting that remediated.

I did email the building department twice.

I sent one message to the general inbox email.

A few days later, since I got no response, I went directly to Director Len Hathaway.

And as of today, they have completely refused to acknowledge my request.

I've had zero contact from their office.

So this is where it stands right now.

Okay.

And I'm not too sure I understand how changing the report is going to change anything.

Um, you know, I don't think you're going to have a complete barrier to cockroaches if they're on the outside of the unit.

You can't control what people surrounding you are doing and how clean they keep.

Um, you know, and it sounds like they're doing the best that they can in that giant building with, with a lot of, a lot of units to try and keep this under control.

So I would think that the remediation that's ongoing puts them in compliance with a problem that is going to be very hard to— I mean, you're not going to get rid of cockroaches in a building like that.

I don't think that's even possible.

Especially building that old.

So, um, and I don't know if you— I don't think any kind of structural thing will seal your unit to keep a cockroach out.

They can get through the smallest spaces.

So, um, I agree.

If I may interject just a moment, uh, aside from the roach infestation, I've had several mice as well.

This has been an ongoing problem, and again, it's because everything is going through an open pathway around the perimeter.

If the structure was sound, these, uh, different types of pests wouldn't be able to penetrate.

They'd be contained in the room where they originated.

And that is the problem.

They are complying with the, uh, exterminator treatments, but they are ineffective because the structure needs to be addressed.

And that's why I say, when, uh, the report was made by Inspector Fernandez, he said no violation found.

Seeing physical dead roaches all over the place shows that he did see an active violation.

That is my biggest key.

But, but Mr. Silva, that's not correct.

Yeah, that's not correct.

It's not correct that he saw a violation.

Just big dead cockroaches mean— well, is an indication that they're exterminating.

We don't rely on that.

We rely on the actual reports.

But That means that it's analogous to repair in progress.

In other words, if someone's got a broken faucet and we walk into the apartment and the plumber's fixing the faucet, the property owner is not in violation.

They're in violation when they're not addressing it.

So, dead cockroaches are a fairly reliable indication that the extermination is working.

It is simply not true.

That they're not in compliance because there are dead cockroaches there.

Mr. Chairman, I just want to say that I'm inclined to agree with what Dr. Gagliardi was saying a minute ago, that amending the report isn't going to resolve the issue.

I don't see any action the Board of Health should take today, and I encourage Mr. Silva to continue to work with the building management to address the pest control problem in that building.

It seems to me that the housing authority is doing what it can do.

And I would also like to state that on behalf of the Florida Housing Authority, we will work with Mr. Silva as we do with all the other tenants.

If there are structural— in terms of building structurally deficient issues, if you need certain things done in the apartment, you can put a work order in.

We're just— I need you to comply.

You're not allowing entrance and you're refusing entrance to the maintenance workers.

When they're trying to attempt to make entrance into your unit in order to fix these issues.

So we're willing to work with you in order to do that, sir.

And we'd be willing to do that until you're satisfied with that.

But I don't think this is the means to be able to do that.

Before you speak, I don't think that it's fair for the Board of Health to be in a position where we're remediating between you and your landlord.

So, Mr. Chairman, I call the question.

I understand what the— what is the question?

That we deny the request to— Okay, that's what I just want to be sure for the record.

Can we have a test?

Can we have a roll call, please?

Sure.

Thomas, Corey.

Yes.

To deny.

Yeah.

Um, Michael Coughlin.

Yes, to deny.

Stephen Gagliardi.

Yes.

All right, Mr. Silva, we suggest you work closely with the housing authority and the building department.

And I'm sure we will get an update from Mr. Fiore and from Mr. Fernandez down the road.

Thank you very much for your time this afternoon.

Thank you.

Is there anything on the director's report?

I'm sorry, um, we had sent an amended agenda, um, today, early afternoon, um, because I had received word from, um, Dan Aguiar regarding— I'm just sorry, my, my, um, I'm pulling up the agenda so I have the correct address.

For a local upgrade request for 115 Newhall Street, Fall River, Dan Aguiar, the city engineer, was unable to attend but felt as though he was confident if the board could, could make that local upgrade request.

If you're comfortable with moving forward without Dan Aguiar and/or or representation from, from the address, we can vote today.

If there's any concerns, we could, you know, table it for next meeting.

But again, Dan was— Dan Aguiar was confident in sharing the information with you and having the board approve that request.

I trust Mr. Aguiar's judgment, gentlemen.

Yeah, I do too.

The request.

Second.

Can we have a roll call?

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Thank you.

Is there anything else under the director's report?

So, um, 2 things I did want to mention.

Um, effective August 28th, the state has, um, has issued kratom as a Schedule I substance.

So we've had some absences between myself, the food inspectors, and our tobacco control inspector.

So we'll be meeting tomorrow as a team to go over what that's gonna look like on the ground, kind of here locally in Fall River.

We're still awaiting some guidance from DPH in terms of police involvement or what other agencies will be involved.

Per the order, local health does have control and/or a designated, you know, municipal department.

So right now we're looking at what we're gonna be doing in the health department, educating, you know, our retailers.

We'll be sending out a memo to the retailers this week.

Again, we've kind of had some absences, so we're doing that this week so that the community will be on the same page and we'll be pushing information out.

Again, we're still awaiting some.

DPH is flushing some of that out and is having office hours with local health departments that we've been attending, so we're, we're kind of getting information as it comes, but on the local level, that went into effect on the 28th and we'll be handling the compliance end of that at this time.

So that's a, that's an update for us.

The other update I wanted to share through DPA, they're doing a community-wide survey, actually statewide survey that we'll be trying to get as many Fall River residents to push that, get as much data as we can for Fall River.

So Mass in Motion, our Mass in Motion coordinator is gonna be doing a lot of that work in terms of working out in the community and getting community members to participate in that survey.

They did this survey a few years ago and we, you know, had some responses for Fall River residents, but certainly we would benefit more as a community if more residents engage in that survey and complete that survey.

And we have a better picture of what's going on, you know, health-wise at the local level as it compares to communities around us and across the Commonwealth.

So that's gonna be open through, The fall, according to DPH.

They don't have a set timeline.

Um, so again, we'll be pushing that out and more information to come, but I'll send it all to you with the minutes so you can complete it.

Um, because that would be great to just have more data and have more folks engage in that way.

Okay, thank you.

Was there anything we see citizens input?

No.

Okay.

Gentlemen, for the next meeting, normally we would go with the last Monday of the month.

I am not available on, on the 28th.

And Tess was checking her schedule on what would be better.

So we're looking at Monday, August 5th.

How does that look for everybody?

I mean, October?

October?

Yes, October 5th.

Yeah, that's fine.

Fine.

Okay.

Um, is there any other business to come before the board that couldn't make the agenda?

No.

Okay, do we have a motion to adjourn?

So moved.

Second.

Do we have a roll call?

Thomas Corey?

Yes.

Michael Coughlin?

Yes.

Stephen Gagliardi?

Yes.

Okay, thank you all for spending the afternoon together.

Have a lovely rest of the day and a nice Labor Day weekend.

You too.

Thank you.