9.8.2026 Fall River City Council

This Fall River City Council public hearing will now be called to order.

Madam Clerk, roll call please.

Councilor Skadeem?

Here.

Camara?

Here.

Cannuel?

Here.

Dion?

Here.

Hart?

Here.

Peckham?

Here.

Pereira?

Here.

Raposo?

Here.

President Ponte?

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.

Motion open the public hearing has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

The time is 6:04, and these public hearings will now be called officially once again to order.

Item number 1, Massachusetts Electric Company doing business as National Grid and Verizon New England for one jointly owned pole location as follows.

This is on Airport Road.

The petition is proposing to install one Uh, new jointly owned midspan pole P19-50 on Airport Road beginning at a point approximately 300 feet east of the center line of the intersection of Skies Road and Airport Road.

This is in accordance with plan number 31303762.

Calling for all proponents wishing to speak on this item.

Calling all proponents.

Just come right down there to the microphone facing the council.

Yep.

Are you guys together or separate?

You're both with National Grid?

Yes.

Okay, great.

Just state your name and your address for the record, please.

Uh, Jeff Silva, National Grid, 245 South Main Street, Hopetown, Massachusetts.

Thank you.

Belinda Truong, Control Point Technology, 200 Ledgewood Place, uh, Studio 300, Rockland, Mass.

You're here to speak as a proponent.

You have the floor.

Go ahead.

Go ahead.

Uh, the poll for Airport Road is for the installation of a recloser for reliability of electrical infrastructure in that area.

Um, we ask that, uh, it pass, and if you have any questions, be more than happy to answer them.

Thank you.

Anything further?

Nope.

Very good.

Thank you so much.

You're good.

Calling all opponents wishing to speak.

You guys are good from the table.

Thank you very much.

And calling all other opponents wishing to speak.

Hearing none.

Item number 2, the Massachusetts Electric Company doing business as National Grid— you can stay there— National Grid doing business as Verizon New England for one jointly owned pole location on Bay Street.

The petition is proposing to install one new jointly owned midspan pole P23-50 on Bay Street beginning on the point approximately 75 feet south of the center line of the intersection of Barker and Bay Street.

This is in accordance with plan number 31290821.

Calling all proponents, please reintroduce yourself for the record, please.

Uh, Jeff Silva, National Grid, 245 South Main Street, Hopedale, Massachusetts.

Belinda Truong, Control Point Technology, 200 Ledgewood Street, uh, Studio 300, Rockland, Mass.

Uh, again, this is, uh, like the Airport Road one.

Uh, the pull is to install infrastructure for reliability in the area.

Uh, we would be installing area closure.

Anything further?

Nope.

Calling all other proponents, hearing none.

Calling all opponents wishing to speak on this item.

Calling all opponents, hearing none.

Item number 3, the Massachusetts Electric Company doing business as National Grid and Verizon New England for one new jointly owned pole location on Bedford Street.

The petition is proposing to install one new jointly owned 50-foot, foot, 50-foot Class 2 midspan pole, P55-50, on Bedford Street, beginning on a point approximately 142 feet southeast of the center line of the intersection of Eddy Street and Bedford Street between existing poles number 55 and pole 56.

The This is in accordance with plan number 31285835.

Calling all proponents.

Again, Jeff Silva, National Grid, 245 South Main Street, Hopedale, Massachusetts.

Belinda Truong, Control Point Technology, 200 Ledgewood Street, Studio 300, Rockland, Mass.

Again, this poll is for the installation of infrastructure.

Uh, it's actually another recloser for that area for reliability of the circuit.

I'm sorry, Mr. President, I didn't hear.

What is this pole near, um, between Eddie and Eddie Street?

Eddie and Bedford Streets?

Yes.

Right.

What is that for?

I'm sorry.

Uh, electrical infrastructure.

Uh, we're going to be putting a recloser on the pole to help with reliability in that area for the residents of Fall River.

All right, thank you.

I just didn't hear you.

Sorry, sir.

Any other— anything further from proponents?

Nope.

Are you a proponent?

As a proponent?

Or you're an opponent?

Okay, great.

Come on down.

Calling all opponents wishing to speak on this item.

Calling all opponents.

Just please just state your name and address for the record, please.

My name is Eileen Pacheco, and it's going to affect my how— where I live.

I live between pole 55 and 56.

Both properties that are involved are owned by family members, and I was out there on Sunday with my husband and we were measuring, and it seems like the new pole that you want to put— I'm very nervous— so the new pole that you want to put is going to be right next to my driveway.

I want to make sure that I know exactly where it's going.

Do you have any pictures of where it's going?

We can— we usually spray the area if not— if we can— if we can't stake it, usually mark the ground with a circle.

Okay, so I have that.

Okay.

I find that that's very close to my driveway.

Okay.

I've lived in this— I've lived in the city all my life.

I've lived on Beaufort Street for 50 8 years.

Okay.

So I know what Beaufort Street's like.

It's a busy neighborhood.

It's, it's a business district, and we have a lot of vehicles coming and going.

And my concern is I already have, I already have trouble getting out of my driveway because we have trucks, vans, construction trucks that block my driveway.

They don't have consideration.

They park very close.

So when we have to make the swing to get into our driveway, half of the time— my husband drives a truck— he has to go in the middle of the road, and sometimes he doesn't make it into the driveway.

So having that pole on the side is going to be very difficult for us.

Would it help if we shifted it 5 feet or more than that?

To be clear, I just want to just say this is a public hearing.

We're here to hear opposition.

And we're here to hear proponents.

We're just— I just, just— I'm going to allow you to speak.

They had the opportunity to speak as proponents.

In most cases when these situations arise, the city council is pretty cognizant of your feelings in, in as a resident.

So this would most likely, if it's the will of the council, to refer it to a subcommittee, which will be Public Works and Transportation, not necessarily act on this item tonight in approving it or not, to be able to hear from you, to be able to vet this.

But we're not going to do this here.

Um, but I just want to allow you— can you just state your name, your address again for the record?

I live at 1139 Bedford Street.

Okay, 1139.

And you, you still have the floor because I've already heard from the proponents.

So you're opposed.

You have as much time as you need to let the council know.

So it'd be up to the council as to whether or not they want to refer the item.

I actually took a picture of where that circle is.

My next question is, which I'm against Years ago, I don't know if it was the electric company, they had to get permission from my parents.

They wanted to have a wire go across and connect to the house.

So on the house now, on the left-hand side facing the house, there are wires.

I just did my whole house.

It cost me a fortune.

Are there going to be any wires that need to be attached to my house?

We'll discuss that.

Yeah, we will certainly have these discussions in our subcommittee.

I think what's important is the council knows that you are opposed to it.

And it's the will of the council when it comes to the full council after 7 o'clock to refer this to a subcommittee.

I think that would be the most appropriate thing to do because your, your concerns are valid, but they're not going to be answered right here.

They need that time to be able to, and you need time to be able to prepare yourself.

Now, will this be— will there be another meeting that I can attend?

Yeah, so what's going to happen, if it's the will of the council tonight to refer it to a subcommittee, the subcommittee will then— the chair will call the meeting, will invite you to that meeting, invite National Grid to that meeting.

You'll be able to speak as freely as you'd like, and then that committee will refer it back to the city council for action if necessary.

Can I also ask, why aren't you utilizing polls 55 and 56.

Why does a new poll have to go?

I hear what you want to say, and I really don't want to minimize debate, but this is just to hear from proponents and opponents.

Councilor in seat 7, Councilor Perot.

I would just request that the lady— if, if, ma'am, you could give your name and phone number so when they do have a meeting they can contact you, because you didn't sign in for citizen input.

So I would just give them your name and a contact information.

So they will call you.

You can do that.

Yeah, and they will— they'll call you.

Okay.

You have anything else?

Any— no, no, nothing else.

You're clearly opposed to it, and it's on the record as such.

Um, it would also— wouldn't be a bad idea for the two of you, between National Grid and you, to speak outside of the meeting, see if there's any compromise prior to coming before the subcommittee.

Okay.

Councilman C2, Councilor Camara.

While we're here, is the only concern you have that it's too close to property?

And he's made a suggestion if he moves it 5 feet that benefit you at all or not?

I, I'm okay with it moving it over, maybe up to the line where, where it is now.

It has a white circle and then there's that line.

I'm okay with that moving it as long as there's no wires going to be attached to my house.

So there will be no wires attached to her house and you'll be able to move it to where she wants it to go?

Potentially, yes.

Therefore, Mr. President, I don't think we need to have the committee.

We can vote on it today with the exception under those conditions.

If the council is willing to do that, because that's her only concern.

But if she can say exactly what she wants to get it done, I mean, I think we can air this out tonight and this way we won't hold up the project.

He's got to change them.

I, I just want to make it clear, Councilor, we have an order that's before us tonight.

We would need to amend the— we would need to amend the order.

We don't know if the dimensions are where they should be.

Yep.

So we want to do this right.

So yeah, just give them the information.

If you two want to talk outside and come to Thank you, thank you, Councilor.

Hearing other— hearing all other opponents wishing to speak, there are none.

Uh, Councilor, I'm sorry, did you have your hand raised?

I'm sorry, I didn't see it.

Okay, um, I, I don't mind having, you know, doing what, uh, Councilor Camara did, but when you said potentially, um, I think, I think, uh, we need to maybe go to the subcommittee just to— I can elaborate.

It's all based on how close the existing poles are out there already.

All right, I know.

So if, if we're within 30 feet between the new pole and the old pole, that's a problem, which is why I said potentially.

If it's 50 feet and we're going to 45, we can make that happen.

Yeah, but if it's 30 feet, we try to keep it that much away so that the safety of our workers— right, it's just my suggestion.

That we probably, um, iron it out in the subcommittee.

Yeah, it's got to go either way.

Do you yield, Councilor?

Oh, I'm sorry.

Yeah, Councilor in seat 6, Councilor Peckham.

I just want to put it on the record, my family lived on the side of Mrs. Pacheco for probably 30 years, and that intersection in itself is an issue.

My corner house where I lived was 1119, right next door, and that house was hit by motor vehicles more times than it should have been.

Um, so the obstruction of the view is, is a major concern there.

So if you could take that into consideration, I'd appreciate it.

Thank you.

I yield the floor.

Thank you.

Any other opponents wishing to speak?

Hearing none.

Item number 4, the Massachusetts Electric Company doing business as National Grid and Verizon New England for one jointly owned pole location as follows.

This is on Mott Street.

The petition is proposing to install one new, new jointly owned mid-span pole P 6 to 50 on Mott Street, beginning on the point approximately 125 feet south of the center line of the intersection of Cambridge Street and Mott Street, roughly 53 feet south of existing Pole 7.

This is in accordance with plan number 31304045.

Calling all proponents.

Uh, Jeff Silva, National Grid, 245 South Main Street.

Uh, Hopdale, Massachusetts.

Belinda Truong, Control Point Technology, uh, 200 Ledgewood Place, uh, Studio 300, Rockland, Mass.

Uh, we're petitioning to install a pole, also to, uh, install a recloser on it for reliability in that area for that circuit.

Thank you.

Calling all other proponents.

Hearing none, calling all opponents wishing to speak on the item.

Calling all opponents.

Hearing none.

Item 6, the Massachusetts Electric Company doing business as Verizon New England Inc. for one jointly owned pole location on Rodman Street.

The petition is proposing to install one new jointly owned midspan pole P53-50 on Rodman Street beginning on the point approximately 156 feet north of the center line of the intersection of Rodman Street and Warren Street.

The pole would be approximately 67 feet north of the existing Pole 54 in accordance with Plan Number 313.

04016.

Calling all proponents.

Jeff Silva, National Grid, 245 South Main Street, Hopedale, Massachusetts.

Belinda Truong, Control Point Technology, um, 200 Ledgewood Place, Studio 300, Rockland, Mass.

National Grid is looking to install a utility pole to install another recloser for a circuit in that area.

It's for reliability.

Hearing all other proponents wishing to speak, calling all proponents.

Hearing none, calling all opponents wishing to speak, calling all opponents.

Hearing none.

Item number 6, the Massachusetts Electric Company doing business as National Grid and Verizon New England for one jointly owned pole location as follows.

This is on Stafford Road.

The petition is proposing to install one new jointly owned mid-span pole P9-50 on Rodman Street beginning on the point approximately 147 feet northwest west of their center line of the intersection of Stafford Road and Pelham Street.

This pole would be approximately 38 feet south of existing Pole 9 in accordance with plan number 31304053.

Calling all proponents.

I am still Jeff Silva, 245 South Main Street, Hopedale, Massachusetts, National Grid.

Belinda Truong, Control Point Technology, 200 Ledgewood Place.

Uh, Studio 300, Rockland, Mass.

Uh, National Grid looking to install, uh, that existing, uh, that new pole, uh, 9-50, to install a recloser on that pole for reliability in that, on that circuit for the residents of Forever.

Thank you very much.

Calling all other proponents wishing to speak.

I think that will conclude the items that National Grid has before us on our public hearings tonight.

Thank you very much.

Again, once again, calling all proponents.

Hearing none.

Calling all opponents.

Calling all opponents.

Hearing none.

Item number 7 is Elvis Alexander Argdon Mendez of 84 Orange Street, Fall River.

This is an auto repair shop license in Fall River on 84 Orange Street, Fall River, Massachusetts 02724, doing business as Amada Auto Repair and Service, for a license to operate an auto repair shop at 830 Globe Street on Lot G13-52 according to the assessor's plan.

Calling all proponents.

Calling all opponents.

Hearing none.

Item 8, Jessica McClausland of 493 Reading Street, Fall River, Mass.

02720, for the removal of curbing as follows.

This is at 498 Reading Street, Montgomery— and Montgomery Street.

The existing parcel was previously served by a 13-foot opening on Reading Street.

The applicant requests permission to create an additional 12-foot curb opening driveway along Montgomery Street.

The total opening for the location will be 25 feet.

Previous asphalt or pavers will be required for any new driveway beyond the sidewalk area.

Calling all proponents wishing to speak on this item.

Calling all proponents, come on down.

Hi, I'm Jessica McCausland at 498 Reading Street.

You could just— I'm so sorry, I can't hear you.

Could you speak a little closer to the microphone for me?

Oh, there we go.

Hi, I'm Jessica McCausland at 498 Reading Street in Fall River.

The reason that we wanted to do that was just so we can put in a safe place for my mom to be able to, be able to park off street, especially with winter coming.

And then it would also give her a level way to get into the house and not have to go up and down stairs at all.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Anything else?

All right, Councillor in seat 4, Council Vice President Dion.

This is extending the opening.

It's actually a separate one.

It's a second.

Yes, exactly.

So my opening now is actually on Reading Street, so this would be on Montgomery.

Okay, so it's— yeah, so it's not 25 feet wide, correct?

It's 13.

The total.

Okay, thank you.

With that, I yield.

Thank you very much.

Hearing any other— anything else from our proponents?

No.

Thank you so much.

Calling all additional proponents.

Calling all opponents.

Hearing none, thank you.

Item number 9, a secondhand article store TVI Inc., doing business as Savers, 11400 Southeast 6th Street, Suite 125, Bellevue, Washington 98004, for the permission to operate and maintain a secondhand article store located at 133 Mariano Bishop Boulevard.

This is for resale of used goods to be sold.

Calling all proponents.

Calling— are you a proponent?

Okay, come on down.

Okay, just please introduce your name and address for the record, please.

So I'm Julia Cotto.

I live at 76 Mott Street in Fall River, Mass.

So good evening to, uh, Council President Pawn and the members of the council.

I live in Fall River.

I'm the district manager for Savers, and I oversee Massachusetts locations, so to include the Fall River location.

Um, at Savers, we offer high-quality goods, right, at good prices for customers, and we work with Big Brothers Big Sisters partners, um, to be able to drive their revenue.

So we pay for everything that gets donated to our stores.

And be able— they're able to then turn it into profitability for, for their organization, right?

Um, we've been with the— we've been with the city for 30 years, and as you guys probably know, we're really just moving one door over to make it a better operation for the teams that we have.

Um, and so we are— I'm here today to hopefully make sure that we can get that, uh, going and our team can move into a better location and operate Um, better really for, for the community.

Councillor in seat 7, Councillor Pereira.

Where exactly is the new location?

You're not going to be where you normally are?

Correct, it's literally right next door, so where American Free used to be.

Okay, okay, I thought so because the address— thank you.

Unfortunately, it just wouldn't transfer over.

Thank you.

Councillor in seat 3, Councillor Canuel.

Thank you.

Is this going to affect the donation center that operates in the back of the current location?

Affected?

And what do you mean by that?

Well, if you're moving down your location, uh, you know, down further in the plaza, the current location where people drop off things, will that change or will that stay the same?

Uh, no, so it'll actually move to the newer building, um, which is right next door.

Right next door.

All right, thank you.

Thank you.

Anything further?

Councilor Seat 8, Councilor Raposo.

Since, since we have you here and, and to Councilor Cano's point, with that moving over to the newer side of the building, is there any plans or different— a different infrastructure of how that operates?

Because I know as a council we've heard complaints as far as dumping and things like that are concerned.

So I'm just curious, what are the plans for that as you guys move over?

Honestly, that's a great question, and that's one of the things that we're most excited about with this new location, because currently we've kind of outgrown the space that we're in.

So a lot of the stuff has to get hosted outside and brought in daily, right?

I can't control the dumping overnight.

What we can control is how do we address it.

So she's here, but she didn't come up with me.

She's the store manager of the location, and what she's implemented is making sure between 6 and 6:30 we have a team come in that addresses all that dumping overnight and we keep it clean, right?

And then throughout the day we maintain that.

The good thing about this is nothing will need to be staged outside anymore because now with the new room that we have, all of our carts, Everything will be inside.

Trash is not on the outdoors, it's actually in the indoor when we're dumping it.

We're going to have loading docks now, so anything that we're doing for recycling, it's not noticeable to the customer.

So that's what the ideal situation is, that we were able to get this going, and the team's super excited about it.

Awesome, that's, that's great news.

Yeah, I yield, Mr. President.

Thank you, Councilman C4.

Council Vice President Dionne.

Yeah, I just wanted to comment.

Um, I Obviously I live in the South End, so I drive by there a lot, and I go by Laurel Street all the time.

And I have noticed over time how you have changed how you handle it and how everything is marked, and there's specific lanes and people have to drop it off a specific way.

So you've changed that tremendously over the years, and I, and I've seen that it has been much better, much cleaner, just with the action you already took.

So, um, I'm not worried about what you're going to do next door now with that because I, I've seen the, you know, you've made a concerted effort to, um, make that much better than what it originally was.

So with that, I yield.

Thank you.

The team works very hard.

Thank you.

Anything else from the council?

Good.

Thank you very much.

Calling all other proponents wishing to speak.

Calling all opponents wishing to speak.

Motion to close the public hearing.

Motion to close public hearing has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Pereira.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to adjourn public hearing.

Second.

Motion to adjourn our public hearing has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Pereira.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

This forum of City Council Committee on Finance will now be called to order at 6:28.

Madam Clerk, roll call please.

Councilor Skadeem.

Sorry.

Camara.

Here.

Canuel.

Here.

Dion.

Here.

Hart.

Peckham.

Here.

Pereira.

Here.

Raposo.

Here.

President Ponte.

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 where the perceived or unperceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible.

Councilor Perot.

Excuse me.

Thank you.

Well, there are people in our city that go above and beyond and do a lot.

To make our community better.

And one of those people is here this evening with us.

And Anthony Cordero, Tony, come on down.

You can bring the whole family.

Thank you.

Well, each year they select someone for the Roger Valcourt Outstanding Citizenship Award, and this year they have chosen Mr. Cordero, a man who at 24 started an insurance company, who now is there seldom because this this young lady here is running it for him.

She's there helping out.

And it's not only the developments that he's done— and look around at all the work in the area and all the economic development that you have done and how you've beautified the city— and it's not only that, but also to have a foundation that, again, this young lady good thing you have 2 daughters to help you out— runs to basically give to a lot of the nonprofits, and they give out a lot of money to help our community.

So I would say that, um, you're like a son of Fall River because you could invest anywhere else, but you invest in your backyard.

So on behalf of the city council— oh, before I give you this My neighbor across the street, Joe, I saw him yesterday.

We were outside.

And I said, Joe, are you working or are you headed to the Azores to make wine?

He said, no, they're making wine today without me.

He said, I'm working.

He said, right now I'm doing a job on Bedford Street.

Tony Cordero's building.

I said, oh yeah?

He said, yeah, you know him?

I said, ah, a little.

He said, He's a good guy.

You know, he comes by to see us all, the workers, and he's always dressed up so nice, and we're dirty from working.

He doesn't care.

He shakes our hands, talks to everybody.

And you know what?

That's because you're a son of Fall River.

Tenement houses that we grew up in, we don't forget.

You certainly don't forget.

And on behalf of the entire City Council, in recognition of your being a recipient of the Roger Valcour Outstanding Citizenship Award and for the long-standing leadership and volunteerism in our South Coast community.

We all thank you very, very much, and I'm going to let you say a few words.

So this is a special honor, and I think Linda has really said what we feel as a family.

Kira and I, we're both, uh, tenement people.

We love the city.

Um, she's absolutely correct in the sense that money can be spent anywhere and everywhere, but we have a goal, and the goal is to try to do whatever we can as a brother of the city and try to make the city better.

So we're committing and we're going longer and we're building more and better buildings.

But it's not the building.

Like I mentioned to Linda, the building is really owned by the bank and then really owned by the city.

Um, I'm just developing it, but it's the idea that you see growth and what we're bringing into the city will eventually spin the commercial side that I see, and that is the restaurants, the pubs, the extra barbershop.

And I'm hoping that takes place as you build critical mass, or what I call clusterization, in our area.

And we, we're moving up to 300 apartments.

We'll probably do 4 450 in the land that we own.

And I think that should be sufficient where people can live, play, and enjoy life right in the, in the downtown of our city, Fall River, which I consider to be a great city.

So thank you so much, Linda.

Thank you for recognizing that.

And, uh, we love you, we love the council, we love the city.

And my family, my girls, the condition was they got to live in the city.

If they leave the city, then they don't work for us.

Well, I keep going by Hyacinth Street and I see your beautiful house being built.

We got one already in the house.

Now we gotta get her.

All right, she tried, she tried.

Bridgewater is so far away from us.

Not too far, but you're not going to get supper from Mom if you're in Bridgewater, so you're missing out.

Chicken pot pie last night.

Okay, thank you.

Sure thing.

The big thing though is that when I was growing up is to be able to keep your kids here.

And both my girls are highly educated, and I'm glad that they're going to carry on beyond me.

I'm 64.

I'm almost on the other side, right?

But they know, because I've been coaching them for 20 years, that they have to take the money that they've earned and put it back in the city and continue to do what their dad and mom are doing.

That's a promise they made me, and I think they will keep it.

You have a wonderful family, great daughters.

I know them both.

And I am extremely thrilled with the work that both of them have done.

And you can't do all of that without having an incredible wife.

She's been a great gift.

She sure has been.

I'm glad you said that.

She tries to trade me in, but— You can go around and thank everybody.

I'm too old for that.

You're welcome, sweetheart.

You bring donuts too, but I couldn't say that because he's a different— All right, next item on our agenda is citizens input.

We've got 2 individuals signed up to speak.

First person, I think that says Ryan Duarte.

Is that correct?

All right, come on down.

I just need your address for the record.

You put USA.

Well, that's great.

I just need your address for the record.

Okay.

Okay, I'm not going to be the guy who invokes the First Amendment and tell you I don't need to give you that residential address.

So for the sake of the decorum here, I'll give it to you.

You can check it also out on the Superior Court case that I'm dealing with the city of Fall River.

Uh, Ryan Duarte, 332 Brock Avenue, New Bedford, Massachusetts.

Is there a motion to waive the rules?

So made.

Motion to waive the rules has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

Councilman C4 opposed.

The ayes have it.

Thank you.

I'm sorry, 332 Brock Avenue.

Brock Avenue.

Thank you.

You have 3 minutes.

I had to write this out because I have to be careful what I say.

I'll start off by reserving all my rights, and I'll let you know, tonight I'm here to formally request that the City Council exercise its oversight authority concerning the Fall River Traffic and Parking Department and the administrative procedures that have been used against me.

I've sent an email, I've made calls.

Mr. Kadeem, you've answered one of them.

I appreciate that.

Uh, the written request is for City Council oversight hearing, and I'm requesting that this statement, my written request, and the exhibits I'm submitting tonight be made part of the official record.

I also want to be very clear about what I'm asking this council to do.

I'm not asking the council to decide my pending civil action, which again, in a reference, the civil action number is 2673.

CV00559.

I am asking the legislative body of this city to review the conduct and procedures of a city department and determine whether those procedures are sufficiently clear, consistent, transparent, and fair to the residents who are required to use them.

I'm prepared to provide the documentary records supporting these concerns.

However, the city's position has characterized my communications as evasive or otherwise suggested that I have failed to properly pursue the appropriate process.

The documentary record tells a substantially different story.

I have repeatedly attempted to obtain public records, clarification, and an explanation of the procedures being applied to my circumstances.

Similarly to a witness in her own proceedings from the defective municipal proceedings.

She is facing the same obstacles I'm facing.

Rather than receiving a clear explanation of the governing procedure, I was converted into a scheduled hearing process that I did not request in writing and did not consent to as the method by which the underlying concerns would be resolved.

The administrative process resulted in enforcement information being transmitted or placed into my RMB record, creating consequences that affected my ability to renew my license and registration, yet I was not provided with a clear and understandable process explaining before those consequences attached.

So I ask you specifically, what procedure governed the matter?

What statute or ordinance authorized the particular procedure?

What exactly was I required to do?

What constituted a hearing request?

What constituted an appeal, what deadlines applied, and what mechanism existed to challenge the city's determination before it produced.

When a municipal process can ultimately produce consequences affecting a person's ability to legally operate or register a vehicle, residents should be able to identify the rules governing that process and understand how they can challenge an adverse determination.

How much time?

15 seconds.

I'll hurry it up then.

I'm asking the city council to perform its own governmental, governmental function to determine whether the city's administrative practices are sufficiently clear, consistent, transparent, and accountable.

I respectfully request that my written request, the statement, and exhibits I am submitting be formally received and preserved in the City Council's official record.

The exhibit showcases my consistent attempts to address Stephanie MacArthur, which were ignored or disregarded altogether.

Mr. Duarte, please say that again.

If you can just try wrapping it up, please, Mr. Duarte.

Okay.

Instead of corresponding meaningfully, she forced and unilaterally converted what she calls a scheduled hearing without my consent or participation, which then led to the RMV enforcement.

And again, Veda Boulay has spoken previously on April 26th, I believe, 2026, in regards to the same matters.

Some councilmen agreed that the notices weren't sufficient and the citations themselves were ambiguous.

There were meetings that were purported to be rescheduled to change the language on that.

There's no follow-up.

Mr. Duarte, thank you.

Councilman C4, Council Vice President Dion.

Would it be an accurate question or statement for me to make that you did take the traffic department, the DMV, and somebody else to court on this matter?

Correct.

And the judge ruled against you?

No, that's not correct.

He didn't rule against you?

No, there's still— it's still— it's still going, ongoing litigation.

He had no ruling at all?

The ruling was pursuant to the injunctive relief, which is still pending as there's reconsideration motions in the docket as we speak.

Can you explain that?

So essentially, my initial action was denied by the judge, and so you filed an appeal?

I motioned for reconsideration.

Okay, okay, that's— that part's pending.

Okay, so I guess as one counselor, and I can only speak for myself, I definitely will not take any votes, take any action, do anything that is opposite a ruling of a court, and the fact that you have appealed and it's ongoing, I think for myself I would need to wait until the results of that before I could— would take any action.

And with that, I yield.

Thank you, Councilor.

Can I respond?

Thank you, Councilor.

Seat 4, you have yielded the floor.

Thank you so much, Mr. Duarte.

Thank you.

Your citizens' input is up unless the council wants to waive the rules.

Was I able to respond to her comment?

Uh, the councilor had the floor and yielded it, so your time's up.

Thank you.

I've extended you much more than the 3 minutes.

And as for clarification on whether the oversight will be agreed or denied, uh, it's up to the council.

We don't have any documentation that you've delivered to the clerk.

I have it here.

I'm willing to submit.

Sure, if you'd like to give it to the clerk, uh, that we could accept it.

Um, and we can either accept it and place it on file at this meeting or at a future meeting, but we have not timestamped it yet.

So it's not officially a document of the city council, and I would need copies for every single city councilor for it to be deliberated between all of them.

And we don't— do you have— you have copies for everybody including the clerk?

I don't have 9 copies of each.

Understood.

We'll, we'll let you give the document to our city clerk.

She will stamp it and you can disseminate it amongst the councilors as they see fit.

Okay.

I also preserved the email that was the initial request.

Okay, thank you very much.

Thank you.

You want to speak as well?

Come on down.

Veda, uh, Boulet, Fall River, Mass.

Oversight review.

I just need your address for the record as well, please.

Um, 19 Grove Street, Fall River, Mass.

Thank you very much.

3 minutes.

Okay.

Okay.

Good evening.

I've spoken to many of you before.

I've spoken here before.

My name is Veda Boulet.

Um, I'm here again regarding the parking situation in my neighborhood that I previously brought before both the Traffic Commission and the council, and the approximate $830 in fees and citations that I am now facing as a result.

While the issue was occurring, about 11 spaces were removed from Brightman Street and Lindsay Street altogether, including the handicapped spaces that I guess they're now looking to amend.

Um, at the same time, parking enforcement was continued multiple times a day in that area.

Um, and I know Councilwoman Linda Pereira also confirmed that at our last ordinance meeting, that she had residents calling her saying that there wasn't enough parking since these new spaces were taken, and that the enforcement was happening multiple times a day.

It was even acknowledged in the council discussions, and I was actively working with the Traffic Commission and the City Council trying to resolve the loss of these parking spaces while the constant enforcement was happening.

So several councilors did express their concerns about what was happening.

There was discussion about whether residents should have received a warning warning.

I know, uh, Councilman Canuel had, uh, thought that warnings would have been more sufficient than letting everybody know with citations.

Um, so the affected parking spaces were voted to actually be reinstated.

So those spaces that were not parkable are now parkable again, as they were when I originally moved in there.

Um, the ordinance committee also voted that the appeal language on the ticket and the website was too ambiguous, that it was not clear that it was only $10 per citation— per license plate rather than $10 per citation, which was the biggest issue I faced because I was looking at $80, $90 to appeal these tickets.

I'm a MassHealth recipient.

I'm a full-time nursing student.

I'm an Army veteran.

And I collect food stamps.

So I didn't have $90 to potentially appeal these tickets.

I asked for an affidavit of indignancy.

I was told that the city doesn't do that and I could come up with a payment plan.

At no point within my 20-day appeal period did anyone tell me that it was only $10 per plate.

Otherwise, I could have absolutely appealed those tickets.

I can do $10.

That information wasn't given to me until after my appeal window closed.

My immediate response to that was, well, can I have a late appeal then, since now I have the proper information?

That was ignored.

Never got an answer.

Haven't heard anything.

5 months later, I get an invoice in the mail for $830 in parking citations.

The city had corrected those hardships, hardships that weren't clear enough that it's only $10 per plate.

And the 11 spots missing from Brightman Street, which if you're familiar with that area, is super congested.

There's more cars than there are spots normally, let alone with those 11s taken.

But now I'm still stuck with that hardship even though the city corrected it.

I've talked to the mayor, I've talked to city council, I've talked to ordinance committee.

I have been anything— I have been anything but evasive.

I have been very transparent trying to navigate every single avenue I possibly could.

And now again, there's a hold on my registration.

I'm a full-time nursing student.

I need to be able to get to clinicals to meet my requirements.

So the 3 things that I'm asking for this city council to do is I'm asking for my previously unanswered request for a late appeal finally be addressed and that the city identify a lawful way for my citations to receive an independent review that does not leave the subject of my procedural complaint, controlling that review.

Second, I'm asking for assistance having the registration hold suspended while this matter is being reviewed so that an unresolved administrative dispute does not interfere with my ability to attend nursing school.

And the last thing I'm asking the council is to exercise its oversight authority to investigate how the Traffic and Parking Department administers parking appeals and discretionary reviews.

Thank you.

I just have one more thing.

If you can wrap it up, please.

You're way beyond your time.

Absolutely.

So my issue was that I was told nothing can be done over and over again, but tickets were dismissed just through an email for another resident, and I was told nothing can be done.

And I, I mean, I went through every possible avenue to be heard just for fair— just for fairness.

That's all I'm asking.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Thank you.

That's it?

Yes, thank you.

Item number 2 is a resolution review inactive park capital projects to determine if $50,000 is available to support, support May's Playground.

This was adopted in July of 2026.

Please come down.

Please introduce yourself for the record, please.

Ian O'Neill, Sousa City Administrator.

Darryl Medeiros, Parks Director.

Emily Arpke, Director of Finance.

I'd like to recognize the sponsor of the resolution, Councilor in seat 3, Councilor Cannuel.

Thank you.

Um, we have a gentleman who's worked very hard to raise a lot of funds from the public regarding this.

I know that there's a lot of outstanding grants that we're waiting for status on, but specifically, you know, as I kind of went down the list of funding sources I didn't see any money coming directly from the City of Fall River towards this.

And I know community— I believe Community Development, CDA, had secured some funds.

We had the Community Preservation Act that was approved for some funds.

But I think, you know, these are our city parks.

There's a lot of people who would benefit from this in Fall River.

And I think, you know, just as we kind of was looking at the math of this and trying to get them to the finish line.

We're looking for, you know, $50,000 potentially, I think, maybe inactive capital projects related to the parks or anything like that, or any other funding sources you could identify to help, you know, ensure this happens.

This is greatly needed here in Fall River.

Miss, Miss Susa, thank you.

Um, yes, you're correct, uh, Community Preservation did, uh, contribute $200,000.

Community Development Block Grant was $100,000.

Uh, right now we are awaiting the Mass Disability Commission application for $250,000, uh, Mass Pot Grant application for $25,000.

There was an earmark from Representative Sylvia that was requested at $100,000 but reduced to $100,000 reduced to $10,000.

And then fundraising, thanks to Mr. Riley and a number of very generous, uh, businesses and individuals in this city, uh, last count, um, which Mr. Dion from CDA gave to me Last week was $83,601.44.

The city certainly is not opposed into making a contribution to this.

What we were waiting to see is if there will be any match from the parks grant that the city would need to put forward, um, in that regard.

The money right now in inactive projects for parks is $181,000.

$222.23.

Okay, so we have a substantial amount of money in active park projects, but when we talk about the outstanding one, uh, that grant— that's a $450,000 grant we're waiting on, correct?

$425,000.

$425,000.

Yeah.

So if that were to not get approved, what happens to the project at that point?

That's an excellent question.

Um, we are hoping to see that funding received.

Um, of course, Jasmine, who was our grant writer, is always looking for additional funding to fund projects in the parks, but there would need to be a decision made if that project does not come through as to whether that would be something we'd put on the capital improvement plan for the parks for future.

Yeah, I think when I think about this type of park, you know, we needed this park yesterday, right?

And so I think, you know, backburnering this is not an option.

I think I would like to see the administration have a Plan B if this grant application for whatever reason did not get approval.

Hopefully it does and everything's on track, but I'm just worried that, you know, if 425 falls through and we only have $181,000 in active capital projects, that, you know, it sounds like to me that, you know, the project would still have a substantial amount of funding behind it, just maybe the plans might have to be redesigned or scaled back at that point.

Yes, the total project based on the cost analysis was about $1 million, a little over a million.

And then my biggest question related to it, um, is the maintenance of it, right?

I, I think, um, I don't know, you know, all the ins and outs of the maintenance to keep this up, but obviously we don't want it to fall disarray.

We want to make sure that we spend $1 million on it, that we are, you know, spending and maintaining it.

Is there a plan to maintain this, uh, if and when the project comes to fruition?

It'll be maintained.

Like, the, the surfacing on this park is the rubber surfacing.

It's a lot less maintenance than the, uh, wood chips that we have to constantly maintain every year, every couple of months.

So that's a big plus with this.

Uh, project is that surface.

It's the same surface like Travasso's Park has.

It's got a long lifespan, minimal maintenance.

So that, that is— besides the maintenance on the equipment, that is— that surfacing is one of the main maintenance pieces in, in the playgrounds, is the, is the surfacing.

Okay, so I think I just want from the administration a commitment that you will provide the funding to make sure this gets to the finish line.

I think that's kind of the intention of the council here and what I put forward, because this resolution that I did file was, you know, directly in response to Representative Silva's reduction funding.

I just saw this as a very worthwhile project, something we really need in this city, and I want to make sure we get to the finish line.

This is our— this is our city park, this is our city, and I want to make sure the city is committed to making sure this comes to fruition.

You're looking for a commitment this evening, Councillor, that we would fund if the ADA grant and the parks grant does not come through?

It's over $600,000 to see the project through to fruition.

I am looking for a commitment, yes, that the administration make sure that we get May's Playground in some way, shape, or form, regardless of whether or not that funding were to fall through.

You told me there's $181,000 $222,000.

We've already secured $200,000.

We've secured $100,000 from a couple different sources.

The gentleman's raised $100,000 on his own practically with the generous support of businesses.

So, you know, I think we have quite a bit there towards this.

You know, I don't know the difference between, you know, a million-dollar project or a, you let's just say $600,000 or $700,000 project potentially, $750,000, whatever ends up being.

But I want to make sure that, you know, we get to the finish line.

This gentleman's worked really hard because he doesn't want to see this in 10 years.

He doesn't want to see this in 5 years.

He wants to see this now.

He wants to see this come, you know, get this grant, you know, in the fall secured, and hopefully, I would guess, maybe as early as spring break ground.

So I, I just would say that it's hard for us to make any type of commitment as an administration to funding anything when all of that would come down to council.

And, you know, you would have to look at it in a comprehensive sense with everything else that we have.

So I think it's the administration's wishes to keep this moving forward, and if something arises where there's a big gap, we would have to have a conversation with you.

To sort of commit that we would do it is hard, but we would absolutely have that conversation and see what the city can handle and what everybody wants to do to move it forward.

Okay, I'll yield for now.

Thank you.

Thank you.

I just want to not lose sight this is a city park, right?

And we have people— I'm going to recognize my colleague in seat 7 in a moment, but this is a city park that we have people fundraising money for when we should be fixing the park and doing the park as a city.

So if it wasn't for the work of everybody trying to donate, we have a city park that needs a sensory, you know, needs a sensory playground, we're not sure if we're going to get a commitment.

So to Councilman Seat 3's point, for clarification, the city's not in a position right now to commit to finishing the project if the grants don't come through, correct?

I didn't hear yes or no.

That is not a conversation I've had with the mayor yet.

I mean, I— we discussed the resolution, um, and we are following up very closely with the grant writer.

We're hoping to hear on the parks grant by the end of this calendar year, and soon after, uh, the first of the year, hoping to hear on the disability, um, the ADA, $250,000.

But I myself have not had a conversation with the mayor that he would be willing to commit the funding or send that down.

I am sure he is happy to do whatever he can, certainly to see this come to fruition, because as you said, Council President, A number of people have worked very hard.

A number of citizens and businessmen have stepped up.

So I'm sure the city is willing to step up to help.

Um, I just tonight, without speaking to the mayor, can't commit over $500,000.

I don't think that would be too responsible of me without having that discussion.

Council Seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

That was going to be my question.

Of the 2 grants that we have outstanding that we're waiting Um, when will we hear?

And you said by the end of this calendar year, the beginning of January, that we'll hear something to get it done for the spring.

They've already done the site visit, correct, Darren?

On the site visit on August 10th.

And I think at the time she said there was 12 or 14 other communities they had to visit for the same grants, and then the decision would be towards the end of the year.

They said they'd have a decision by the end, towards the end of the year.

I mean, I think that if we do get a grant, is there any money that we have to put in matching money to a grant?

If you do, then you have that $181,000 that you have left is in, in his budget and inactive.

So if you're going to need that to cost share with getting other money, I mean, I, I think we need to wait and see what exactly we're going to get.

Because I, I think it's something that's desperately needed.

Absolutely.

And we're in October.

I mean, we're waiting 2 more months.

The end, you know, we'll be in December and January.

Can we bring this back at that time that you get a response and see where we're at?

And then whatever other additional monies we have to put in, then we'll have an amount of what the additional monies are to put into it.

Yeah.

And I, I checked with Emily too.

This is not a project That was included in the capital improvement plan previously, um, because we were looking at these grants.

Now, um, that can change if those don't come to fruition as well.

Then you'd have to prioritize what capital, uh, investments are best, and then the council could do that.

But other than that, I say you got to wait till you find out what you're going to get on the grants.

Hopefully they'll come through.

I think the, um, Mass Commission, um, I think Mr. Pacelli, yes, helped with putting that grant.

Um, they're very supportive, the local disabilities.

He's very supportive, and, um, he's an excellent writer and knows every loophole of every law to get a grant.

He's very knowledgeable.

So I'm hopeful that that one will come in as well.

But I say it's worthwhile.

We all do want it.

We all do understand the need for it.

Um, but we have to wait and see what's going to happen with the grants coming.

So a few months, but I think we need to know then to get it ready so that it's up and running for the spring.

With that, I yield.

Thank you, Mr. President.

Thank you.

As just a point of clarification, Madam Clerk, do we know if a letter was sent to the governor, the lieutenant governor, and the Speaker of the House regarding this?

As a— it was, yes.

And when was that sent?

Do you have— it was— recollection was after our July 14th meeting.

It would have been soon after.

Yes.

Councilman Siegfried.

Councilor Daniel.

Thank you.

So if you're not prepared to commit, you know, potentially half a million dollars, are you prepared to commit the $50,000 that this resolution asks for from the inactive capital projects?

We just don't know if it's needed at this point in time.

That's the only reason that we wouldn't commit to that.

But if it's needed, you know, we would absolutely reutilize sources that we already have.

So yes, in that sense, but it's not a full commitment because if we don't need the money, then why would we— wouldn't commit it to a project, obviously, if it's not needed to fund it.

So what I'm hearing from you indirectly is that you believe if these grants come through, that this project has all the money it needs without the $50,000 that the council requested.

I mean, there's a potential for that, but we, we haven't bid out the project yet either, so we don't even have a firm cost on the project.

So it's both need to kind of happen and you know, we'll go from there.

And if we do have a gap to fill, we would obviously use those funds first.

That would be the priority, is to use what we already have, and then from there we could move forward.

The cost analysis that was done by the architects does show that the amount that would be raised if those grants come through fully would be more than enough to put the playground that was put together, the specs for that, without— to fruition.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Councilman Seedate.

Councilor Raposo, out of curiosity, when will we know how much is turned back from the Parks Department for this FY26?

Um, so your quarter 4 book would have, I'm going to say, an estimated amount in it.

Um, obviously there's encumbrances and all of that, and it's unaudited, so it's not going to be perfect, but it should be close to the number that would, would have been turned back.

Um, but I can without even opening the book, tell you that a lot more money was spent in parks this past year than it had been previous years with somebody working in the department full-time now and focusing on it.

So I think the turn back, if there is any, would be very nominal at this time.

When, when will we know for sure when that, when that's solidified?

When is it?

What's the timeline on that?

So technically speaking, when the audit closes, but, um, which would be next March.

But we'll have, um, we close the books on October 1st and roll them forward so we could get a more firm number at that point.

Okay.

But otherwise, the technical answer is when the audit is complete.

Okay, thank you.

Councilman C1, Councilor Kadim.

Thank you.

So at the end of the day, I, I think what the council is looking for is just a commitment for the, for the playground itself, right?

So I think it's fair to say that we are committed to the playground.

I know some folks are getting in the weeds and might not necessarily understand the process because I was going to bring up— you did mention it— what we have is an estimate.

We still have to go out to bid.

So I mean, it can come in 30% higher, it can come in 30% lower.

We don't know where it stands.

So at the end of the day, obviously, you've got to get the grants to come in.

So hopefully by the end of the calendar year there, we'll have some type of announcement, or at least early April, in terms of when the park grants are going to be issued.

And at that point, the administration would come down or at least give us an update as to where we stand with the grants.

Um, and a potential solution to funding the playground if, if that's what we're committed to doing, right, in terms of funding sources.

And, and I hear, uh, the free cash and looking at, you know, the Park Department, but at the end of the day, um, I think the council and I for one support this, uh, playground.

So whatever we need to do, uh, whether it's debt service, reallocating, uh, monies from the inactive accounts, or the utilization of free cash, a stabilization account, uh, to get the project moving forward, which I would think would be next construction season at the earliest anyway, um, standing based on where we are, right?

So, so if we can— the administration is absolutely committed to this project, right?

I think that would probably help a lot with that.

Okay, right.

With that, I yield.

Thank you.

Anything further?

Motion to table.

Motion to table has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to adjourn finance.

Motion to adjourn the Committee on Finance has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Hart.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Time is 7:06, and this floor of a city council meeting has now been called to order.

Madam Clerk, roll call please.

Here.

Tamara.

Here.

Canuel.

Here.

Dion.

Here.

Hart.

Here.

Peckham.

Here.

Pereira.

Here.

Raposo.

Here.

President Ponte.

Here.

If everybody in the chamber can please rise for a moment of silent prayer.

Thank you, and a salute to the flag.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

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 where the perceived or unperceived by those present and are deemed acknowledged and permissible.

Madam Clerk, good evening.

Good evening, everyone.

Mr. President, the first item before you is a communication from the mayor and a request for the confirmation of the appointment of— reappointment of Christopher Anteo to the Cultural Council.

Motion to confirm.

Motion to confirm the reappointment of Christopher Anteo has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Councillor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 1B is a communication from the mayor and the request for the confirmation of the reappointment of Vanya Marie Navarros to the Cultural Council.

Motion to confirm.

Motion to confirm the reappointment has been made by Councillor Peckham, seconded by Councillor Raposo.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 2 is a request from the mayor for the confirmation of the reappointment of Ken Shadegg to the Historical Commission.

Motion to confirm.

Motion to confirm the reappointment has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 3 is also communication from the mayor and a request for the confirmation of the reappointment of Richard R. Mancini to the Historical Commission.

Motion to confirm.

Motion to confirm the reappointment has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Canuel.

Discussion?

Hearing none.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 4 is the fiscal year 2026 quarterly budget report.

Motion to refer the item to the Committee on Finance has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Hearing none.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 5 is a communication from the mayor and a loan order for $10 million for the construction and/or improvement of city streets.

Authorized to be published and referred to the Committee on Finance.

Motion to authorize the item to be published and referred to the Committee on Finance has been made by Councilor Canuel, seconded by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion?

Councilor Incide, Councilor Raposo.

Just ahead of that conversation in finance that's coming up, can we get a list of what the plan is as far as those city streets are, an updated list?

Sure.

I will just state for the record that our city engineer has been Uh, delightful in keeping this council updated on a quarterly basis on, uh, the streets that are in, in, on schedule and to be scheduled.

I believe, I believe we're due for that update very soon, and I'm sure we'll get it by tomorrow if we don't already have it.

Um, maybe you've already sent it, but we'll be getting it soon.

But absolutely, we'll note that for the record.

Thank you.

I yield.

Anything further?

Motion to authorize the item to be published and referred to the Committee on Finance has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 6 is a communication from the mayor and a request from the purchasing agent for council approval to conduct a public online auction for surplus property.

Motion approved.

Motion to approve has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Councilman C7, you have a question?

Yeah, I— not a question, just a comment.

I would like for it to be somewhere on the website, uh, how people go online, um, for this auction, to go online and see what's there.

We used to have them in person.

Now, I don't know, everybody wants to do something on a computer, uh, except the council.

We don't want to do anything on the computer, but everybody else, I guess, does.

Um, and I just think that the public should know what website this is on for them to, um, get the surplus.

It's— I didn't see it in here, so I don't know if maybe Trevor can send that down or we can figure out how to publish that.

Madam Clerk, if you could send maybe a communication to Trevor and IT to get back to Councilor Pereira and share with the council in terms of what the online website is for the online public auction.

Share it with the, with the people of the city that may want to go online and put in bids for stuff.

I I don't do that.

I'm not really good with that.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Motion to approve has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussion, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 7 is a number of recommendations from the Traffic Commission for traffic ordinances.

Motion to refer the item to the Committee on Ordinances and Legislation has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Pereira.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 8 is a communication from the City Council president and the revised policy to the City Council regarding use of outside legal counsel.

Motion to accept.

Motion to accept the item and place it on file has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Councilor at seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

Yeah, there's 21 different things that we need to do to do this.

Why not, if somebody wants to get an outside legal opinion Come to the council floor, put it in.

I want to do an outside legal opinion because I want to check on this.

Okay, we vote on it.

Majority rules.

So instead of calling this, looking at, uh, looking up MGL laws and seeing what you find and writing this and writing that— not that I'll probably use it, but we make things so complicated sometimes.

Why not?

If you want another opinion, then you bring it to the council floor.

I'd like to have an opinion Because I don't agree with Corporation Counsel on this.

I want another opinion on this matter.

Okay, so we take a roll call vote.

I don't know, did you add that to the rules that we suggested to the council in the draft form?

I did.

Madam Clerk, is this on this item?

I didn't read it.

I did, I sent it in.

It's incorporated within the, um, the policy, but it's the will of the council to cut down on.

I mean, I thought it was just simple.

One thing, boom, you bring it to the council, we vote on it, boom, done.

You vote up or down, you're going to get outside or you're not.

But whatever you want to accept and place on file, that was, uh, what the motion that was just made.

Roll call vote.

Councilman C4, Councilor Dionne.

Um, I would agree that if there are matters to go to, um, outside legal, um, that the council weigh in on it and, and have a majority vote as to whether we move forward with it, with the idea, or not move forward.

There may be things that— there may be something, say I for instance, my thing is important, and the majority as a full council says, uh, not so much, I think we can live without that.

Um, so I, I would agree with a majority vote on Um, whether we send things forward or not.

With that, I yield.

Madam Clerk, where in this, uh, 21-page document would it refer to Councilor in Seat 7 and our vice president's concerns?

Uh, item 12 mentions the requiring of a 2/3 vote.

Um, I suppose you could amend that just to change it from 2/3 to majority.

What is the will of Councilor in Seat 7, Councilor Pereira?

You know, everybody talks about transparency.

Well, let's be transparent.

If somebody wants to use outside counsel because they don't agree with corporation counsel, and that's fine, any one of my colleagues can come and say, I'd like to have this checked by someone else, another attorney.

Okay, we vote on it.

You don't need everything else.

It's— it just make it simple.

That's my opinion.

But there's a body of 9 here, and the motion on the floor right now is to accept and place on file.

I know what the motion is.

I'm trying to advise is whether or not the council wants to amend it or not.

Trying to be helpful.

Councilman C1, Councilor Kadim.

Well, I'm going to make a recommendation that we just refer this to Finance Committee and just have a conversation or back and forth of what we want to see.

I think at the end of the day, we can have a very simple policy, and then when things go awry, then we're going to say, okay, what's the policy say?

Says nothing.

So then, you know, in a perfect world when everything is going well, we don't need a policy.

It's when things aren't going well that we need to make sure we have the policy.

I said from my standpoint, the intent of the policy, number one, is to just identify that all— and this is just me as one councilor— that all the legal opinions are still going to Corporation Counsel 1.

So we're not going out to outside legal.

The second piece is, is that this body, right, one individual of this council has no authority to go go ahead and seek a second legal opinion.

So I don't disagree.

So we, we should have either the authority from this, this body or vote to give the authority to either council leadership to authorize a second legal opinion.

Because one thing we don't want to do from a financial standpoint— we have limited budget— we don't want one councilor saying, you know what, this is an issue for me, I've got, you know, a pet project and I want to know where we stand on this, and so now I want to go seek outside legal.

So there goes our budget.

And then we've got another councilor doing something else.

So I think we just need to be on the same page in terms of what is being referred to outside legal, right?

And it should only be a second legal opinion on something we don't agree with from Corporation Counsel.

So the main point of all of our legal opinions should be coming from, from the 6th floor, in my opinion.

Outside of this, in terms of turnaround time, I think that's important, but I I think that if it's not going to be in the policy, when we're taking votes, we should absolutely highlight exactly when we want, you know, the opinion to be turned around.

Some of the opinions could be a month.

There are opinions that are time sensitive that would require, you know, a 2-day turnaround time.

And I think that needs to be communicated to the attorneys, whoever we have, so that they have the ability to just turn it around.

So whether or not we capture it in the policy, Um, I'm indifferent to that, but I think the overall concept and construct we, we need to really kind of consider.

And I just think we need to look at it from, if we're all in disagreement, how are we handling this policy?

Because that's what's going to drive it.

So I'll make a motion to refer it to Finance Committee.

Motion to refer the item to the Committee on Finance has been made by Councilor Kadim, seconded by Councilor Canuel.

Discussion?

Councilman Siede, Councilor Raposo?

Yeah, I was just gonna— at this moment, I have, I have a few concerns about policy in and of itself.

There's, there's a few lines in here that I just don't agree with.

Um, so I, you know, I want to back up Sean on his idea of going to finance because I think we need to actually go through it step by step and understand, A, what the implications are, but B, um, if there are parts that, that some of us may or may not agree with.

So support going to finance.

Understood.

I just, for the record, we sent a couple letters.

I know it's been summer and stuff.

We sent a couple emails to the councilors, council, if they wanted to make any suggestions to this.

Prior to tonight's meeting.

I don't want to think anybody's ambushing anybody.

We did send a couple letters out.

If anybody had suggestions, we could have emailed the city clerk and we could have made those changes tonight.

There's no rush in this.

There's nothing pending in any way, shape, or form.

But I was trying to be proactive in that effort.

Yeah, just to be clear, I, I responded and all that, but I guess my, my concern is there were some things added to this that I don't necessarily agree with.

So I want to make that known and to see if there's appetite to change it at all.

Understood.

Thank you, Councilman.

Councilman C4, Council Vice President DeYoung.

Um, we did have a motion on the floor already that would need to be withdrawn, I would assume.

The, the motion to refer will take precedence over that.

Okay, thank you.

Motion to refer has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussion on the motion to refer, I'm good.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, if we can get that on for the next meeting, please.

No problem.

Thank you.

Item 9 is a communication from the Corporation Council requesting that Section 2-33 of the city code relating to the authority to retain outside legal counsel be removed from the city code.

Motion to refer to Committee on Ordinances.

Motion to refer the item to the Committee on Ordinances and Legislation has been made by Councilor Canuel, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to take item 14 out of order, please.

Motion to take item 14 out of order has been made by Councilor Canuel.

Second by who?

Uh, by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion on taking that out of order?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Madam Clerk, item 14.

Whereas the Fall River Industrial Park landfill has been closed for 14 years and the City of Fall River has not yet arrived at a fair, equitable, or comprehensive solution to address an ever-growing challenge regarding disposal of trash and recycling, and whereas expediency has been prioritized while addressing the exorbitant cost of solid waste and recycling disposal without a comprehensive financial evaluation, and whereas there are approximately 10,000 residential properties within Fall River and the city utilizes a formula to determine the number and size of the carts each property should have, but the administration has not yet obtained an inventory of excess carts distributed and the related impact this has on overall disposal costs.

Now therefore be it resolved that the Committee on Finance convene with the city administrator, the director of city operations, the director of community maintenance, the Director of Financial Services, and Attorney Matthew J. Thomas, Esquire, to discuss developing a comprehensive plan to obtain an accurate financial analysis related to the cost and distribution of solid waste and recycling carts.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Canewill.

Discussion?

The sponsor of the resolution, Councilor in Seat 4, Council Vice President Dion.

Yeah, the reason I wrote this resolution— so on our agenda tonight is the proposed ordinance to vote on, on taking 5 and 6 families off, um, an ordinance so that they— their trash isn't picked up anymore.

Um, and after a lot of thought and consideration, I had paperwork which identified how many, uh, 6 families— this is only 6 families that there are in the city of Fall River.

And it was— I don't have my paper with me now, I'll have it for that meeting— I believe 591 that actually have carts.

Collectively, they have 159 carts in excess of what they are supposed to have.

So I did some basic math, um, and I divided the 591 into 9,500 uh, residential properties because there's 10,000 properties in the city.

The long and the short of it is this: we potentially have 3,000 carts out there in the city of Fall River that should not be out there.

And I think we need to track it, find out what the exact number is, because if I'm even close, the cost of those 3,000 carts falls just short of taking 5 and 6 families off of trash pickup.

So if we can offset the cost of trash simply with pulling in 3,000 carts and still be able to pick up 5 and 6 families, I think that is the more fair and equitable way to do it.

And then we can offer anyone who feels they need the extra carts, if they want to pay monthly for additional carts, they're welcome to do that.

That it will not be a tax, that'll be a user fee, because people will still get their trash picked up, but they're going to go according to the formula for how many carts each house will have.

And with that, I yield.

To be clear, Council, you said there's 3,000 additional carts.

So if you have a single-family house or a two-family and you requested 3 more carts, you're saying there's 3,000 of those requests possibly out there?

Oh yeah.

Understood.

I just wanted to clarify.

There's one six-family alone.

A six-family is supposed to have 3 trash carts, 95-gallon.

There is one out there that has 7.

Understood.

I just wanted to clarify.

I want to make sure I heard you right.

Councilor in seat 3, Councilor Canuel?

No, you didn't raise your hand.

Councilor in seat 6, uh, 7, Councilor Pura, you raised your hand.

Yeah, uh, you know, my concern, who's going to count the carts and who's going to go around and what is that going to cost the city to count the carts?

Is Easy going to count the carts or Capital Now, or is it going to be our workers that have counting them.

And the other thing is, because of the cost of rents, etc., there are many people living in one tenement property, whatever, or one house.

They've got family members living there as well.

There's a lot of that going around in the city, and we don't have anybody checking into that.

So they, you know, instead of having 2 people, maybe now they have a daughter or son-in-law and 3 kids living there.

So you've got 5 extra people plus 2 that they need more.

It's, it's stuff.

I think we need to resolve the trash problem.

Everybody's afraid to do it, but we need to look at the whole picture and get it done.

I just heard this week— I don't know if it's true or not— but if we have bulky items, that Capital's going to charge us for bulky items.

Like, I don't even know what this trash contract says.

We've never gotten a complete copy of it.

Maybe we need to get that.

But I say you need to have a whole meeting on all this trash and Resolve it.

This mayor's been here for 6 years.

Resolve it.

That's just my 2 cents.

Thank you.

I yield.

Thank you, Councilman Sieck.

To Councilor Camara.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I just want to make sure I'm clear on this.

So if someone does want a second cart, there's just an additional fee that they'll pay for it annually or monthly, either way, whatever the case.

Yeah, okay.

I just don't want to deny someone the ability to have a second cart.

No, no, no, no, it still allow— yeah, right now it's a one-time fee as I understand it, and that's it.

But if they want to get one, they can request it, pay the fee for the cart, and then the continuous fee for me for the pickup of the cart.

That's fine.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor.

And C6, Councilor Peckham.

I just want to say I agree wholeheartedly with the overpopulation of our apartments.

My problem with this is though I filed the resolution in the last meeting I was unable to attend to figure out our population Because again, everything we do in this city comes down to the number of people that we're servicing.

So until we find out that number, all of these conversations, in my opinion, opinion, are moot.

Because if we don't know the amount of people we're servicing, that number is just going to skyrocket eventually.

So I do agree with you, Councilor Pereira.

We do eventually have to go around this city and find out how many people are living here It's basic democracy and taxes.

So if you're starting off a city, let's say, and you've got 50 people, you're going to come up with a number that you reach contributing to the advancement of your society.

How are we budgeting the city?

How are we coming up with numbers and approving them if we do not know the amount of people that live here?

Everything we talk about comes back to that, and you just hit the nail on the head.

With that, I yield.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor.

C4, Council Vice President Dion.

So how are they going to count the carts?

The same way they did the 6 families.

I have the paperwork.

It was given to us on the trash task force by the city, who counted every cart that every 6-family had— every recycle, every trash, and every yard waste cart.

They know exactly how many carts each house has.

We have people every day that they pick up trash.

There are— I shouldn't probably call them trash police.

They take— they walk the routes, they drive the routes.

It isn't difficult to drive by a house and see at a single family 3 trash carts instead of 1 and mark it on a piece of paper.

I don't think it's rocket science.

I don't think it's difficult.

And in terms of the population, that's the point.

If you follow the formula and a single family is supposed to have one 65-gallon trash, one 65-gallon recycle, and there's 7 people instead of 3 living in the house, they're going to say, I need another cart.

And the city is going to say, okay, and it's going to cost you this much, this much money a month to have it, which is going to offset the cost for the city instead of the city absorbing this cost now, which is hundreds of thousands of dollars.

We're going to be able to keep everybody on the, on, on the, uh, with their trash being picked up, and then only the people who need extra will ask for extra and will have the ability to pay for it.

And I don't think anybody will have a problem with that because you're going to get your initial carts, which are come when you pay your taxes, your, your trash and recycle gets picked up.

So you need more than that, you want more than that, you are welcome to it.

So we'll save hundreds of thousands, and then there won't be any additional cost to the city because the people will pay to have them.

And, and I, I don't think it's going to be that difficult.

I mean, I drove around the city and counted every business that had trash and recycle carts and how many they had, all by myself.

Um, that took time, but I did it.

I mean, it isn't hard.

Drive down the street on a trash day and look at how many carts are out in front of the house.

I, I don't think it's that difficult, and it will address the population issue at the same time, I believe, because they will need the extra carts.

So with that, I yield.

Thank you, Councilor.

In seat 7, Councilor Purrer.

I don't disagree with everything my colleague says in seat number 4.

However, How long ago did we have that meeting on trash that we were on the committee?

What was that, 3 years ago?

So if you found that the carts at that point was over 3,000, it's got to be more now.

If 3 years ago, and now you've got more people living, uh, you know, in units together.

I know there was one community that did an ordinance that the only people that could live jointly, they had to be like one generation distance or something like that.

I was shocked.

But I did see that, and that— you know what, it was in the, uh, in Milford.

But I think we need to put the task force together and get the job done, is what I think.

But I've been on 3 task forces for trash, and they all fizzle out.

With that, I graciously yield.

Thank you, Councilor Incide.

Councilor Raposo.

Yeah, just to clarify, wasn't there an audit done by DCM about the amount of carts that were done in the city?

Didn't they go around and scan them and remove the ones that were Nope, only business.

Can we, can we get clarification on that?

Because it's my understanding that that's what they were working on and doing.

When?

I— last year maybe, that was a conversation.

If we could get some clarification, maybe a communication to DCM about that, I think that would be helpful.

Madam Clerk, if you may just send a letter or an email, if you can, for the record, to DCM tomorrow, a copy of the council— to Councillor Raposo's point.

It'd be appreciated.

Valid question.

I don't recollect any of that.

You yield?

I yield.

Councilman C4, Council Vice President Dion.

What was the last thing you just said?

I was going to respond.

I just said that if we had our trash meeting a few years ago— so, but that's— so that's part of the problem.

We spin our wheels and spin our wheels and spin our wheels.

We talk and we talk and we talk and we never take action.

That's the whole problem.

Just like how many times have we Listen, before they just did this new contract, the year before, how many times did we hear, in 2 weeks we're coming down, in 2 weeks we're coming down, we're going to this, we're putting something together?

They never came.

So this is about bringing them to the table and saying, listen, we're not voting on anything until you do what you say you're going to do.

How many times have we heard, oh, we're going to be bringing down an ordinance for a 3-strike rule?

Has it happened?

No.

And guess what?

That's more people off the, the trash list if they don't follow the rules.

And that's— that again, that's also part of the conversation I want to have.

It's like, you know what, you want to vote, you want support, you want to solve the problem?

Well, guess what?

You get no vote until we straighten it out once and for all.

And with that, I yield.

Thank you, Councilor.

And C1, Councilor Kadim.

The only thing I wanted to say was everything that Councilor C. Forsythe, so ditto to that.

But I agree with everything she said.

Ditto.

Um, can we, can we get a list?

I was going to ask, uh, along the lines as Councilor on C Day, uh, my understanding was when the carts went out there was a barcode so that they would scan the barcode so they know exactly where the cart belongs to which property.

So I imagine that there is at least a database where these carts are, so that would hopefully help us kind of get an understanding of how many cards are actually out there.

Um, so I would imagine that they're still maintaining and keeping up with that, I guess, that spreadsheet or whatever that system is that they're using to, to track these cards.

It would just be interesting to see.

Um, I know she had the numbers, but it would be interesting to be able to get that report if, if they have something like that without a yield.

Thank you, Councilor.

Councilman Seat 2, Councilor Camara.

Yeah, I just want to— I mean, last year the state of Massachusetts passed the ADU unit dwelling there, the additional dwelling unit on property, if it qualifies.

So you're going to have more people living on the same piece of property, and there's going to be more carts and trash to be picked up as well.

So it's good that we try to get a grip of how many carts are out there and, you know, what they're going to pay for.

If they want additional ones, they can ask for them and pay for them on a regular basis because it's only going to increase.

With that, I yield.

Thank you, Councilman C4.

Council Vice President Dionne.

Unfortunately, I started this fight before I ever became a city councilor.

And way back when, I made that statement to somebody.

You've got the barcodes on the carts.

Why don't you know how many carts are out there?

And I was told, because we don't use those barcodes, we have no idea.

Since then, we've heard we're now able to put them in the system with the barcodes.

So again, I'd love to know Where are we?

Did that— was just— was that just a sound bite that sounded good, or is that the reality now?

Because if it is the reality, it's something new, and they do not have an accurate count.

Because if they had an accurate count, and if I'm right and there was somewhere around 3,000 carts out there, why don't they know that?

And why haven't they gone and gotten them and pulled them in to save the city money?

And those are the answers that I want.

So with that, I yield.

Councilman C2, Councilor Camara.

Yeah, I just want to point out one thing.

We can go on this forever, but the people who are there now were not the people who were there when these cuts were rolled off.

So that's probably why they don't know, and they're trying to gather that information to make it more, you know, more explanatory.

It's— you're talking to different people now, different department heads and different people who work there.

With that, I yield.

Thank you.

I just want to recognize our colleague in seat 4 for a creative solution-based resolution.

So that we've been talking about trash for 25 years in the city, and if this makes a little bit of a dent, I applaud your efforts.

So I'll be supporting the resolution.

Anything further?

Motion to adopt the resolution has been made and seconded.

Harry, no further discussions.

All those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Thank you.

Madam Clerk, item 10.

The Committee on Ordinances and Legislation, at a meeting held on August 11th, 26, voted 3 ayes, 2 nays, to recommend that the accompanying proposed ordinance be passed through second reading and enrollment, with Councilor Canuel and Councilor Pereira voting in the negative.

This is the proposed ordinance amending Section 62-2C of the City Code for solid waste collection and disposal generally.

Motion to reject.

Motion to reject.

Motion to reject has been made by Councilor Canuel.

Seconded by Councilor Pereira.

Discussion?

Councilman Seat 1?

Uh, so I, I, I guess I'd support a motion to table until we had a conversation about the other one.

So I just don't support the rejection part.

So motion to reject will take precedence over that.

I've entertained that.

Motion to reject has been made and seconded.

Roll call.

Roll call.

Uh, would that be granting the item leave to withdraw?

Uh, reject slash leave to withdraw would be the appropriate motion.

Yep, I'll acknowledge that.

Thank you.

Councilor Skadeem?

No.

Camara?

No.

Canuel?

Yes.

Dionne?

No.

Hart?

No.

Peckham?

No.

Pereira?

Yes.

Raposo?

No.

President Ponte?

No.

Motion to table.

Motion to table has been made by Council Vice President Dionne, seconded by Councilor Hart.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The eyes have.

And for the record, Madam Clerk, if you can just make sure— there were some questions on the resolution that we discussed regarding trash, uh, regarding the number of carts, and a number of other questions that Councilor Raposo had as well.

You can let the respective department heads know that we'll be adding that item on our next regularly scheduled City Council meeting so they have enough time to prepare for any of the questions councilors have.

And if any councilors have any additional follow-up financial questions.

If you want to get it in ahead of time, that will be able to allow them to prepare themselves.

That would be appreciated as well.

Okay, thank you.

Next order of business, item 11, is the proposed ordinance for second reading and enrollment for miscellaneous traffic.

Motion so made.

Motion to pass the item through second reading and enrollment has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Whereas from time to time curb removal applications are submitted after the curb removal work has been completed without the required permit, and whereas Section 8-110-13 of Appendix A Fee Schedule of the City Code, which relates to streets, sidewalks, and other public places, includes a fee of $250 for curb removal applications and whereas the city code does not include any additional fee or fine that may be applied when such work is completed prior to applying for and obtaining the proper permit from the City of Fall River, now therefore be it resolved that the Committee on Ordinances and Legislation convene with the city engineer and Corporation Council to draft a proposed ordinance establishing a fee or fine in an amount greater than $250 to be applied to after-the-fact curb removal applications.

Motion to adopt has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Council Vice President Dion.

Discussion?

Sponsor and the resolution content, C2.

Councilor Camara?

I'm all set.

Very good.

I just wanted to acknowledge you.

Hearing no further discussion, motion to adopt has been made and seconded.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Whereas Oak Grove Cemetery, a garden cemetery established in 1855, is the final resting place of many notable residents and representatives of Fall River, including actors, artists, humanitarians, and politicians, and whereas this landmark is the largest active city-owned cemetery with monuments that reflect the names of those who operated textile manufacturing mills that drove the city's economy in the 19th and 20th centuries within its 130 acres, and whereas Oak Grove Cemetery attracts visitors due to the many noteworthy burials, including the Borden family plot, the gravesite of Lewis Howard Latimer, and the Hargraves Mausoleum, and whereas there have been recent renovations to various areas of this property that have raised concerns with residents and local elected officials due to the lack of consistency with the cemetery's historical landscape.

Now therefore be it resolved that the Committee on Economic Development and Tourism convene with the city administrator, the director of city operations, and the chair of the historical commission to review current and proposed renovations at Oak Grove Cemetery, discuss protocols to ensure the preservation of historic memorials, gates, walls, and other significant features, and examine plans for the continued maintenance and protection of one of Fall River's most popular historic tourism destinations.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Council Vice President Deanne.

Discussion?

The sponsor of the resolution, Councilor, and seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

Well, I started getting calls early in the morning when people saw sky blue paint on the Oak Grove entrance to Oak Grove Cemetery.

And then it was told that that was primer paint that was left over.

They were going to paint it gray.

However, that's an Olmsted cemetery, like many of our Olmsted parks.

We have a historic commission.

I don't think we utilize them enough.

They're left out of the loop, and I don't think that should be the case.

I think they should be involved in a lot of situations in Fall River, and then, you know, they can send an email to the council to let us know what they've noted on something, so when constituents call us, we have answers for them.

Um, I think that that would be prudent.

I know that, um, I did talk to Mr. Mancini about a marker, and Council Peckham knows about that.

There was a marker from the Freedmen Land Purchase, which was up in, you know, up on North Main Street, and that marker was put in the Historic Society.

But when I talked to Mr. Mancini, he said, I found out about it 3 months ago, we worked on it.

Like, we didn't know any of that.

Is that a symbolic thing?

Should it have stayed there?

How are we selling land, or how did that land get sold when there's something from the city of Fall River that's there?

So I think that they need to, you know, get more involved.

Uh, Councilor Peckham did call the Historic Commission and they met and did it.

But they wish too that they would have had a little bit more time.

And how did the city sell that with us not even knowing it was there?

A cemetery that they only found out 2 years ago there was a cemetery there.

I can clarify all of this.

I've been working on this for 6 years.

In 2020— Consulate, let's— if we could just let Councilor Pereira finish, and then I'm going to get you the floor.

No, no, that's fine.

You, you yield?

Yeah, I'll yield the floor.

And yeah, absolutely.

So in 2020, I was notified by director of a department in Freetown about this stone.

The stone was not on Fall River's property.

The stone belonged to Ship's Watch Apartments.

So 20— back in 2020, I was working on figuring out what we were going to do with that stone, if it was eminent domain, if it was easier just to take it out of the ground.

Then COVID hit, so nothing got done.

Fast forward to this tenure, it was at the top of my list to preserve that stone.

It was set in 1653.

Um, we've had 3 high schools in 100 years.

That stone stood there for almost 400, so I wanted to preserve it.

The problem was it's on private property, so I reached out immediately to the Historical Commission.

They were in the loop from day one, all the way back to 2020.

The Historical Commission was involved with Mike Martins.

I had discussions with him, and the Mass Historical Commission cleared us to remove the stone.

That conversation was had between Mr. Mancini and a gentleman named Michael from the State Historical Commission and the attorneys from Ship's Watch Apartments.

So everything was rectified, all i's were dotted, all t's were crossed to make sure that we were within our legal boundaries to remove that stone.

Ship's Watch gave it to us.

So that's the story behind the stone.

With that, I yield.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilman.

Seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

And that's my exact point.

How did Ship's Watch buy that property?

Who owned that property before them to build that there?

How did we have something historic there that we didn't know about?

Did the city own that land at one point, and how did that transfer?

And I certainly— I guess I could go to the registry of deeds and the cemetery's— the cemetery's— as the stone was not in the cemetery, the stone was approximately 24 or 25 feet south.

That's fine.

Of the wall, and that was on Ship's Watch's property.

That's fine, but how did Shipwatch purchase that?

Was that owned by the city before?

How did something get placed?

Was it placed on somebody else's property and that person sold it?

Like, I just think that there's— just for one further clarification, point of clarification, Councilor Pegham, there was about 25 other stones that existed that we, we estimate about 25 others because there was 26 plots of land from Rodman Street to Freetown.

All of those are gone to the best of our knowledge.

So this was the last one.

That's why I wanted to preserve it.

Um, they just build, develop, and knock them down.

So I just wanted to make sure that that did not happen with this one.

Thank you.

I yield.

And I will just finish by saying we have a historical commission and all of these things that happen.

Let's figure out a way to research to make sure that things like this don't happen again, that the Historic Commission be involved right from the get-go, especially when land is being sold, and land in the North End that had a lot of, um, maybe indigenous properties or what have you, um, to look at that.

I just think we have a good Historic Commission, and they would— you know, I would like to have them aware of the history of Fall River.

We tend to want to get rid of our history, and I'm glad that Councilor Peckham saved that, and it will be placed in the Historical Society.

But I just think the Historical Commission is there for a reason, and we should fulfill the reason that we have a Historical Commission.

With that, I yield.

Anything further?

They should have done something.

Motion to adopt as amended, seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Whereas residents of Fall River deserve clear accessibility and user-friendly information regarding how municipal revenues are allocated and spent, and whereas other municipalities within the Commonwealth provide interactive financial transparency tools that allow residents to search for government spending by category, department, fund, vendor, and other relevant criteria, now therefore be it resolved that the Committee on Finance convene with the city administrator, the director of financial services, and the Director of Management Information Systems to discuss the creation of a public-facing interactive financial transparency portal utilizing the city's existing financial systems and data, allowing residents to search and review municipal spending by category, department, fund, vendor, and other relevant criteria.

And be it further resolved that the administration provide frequent updates to the Committee on Finance regarding the development and implementation of this program.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt the resolution made by Councilor Vice President Dion, seconded by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion?

The sponsor of the resolution, Councilor in seat 3, Councilor Canuel.

Thank you, Mr. President.

I'm pleased to introduce this resolution because I believe we can do a better job of making Fall River's financial information accessible to the public.

If a resident wants to know where their tax dollars are going today, that information is public but finding it and understanding it can be difficult.

What I'm proposing here in this resolution is an open checkbook, an interactive tool that allows residents to actually explore the city spending.

For example, a resident could search for a particular department, vendor, fund, or spending category, see how much is spent, and then drill down further into the individual transactions and payments that make up that spending.

In Arlington, Mass., you can even get down to individual check number.

That's the level of transparency I aspire for Fall River to reach.

And this isn't a new or experimental idea.

As I mentioned, Arlington, Mass.

has one.

New Bedford has one.

The Commonwealth has one.

There's also an interesting Fall River connection.

Adam Chapdelaine, who previously served as Fall River City Administrator, who went on to become Arlington's Town Manager, and about 4 years after leaving Fall River, Arlington implemented its open checkbook under his administration.

And Arlington's Open Checkbook was designed to link directly to Munis, the same financial system we use here in Fall River.

I've also confirmed that our Munis system can support this type of functionality as an add-on feature.

So we're not talking about replacing our financial system or making a major technology investment.

This should be a relatively low-cost way to make better use of the financial information and technology we already have.

The goal is to make that information searchable understandable, and accessible to everyone.

And this isn't about replacing audits, it's about giving residents the ability to look for themselves.

The information may already be public, but public information isn't truly transparent if people can't find it easily and understand it.

And I believe an open checkbook would be a meaningful step forward towards greater transparency, accountability, and public trust in how we manage taxpayer dollars.

I respectfully ask that my colleagues support this resolution.

Thank you.

Yield to Councilman C4, Council Vice President Dion.

I think this is probably one of the best resolutions that I've heard.

Um, I think it's exactly what people are looking for, and even us as councilors at budget time, this would make our life so much easier.

You want to know who works for the city?

Outside vendors is what I mean.

Sorry.

Oh, thank you.

Sorry.

That was you.

That was me.

Yeah.

I couldn't hear you, so I figured I'd hear you from here.

Oh, that's okay.

Oh my God.

So when we outsource, who are we outsourcing to?

How much are we spending?

How much are they getting paid and what are they doing?

All the questions we ask all the time.

Time that we never seem to get the answers for.

And this is— and we would get the answers.

Um, I would like to commend my colleague.

He has come a long way since his first resolution, and I do support this.

And with that, I yield.

Thank you.

Very good.

Thank you.

Anything further on the resolution?

Thank you very much, Councilor.

Motion to adopt has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Whereas the Human Resources Compensation Study is currently being solicited for bid by the City of Fall River to compare various employee salary schedules with other municipalities, and whereas from time to time proposed ordinances with recommended salary amendments are presented to the Committee on Ordinances and Legislation, and whereas determining, determining a reasonable salary salary limitation for various positions can be challenging without comparable data from other cities and towns.

Now therefore be it resolved that the Committee on Ordinances and Legislation convene with the Director of Human Resources to discuss the planned human resources compensation study, ways that the data collected within the study may be utilized for future financial decisions, and how this study may affect future proposed ordinances to to amend existing salary totals.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt the resolution has been made by Councilor Raposo.

Second.

Seconded by Councilor Pereira.

Discussion?

The sponsor of the resolution, Councilor in seat 8, Councilor Raposo.

Yeah, I mean, I think it speaks for itself.

I give credit to Director McElhinney for getting this off the ground.

Um, he did, did put a, um, the bid was put out for the study.

We've had numerous discussions and ordinance about salary structures and what have you, and I don't want to rehash the past, but essentially some sort of system that puts a rank at municipal positions.

So this way there's a clear understanding of what those positions should be compensated at.

So hoping this is the beginning of that, but I would like to have Director McElhinney come down and update us on his progress.

And then once bids are solidified or what have you, we can continue to work toward what should be a comprehensive system in place for the next budget.

I yield.

Anything further?

Motion to adopt has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Whereas several residents have shared complaints regarding driver speeding in various areas throughout the city, and whereas speeding is an unsafe practice that can lead to property damage, injury, or loss of life, and whereas stronger enforcement of illegal speeding will likely dissuade further speeding violations within the city, now therefore be it resolved that the Committee on Public Safety convene with the Chief of Police and Director of Traffic and Parking to discuss enforcement practices and procedures to improve resident safety on this issue.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt the resolution has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

The sponsor of the resolution, Councilman C7, Councilor Ferrara?

Just that everybody is complaining, uh, about how fast people are going.

I mean, pedestrians are being hit, people are flying around the city.

So if you have to do some stings here and there to slow people down— and remember, certain places it's 25 miles an hour, Bedford Street's 25 miles an hour— you have people flying down at 40 miles an hour, um, and it's a congested area.

It's tough, I think.

Public Safety can talk to the chief and see what they can come up with.

With that, I yield.

Councilman C6, Councilor Peckham.

Yeah, I think it's an excellent resolution.

I've had a couple of conversations recently with Chief Orr, um, in regards to some certain intersections where the speed is drastic.

Um, so it's definitely something that I'm looking forward to entertaining.

So with that, I yield.

Thank you.

Councilman C1, Councilor Kadim.

So I think it's a terrible idea.

Um, so My, my colleague just gave kudos to Councilor on C3 for coming a long way from resolutions.

The very first resolution that we all rejected out of hand was one that was very similar to this, and the reason I don't support this is one, uh, just the language in terms of discussing enforcement practice and procedures.

Uh, there's, there's one thing to have a conversation about traffic, there's another thing that can get misled and viewed as we're now giving a directive to the police chief to give quotas, which is illegal, right?

So Massachusetts General Law Chapter 90 already gives the authority to the police department for enforcement of traffic.

So everything that the police department possibly needs, they have.

So we should not be having any conversation about discussing the practices and, and talking to a police chief on how to run the police department.

Now, if you want to talk about the quality of life issues and have those conversations and have more of a vague discussion, I absolutely support it because I don't disagree that— and I don't think it's just, you know, the city of Fall River.

I think it's other communities, especially with the perception of the police department.

You're starting to see less enforcement of Chapter 90 laws, and that's just social media and everything that the police department is dealing with.

So I think if there's a validity behind having some of those conversations.

I said just the way it's written, for me, I, I can't support it because I think it sends the wrong message, uh, with regards to that.

So, um, I know in the past, especially when we had Plymouth Ave and everybody would cruise the Ave, we, you know, you'd see the police officers on the Ave, you'd always see a police officer pulling somebody over.

So I think at some point we need to get to that, get back to that.

But I think there's there's some hesitation from the profession itself to, to move in that direction because of what we're dealing with from a policing standpoint.

So that's just my reason for not supporting it, but I do support the conversation about improving quality of life in the city.

With that, I yield.

Thank you.

Councilor in seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

I'll make an amendment to it.

Um, let's take out where a stronger enforcement be done, and where it says be it resolved the public safety convene with the chief and director to improve safety for residents on this issue.

So you want to strike whereas the entire third paragraph and strike the third, and be it resolved that the Committee on Public Safety convene with the chief and director of traffic and parking to discuss safety on this speeding issue to our residents.

A motion to amend the— and strike whereas stronger enforcement of illegal speeding will likely dissuade further speeding violations within the city, has been made by Councilor Pereira.

Is there a second?

Second.

Seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion on the amendment?

Hearing none, voting on the amendment.

Motion to, uh, to, uh, for the amendment has been made.

Roll call.

Mr. President, for clarification, was the amendment to strike the first line or the last line?

The whereas stronger enforcement of illegal speeding Right, the third line.

Um, the third line, Madam Clerk.

Okay, and leave the last line alone.

The same last line would be just to have a meeting with the chief and the director of traffic.

Okay.

Um, relative to the concerns of residents regarding speeding throughout the community, throughout the city.

Okay, and to strike discuss enforcement practices and procedures.

Strike out enforcement.

Thank you.

Motion for the amendment hearing.

No further discussion.

Roll call on the amendment.

Councilor Cadime?

Yes.

Camara?

Yes.

Canuel?

Yes.

Dionne?

Yes.

Hart?

Yes.

Peckham?

Yes.

Pereira?

Yes.

Raposo?

Yes.

President Ponte?

Yes.

Motion to adopt as amended would be appropriate has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 18 is a citation for Anthony F. Cordero, the recipient of the Roger Valkor Outstanding Citizen Award.

Motion to accept the item and place it on file has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Pereira.

Discussion?

Councilor in seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

Just to add, I'm not going to be here on the 16th, but, um, there will be an event Uh, regarding this, um, award on September 16th, next Wednesday, at Venus de Milo, if anybody's interested.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to take item 19C out of order.

Second.

Motion to take items 19C out of order has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to refer 19C to the Public Works and Transportation Commission.

Motion to refer item 19C to Public Works and Transportation has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Cannuel.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 19C was a request from, um, the Massachusetts Electric Company, DBA National Grid, and Verizon New England Inc. For one new jointly owned poll location at Bedford Street.

Items— is it the will of the council to take the remaining items together?

Yep.

Motion to take items A, B, D, E, and F together has been made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Council Vice President Dion.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to adopt after reading has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Vice President Dion.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Those requests are for Airport Road, Bay Street, March Street, Rodman Street, and Stafford Road.

Thank you, Madam Clerk.

Motion to take items 20 through 22 together.

Motion to take items 20 through 22 together has been made by Councilor Raposo.

Second.

Seconded by Councilor Pereira.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Is there a motion?

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt items 21, 20, 20, 21, and 22 together has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Hart.

After reading has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 20 was an auto repair shop license.

License for Eva Alexander Aragon Mendez of 84 Orange Street to operate an auto repair shop at 830 Globe Street under the name of Moda Auto Repair and Service.

21 was a curb removal for Jessica McCausland at 498 Reading Street, removal of 12 feet of curbing for a total opening of 25 feet on Montgomery Street.

And item 22 was the secondhand article Store for Savers to be located at 133 Mariano Bishop Boulevard.

Item 23, our auto repair shop license renewals.

Motion to adopt the renewals has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Canuel.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Those renewals are for Jody Oliveira, DBA Ground Earth Inc., at 1741 Stafford Road, and Marco Tavares, DBA Auto Stop, at 325 Oman Street.

Motion to adopt.

Seconded.

We've already done that.

Item 24 is an auto repair shop license transfer located at 605 Globe Street from Robert P. Fortier, DBA Fortier's Auto Sales and Service, Inc., to Justin R. Fortier, DBA Fortier's Auto Sales and Service, Inc. Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor LaHart.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 25 is the police chief's report on licenses.

Motion to adopt.

Motion to adopt the police chief's report has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 26 is a request from the Massachusetts Electric Company, DBA National Grid, and Zayo Group LLC for the installation of permanent aerial fiber attachments on existing National Grid utility poles.

Could we— item, uh, 26A is, uh, the first item is Bedford Street, 737 linear feet across 9 existing poles.

Is there a motion to approve?

Motion so made.

Motion to approve Bedford Street has been made by Councilor Raposo.

Seconded by— second— Councilor Pereira.

Discussion?

Councilor in seat 8, Councilor Raposo.

I just want to ensure this particular request has nothing to do with the other pull request that was in the public hearing.

Are they not connected?

No.

Okay, thank you.

They're separate.

Motion to approve has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 26B is for Local Street 903 Linea feet across 8 existing poles.

Motion to approve.

Motion to approve Locust Street has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

And 26C is for Stonehaven Road, 1,731 linear feet across 12 existing poles.

Motion to approve Stonehaven Road has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham discussion.

Councilor in seat 7, Councilor Pereira.

Um, some of this work has already been done.

Um, this is supposed to be fiber optic cables to the new Diamond, to, to the new Diamond for, um, their internet service.

And I know they've been working on it at the corner of Bedford and Eastern Avenue.

We received a letter that they were starting to do preliminary work until it got approved by us.

Yeah, they were operating under a license, a temporary license by Attorney Matt Thomas because the school opened and they didn't get their stuff done in time.

So that's the only reason why it started ahead of time.

Okay, and so that's why we're approving it?

That's right.

Just so we're all on the same page.

Thank you.

I yield.

Motion to approve has been made and seconded.

Hearing no further discussions, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 27 is a number of claims.

Motion to refer claims to Corporation Counsel has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Council Vice President Dion.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 28 is a communication from the Assistant Corporation Counsel as a response to the Open Meeting Law complaint filed by Colin Diaz for the July 28th, 2026 special meeting of the City Council.

Motion to accept the item and place it on file has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 29 is a communication from a city resident regarding bus stop location near 102 Laurel.

Motion to refer to the Committee on Ordinance and Legislation.

Motion to refer the items to the committee— the item to the Committee on Ordinance and Legislation has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 30 is a drain layer license for JPB Construction Company, Inc. Motion to approve JPB Construction's drain layer license has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Peckham.

Discussion?

Hearing none.

All those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 31, our planning board minutes for the meeting held on July 8th.

Motion to approve the planning board minutes on July 8th has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Mr. President, customary to accept and place on file.

Is that the council's intent?

Uh, motion to approve and accept and place on file is our intent, correct?

For that motion, correct.

Let the record reflect.

Thank you.

Next order of business, item 32, our Zoning Board of Appeals minutes, uh, for the July 16th meeting.

Motion to approve and place on file has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Hearing none.

All those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Is it the will of the— oh, excuse me, I'm getting ahead of myself.

Item 33 are notices of casualty and loss.

Uh, item A, 34 Friendship Street.

Motion to accept, place on file.

Motion to accept the item and place it on file has been made by Councilor Raposo for 34 Friendship Street, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Hearing none.

All those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

And item 33B is for 484 Highland Avenue.

Motion to accept and place on file has been made by Councilor Peckham, seconded by Councilor Raposo.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to lift item 6A from the table.

Motion to lift item 6A from the table has been made by Councilor Canuel, seconded by Councilor Pereira.

Discussion on lifting the item from the table?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item 6A is a communication from the mayor and the appropriation of the following funds to and from the PEG Access and Cable Related Fund, total amount of $586,600.

The first appropriation is for $330,000 for Fred TV operating salaries and expenses.

The second is $106,600 for Fred TV capital and $150,000 for FRC Media operating salaries and expenses.

Motion to adopt has been made by Councilor Camara, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Councilor in seat 1, Councilor Kadeem.

Thank you.

What was What was the reason for tabling this and then removing it from the table?

Because I, I thought, if recollection serves me right, was we just needed some documentation from the Department of Revenue to suggest that we can spend this money.

Have, have we gotten that?

Correct.

I believe there was an email from the Director of Financial Services regarding that.

Um, I may have it with me, but I don't have it handy.

But I believe that there, there has been, um, communication with that regard from the DOR saying that we— because the way the— when we adopted it, it said it could not take place until the next prior fiscal year, so the next July.

So do we— she's not here.

My recollection is that there was an email sent from the Director of Financial Services that she had confirmed with the DOR.

I don't have it with me at the moment, but Um, Miss Susa, do you happen to know before I waive the rules and have you come down on this item?

No.

Okay, Consulency 1 has a valid point.

So if we don't get this confirmation, I think it's probably appropriate.

I'm not going to tell how my colleagues to vote.

I'm just saying that the law as I read it was very clear and specific that once we establish the account, it can't be utilized until the next July, which which would be this coming July.

So, you know, I was, I was just looking for confirmation, and I, I'd like to see a ruling from the DOR as the explanation as to why they're now changing their guidance.

I mean, there's an IGR out there.

So, Madam Clerk, I know we're looking at an email here, but is there anything from Miss Harpkey on that confirming to council?

Uh, 2-minute recess, please.

Yes, 2-minute recess it is.

As far as City Council meeting is now back in session, uh, the clerks, uh, did see a communication, uh, that went back and forth during our recess, but there's no, um, ruling, Councilor in seat 1, from DOR.

So it's up to the council as whether or not they want to adopt it or table it.

Motion to table— motion to table will take precedence— has been made by Councilor Raposo.

Seconded by Councilor Canuel.

Discussion?

No discussion.

All those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Roll call on tabling.

Councilor Scadino?

Yes.

Camara?

No.

Canuel?

Yes.

Dion?

Yes.

Hart?

Yes.

Peckham?

Yes.

Pereira?

Yes.

Raposo?

Yes.

President Ponte?

Yes.

Motion carries 8 yeas, 1 nay.

The Committee on Public Works and Transportation, at a meeting held on September 8th, 2026, voted unanimously to recommend that the accompanying order be adopted as amended.

This is an order for curb removal at 677 Meridian Street.

The committee did add these following stipulations: a double permit fee to be paid within 30 days of adoption, as the curbing was removed prior to City Council approval.

Motion to adopt— motion to adopt as amended has been made by Councilor Canuel, seconded by Councilor Hart.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

And could I please have a recess for the signing of ordinances, please?

City Council will be in recess.

What's up?

My name's— Yes, the Far Rockaway City Council meeting is now back in session.

Madam Clerk, the last item before you for, um, ordination is, uh, proposed ordinance for miscellaneous traffic.

Motion to pass, be ordained.

Motion to pass the item to be ordained has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Canuel.

Discussion?

Hearing none, all those in favor?

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

That's all we have.

Motion to adjourn has been made by Councilor Raposo, seconded by Councilor Cannuel.

Discussion?

Hearing none.

All those in favor?

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Good night.