City Council

City of Revere, MA 281 Broadway Monday, July 27, 2026 6:00 PM Revere, MA 02151 City Council City Council Chamber – 2nd Floor Meeting Minutes Salute to the Flag Roll Call of Members Present: Councillor Argenzio, Councillor Cogliandro, Councillor Giannino, Council Vice President Guarino-Sawaya, Councillor Haas III, Councillor Kelley, Councillor McKenna, Councillor Mercurio, Councillor Novoselsky, Councillor Silvestri, and Council President Zambuto 1. Approval of the minutes of the July 13, 2026 meeting of the Revere City Council. Attachments: 07132026CityCouncilMinutes.pdf Minutes of the July 13, 2026 meeting of the Revere City Council were unanimously approved. RESULT: APPROVED Public Hearings 2. 26-152 C-26-10, Hearing called as ordered on the application of Eastern Equity Partners, LLC, 1040 North Shore Road, Unit B2, Revere, MA 02151 requesting a special permit from the Revere City Council to allow a residential apartment use within the Central Business District at 29, 35, and 43 Foster Street, Revere, MA 02151. Attachments: PH.C2610.43FosterStreet.pdf Proponents Brian McGrail, Attorney for the applicant Jamie Russo, 1040 North Shore Road, Revere, MA Opponents none The applicant stated that the proposal would replace an aging industrial use with a modern residential development that better aligns with the surrounding area. The project is intended to eliminate truck traffic, forklift activity, equipment noise, and operational impacts associated with the lumberyard while creating a safer, more pedestrian-friendly environment. The applicant also stated that the development would expand the City's housing supply, support local businesses, utilize existing public infrastructure, and be professionally managed. Any required water and sewer infrastructure improvements would be addressed during the Site Plan Review process. Several Councillors expressed support, citing the site's suitability for residential redevelopment, Page 1 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 the anticipated reduction in truck traffic and congestion, and the potential economic benefits to nearby businesses. Councillors also noted that the lumberyard is no longer a compatible use in the area and that the applicant has a positive development record within the City. Councillor Kelly raised questions regarding the project's density, noting that the proposal includes 85 residential units with 42 parking spaces. Additional questions focused on whether existing water and sewer infrastructure could support the development and whether any affordable, senior, or veteran housing would be included. The applicant responded that infrastructure requirements would be evaluated during engineering review and upgraded if necessary, but confirmed that the project is a market-rate development and is not specifically designed for affordable, senior, or veteran housing. Referred to the Zoning Sub-Committee on August 10, 2026. RESULT: REFERRED TO COMMITTEE 3. 26-153 C-26-11, Hearing called as ordered on the application of Eastern Equity Partners, LLC, 1040 North Shore Road, Unit B2, Revere, MA 02151 requesting a special permit from the Revere City Council to allow a residential apartment use within the Central Business District, and to alter and extend a non-conforming structure to enable the appellant to construct an 85-unit residential apartment building at 40 Foster Street and 310 Broadway, Revere, MA 02151. Attachments: PH.C2611.40Foster&310Broadway.pdf Proponents Brian McGrail, Attorney for the applicant Paul Rizzo, 310 Broadway, Revere, MA Opponents none The applicant explained that the proposal would preserve the existing commercial building and its tenants, including M&T Bank, Tufts Medical, and Kaplansky Insurance, while adding 85 residential units to create a mixed-use development. The applicant stated that the project would efficiently utilize an already developed site, increase housing availability, strengthen the Central Business District, and support nearby businesses through additional foot traffic. The applicant also noted that any required water and sewer infrastructure improvements would be completed during the Site Plan Review process if required by the City. Councillors generally expressed support for the project, citing its location, the preservation of existing commercial uses, and its potential to increase activity and economic vitality along Broadway. Questions focused on the architectural appearance of the building, the mix of residential units, and parking. The applicant stated that the building would have a distinct appearance from the adjacent project, would primarily consist of one- and two-bedroom units, and would increase the amount of on-site parking. However, all parking spaces would initially be reserved for the existing commercial tenants and customers, with no residential parking proposed. The applicant explained that the residential units would be marketed to tenants Page 2 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 without vehicles, consistent with similar developments operated by the developer. Referred to the Zoning Sub-Committee on August 10, 2026. RESULT: REFERRED TO COMMITTEE 4. 26-154 CZ-26-02, Hearing called as ordered on, An Ordinance Further Amending the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Revere Relative to Body Art Establishments. Attachments: PH.CZ2602.Body Art Establishment Zoning.pdf Body Art Planning Board Recommendation 07282026.pdf Proponents Claire Inzerillo, Policy Writer & Analyst John Festa, DPCD Small Business Liason Stephen Damiano, 172 Suffolk Avenue, Revere, MA Aliscia Thompson, Owner, Legacy Tattoo Opponents none The City Solicitor's Office and Office of Planning and Community Development explained that current zoning limits body art establishments to the TED District by special permit. Staff stated that the proposal was developed in response to growing demand from both traditional tattoo artists and cosmetic body art practitioners and emphasized that the Council could determine the appropriate zoning districts and whether the use should remain by special permit or become permitted by right. Several proponents spoke in favor of the amendment. One resident argued that the existing ordinance reflects outdated perceptions of tattooing, noting that people with tattoos serve as professionals, business owners, first responders, educators, and public officials. Another speaker, a Revere native and owner of a tattoo business in Danvers, explained that restrictive zoning previously prevented her from opening in Revere, forcing her to operate elsewhere despite a significant portion of her clientele residing in the City. She expressed a desire to relocate her business to Revere and keep that economic activity local. Councillors expressed broad support for modernizing the ordinance. Several stated that tattoo establishments should no longer be treated differently from other lawful businesses and supported expanding the permitted districts beyond the TED District. Councillors emphasized that allowing body art businesses would encourage local entrepreneurship, create jobs, retain tax revenue, and provide residents with services currently available only in neighboring communities. Several members also suggested that the Zoning Subcommittee consider whether body art establishments should require a special permit or be permitted by right. One Councillor recommended discussing whether the City should limit the overall number of establishments to avoid over concentration. Councillor Cogliandro offered an amendment to allow body art establishments in the GB and Page 3 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 GB1 District. The proposed ordinance was referred to the Zoning Sub-Committee on August 10, 2026. RESULT: REFERRED TO COMMITTEE 5. 26-155 CZ-26-03, Hearing called as ordered on, An Ordinance Further Amending the Zoning Ordinances of the City of Revere Relative to Food Truck Regulations. Attachments: PH.CZ2603.Food Truck Zoning.pdf Food Truck Planning Board Recommendation 07282026.pdf Proponents Claire Inzerillo, Policy Writer & Analyst John Festa, DPCD Small Business Liason Opponents none City staff explained that food trucks are currently permitted in several zoning districts with Licensing Commission approval and that the proposal would simply add the PDD2 District as another eligible location. Staff emphasized that the amendment would not automatically authorize food trucks but would allow the Licensing Commission to evaluate applications on a case-by-case basis. The proposal was developed in response to increasing inquiries from food truck operators and after discussions with property owners, businesses, and Ward Councillors. Staff stated that the intended location was the Wonderland Marketplace area, where impacts on nearby residential neighborhoods would be minimized. Councillors discussed potential impacts on nearby residents and existing businesses. Concerns were raised about generator noise, fumes, and quality-of-life issues based on previous experiences with food trucks in other locations. Staff responded that the proposed district is primarily a busy commercial area and that the Licensing Commission would evaluate each proposed location to address concerns related to noise, proximity to residences, and site suitability. Several Councillors expressed concern that food trucks could compete unfairly with brick-and-mortar restaurants, particularly during major events. In response, staff and Councillor Novoselsky stated that the intent is to place only one food truck in the Wonderland area, away from existing restaurants, banks, and storefronts, and to avoid permitting vendors that would directly compete with nearby businesses. The proposal was presented as a means of supporting economic activity while protecting existing establishments. Other Councillors voiced support, stating that expanding food truck opportunities would encourage entrepreneurship, provide additional dining options, and attract more visitors to the area. Questions were also raised regarding meal tax collection, licensing requirements, and whether food trucks should be subject to the same tax obligations as traditional restaurants. Staff indicated that this information would be provided to the Zoning Sub-Committee before further consideration. The Council also requested a map of the PDD2 District to assist with future Page 4 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 discussions. The proposed ordinance was referred to the Zoning Sub-Committee on August 10, 2026. RESULT: REFERRED TO COMMITTEE 6. 26-139 Communication from the Mayor relative to the proposed ordinance, An Ordinance Establishing Regulations for Naming City Property in the City of Revere. Attachments: CityPropertyNamingRegulationsOrdinance07132026.pdf Proponents Rose Burns, Aide to the Mayor Opponents none Representatives from the Mayor's Office explained that the ordinance was introduced to establish a uniform process for naming City property and to promote consistency, historical accuracy, and standards that would withstand the test of time. They emphasized that the proposal was not intended to change the existing process for school property, which is governed Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 43, Section 33. Several Councillors questioned the proposed requirement that an individual be deceased for ten years before City property could be named in their honor. One Councillor suggested reducing the waiting period to five years, while another proposed eliminating the waiting period entirely, arguing that an individual's contributions should not diminish over time. In response, the administration stated that a waiting period provides an opportunity for history to fully assess an individual's legacy before a permanent public honor is granted. Discussion also focused extensively on the naming of public school buildings and grounds. Several Councillors expressed the view that because school facilities are owned by the City and funded by taxpayers, the City Council should share authority with the School Committee and Mayor in naming those properties. Suggestions included pursuing a Home Rule Petition to grant the City Council a formal role in naming school buildings and grounds. The City Solicitor's Office explained that the proposed ordinance intentionally excludes school property because the School Committee currently follows its own adopted rules governing the naming of school facilities. Staff noted that the legal authority over naming school property has been questioned previously and remains under review. The Solicitor's Office stated that it is researching the applicable legal authority, including prior legal opinions and Massachusetts law, to clarify the respective roles of the School Committee and City Council before the ordinance advances further. The proposed ordinance was referred to the Legislative Affairs Sub-Committee. Page 5 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 RESULT: REFERRED TO COMMITTEE Public Comment Pursuant to Chapter 402 of the Acts of 1965 Marissa Capone, Revere Beach Boulevard, Revere, MA spoke in favor of Council Order 26-157 citing a recent accident where a reckless under aged scooter operator driving on the sidewalk crashed into and landed on her vehicle causing extensive damage. Appointments Sub-Committee Report The City Council unanimously approved the location of the memorial portraits of former Councillors O'Hara, Curcio, and Penn to be installed on the rear wall of the right-hand side of the Chamber above the portraits of former Councillors Guinasso, DelGrosso, and Colella. Legislative Affairs Sub-Committee Report 7. 26-137 Motion presented by Councillor Cogliandro: That the Mayor request the City Solicitor to provide a legal opinion regarding the interaction between Section 2.03.050(E) of the Revere Revised Ordinances and Chapter 402 of the Acts of 1965. Facts: Section 2.03.050(E) of the Revere Revised Ordinances provides an exception to the City's open meeting requirements for sub-committees of the School Committee that meet before 5:00 p.m. Chapter 402 of the Acts of 1965 provides that employees of the City of Revere shall be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard at any meeting of a public body concerning a matter being considered by the public body in which they have an interest. Question: If a sub-committee of the School Committee convenes pursuant to the exception set forth in Section 2.03.050(E) at a time when interested City employees are unable to attend due to their work schedules, would such a meeting violate Chapter 402 of the Acts of 1965 on the grounds that the affected employees were not afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard? The motion was unanimously approved on a voice vote. RESULT: ORDERED Health & Human Services Sub-Committee Report 8. 26-051 Motion presented by Councillor Haas: That the Mayor be requested to establish a Medical Equipment Loan Program through Elder Affairs and Public Health Departments. The program would allow seniors who are in need of medical equipment or any resident who undergoes a procedure and is in need of equipment to ‘borrow’ items, such as a wheelchair, walker, transport chair, commode, shower bench/chair, cane, knee scooter etc. There would be no charge to the city - simply storage and tracking of said equipment- as well as zero cost to the residents who take out the equipment. The inventory and supply of equipment would rely solely on donated items, allowing the program to start from the ground up and essentially run itself over time. The program would also Page 6 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 feature a waiver that the resident would sign before taking the equipment home. This program would allow our residents easy access to items while avoiding large purchases on medical items especially if the resident is in need of the equipment for only a short period or recovery window. The Health and Human Services Subcommittee considered a motion requesting that the Mayor establish a medical equipment loan program through the Elder Affairs and Public Health Departments. The proposed program would allow residents to borrow donated medical equipment, such as wheelchairs, walkers, transport chairs, shower chairs, canes, and knee scooters, at no cost. Equipment would be supplied through donations, with residents signing a liability waiver before borrowing items. Chairman Hass explained that he has experience administering a similar program and described it as a low-cost service that benefits seniors and residents recovering from medical procedures. He stated that the program could operate without additional staffing, with inventory limits established by the City and only clean, safe, donated equipment accepted. He emphasized that a liability waiver would be prepared by the City Solicitor's Office and argued that providing equipment locally would be more convenient than requiring residents to travel to Woburn. Several Councillors expressed support for the concept but raised concerns regarding liability, equipment inspection, storage, cleaning, staffing, and long-term administration. Questions were also raised about whether the City should duplicate services already offered through established organizations such as the HELP medical equipment loan program in Woburn. One Councillor noted that Revere previously operated a similar program and questioned why it had been discontinued. The Chief of Public Health advised that the Public Health Department, Elder Affairs, and the Veterans Office currently receive relatively few requests for medical equipment and typically refer residents to the HELP program, which has been successful and has generated few complaints. She noted that any City-operated program would require procedures for liability, equipment inspection, storage, cleaning, and administration but stated that implementation would not be impossible if the City chose to pursue it. Supporters of the motion argued that the administrative challenges could be addressed and that a local program would improve accessibility for residents by eliminating the need to travel outside the City to obtain temporary medical equipment. Opponents maintained that the City should continue referring residents to existing programs rather than creating a duplicate municipal service with additional operational responsibilities. RESULT: ORDERED Yes: Councillor Argenzio, Councillor Cogliandro, Councillor Giannino, Council Vice President Guarino-Sawaya, Councillor Haas III, Councillor Kelley, and Councillor McKenna No: Councillor Mercurio, Councillor Novoselsky, Councillor Silvestri, and Council President Zambuto Communications Page 7 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 9. 26-160 Communication from the Election Commissioner requesting approval the warrants for the 2026 State Election Primary and the 2026 State Election. Attachments: StateElectionWarrants.07272026.pdf Councillor Kelley left the Chamber at approximately 7:20PM. The City Council unanimously approved, on a voice vote, the warrants for the 2026 State Election Primary and the 2026 State Election. Councillor Kelley was absent. RESULT: APPROVED Motions 10. 26-156 Motion presented by Councillor Guarino Sawaya: That the Mayor request the Revere Police Department, the Massachusetts State Police, the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR), and all other appropriate public safety agencies to immediately increase enforcement of the laws governing the operation of electric bicycles, electric scooters, mopeds, and bicycles on the sidewalks and pedestrian walkways along Revere Beach. Further, that the Mayor send a formal letter to the appropriate agencies requesting a coordinated enforcement initiative, including the issuance of citations and any other enforcement measures permitted by law, to address the growing number of unsafe and reckless operators who are placing pedestrians and motorists at risk. The motion was unanimously approved on a voice vote. Councillor Kelley was absent. RESULT: ORDERED 11. 26-157 Motion presented by Councillor Guarino-Sawaya: That the Mayor request the Chief of Police to direct the Animal Control Officer, and in the absence of the Animal Control Officer, Revere Police officers, to proactively enforce all applicable state laws and city ordinances regarding excessive and habitual dog barking that disturbs the peace and quiet enjoyment of neighboring properties. Further, that officers be authorized to issue warnings, citations, and fines, where appropriate, to property owners who repeatedly allow dogs to bark continuously after complaints have been made, in an effort to address this ongoing neighborhood nuisance and improve residents’ quality of life. The motion was unanimously approved on a voice vote. Councillor Kelley was absent. RESULT: ORDERED 12. 26-158 Motion presented by Councillor Guarino-Sawaya: That the Mayor request the appropriate department to work with local retailers to establish a program for the prompt retrieval of abandoned shopping carts throughout the city, particularly in residential neighborhoods, parks, wetlands, and along roadways, and begin enforcement with removal and retailer responsibilities. The motion was unanimously approved on a voice vote. Councillor Kelley was absent. Page 8 of 9 City Council Meeting Minutes July 27, 2026 RESULT: ORDERED 13. 26-159 Motion presented by Councillors McKenna and Mercurio: That the City Council write a letter to the Department of Conservation and Recreation (DCR) advocating that the DCR request funding through appropriation and/or grants relative to the repair, reconstruction, and climate-resiliency improvements of the Short Beach seawall and adjoining sidewalks along Winthrop Parkway in response to its own May 2025 report, DCR State Parkways Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment which identifies Winthrop Parkway as a hot sopt. The motion was unanimously approved on a voice vote. Councillor Kelley was absent. RESULT: ORDERED Late Motions 14. 26-161 Late motion presented by Councillor Silvestri: That the City Council approve the attached resolution, "A RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE MA FASST COALITION AND THE PASSAGE OF HOUSE BILL 3772 AND SENATE BILL 3021 TO MODERNIZE STUDENT TRANSPORTATION." Attachments: SilvestriResolutionStudentTransportationBillSupport.pdf The resolution was unanimously approved on a voice vote. Councillor Kelley was absent. RESULT: ORDERED Adjournment The City Council now stands adjourned to meet on Monday, August 10, 2026. Page 9 of 9