City Council

City of~aunton 9'.unicipa{CounciC9'.eeting 9'.inut;es City Ha{{, 15 Summer Street, ~aunton, ~ In tlie Cliester ~ 9'.artin 9'.unicipa{CounciCCli.am6ers - 9'.inut;es, Septem6er 26, 2023 at 7:()4. O'cfoc~/P.9'.. 'PfetflJe of.ft./agiance <J(lguiar 9'.eeting 9'.ayor Sliaunna £. O'Connellpresiding (['rayer was offtreti6y tlie 9'.ayor (]!resent at rollca/Iwere: Counci/Drs <Paste/I, Q!tintal, Santfers, Coute, <Pottier, 9'.cCaul; <Borges, {J)uarte anti(])ooner Record of preceding meeting was read by title and approved. So Voted. Opportunity for input by the general public. No one spoke during public input. Hearing: NONE Communications from the Mayor: Mayor O'Connell said they would like to thank everyone, our team at DPW and our partners at Republic Services for organizing what was a very successful free household waste drop-off day this past Saturday. We served about 375-vehicles and it went off without a hitch. The line kept moving. Our guys and gals that were working there were very helpful. They got a lot of positive feedback from residents who were thrilled to be able to finally clean out their basements, attic or whatever it was. They will definitely be having another one of these in the upcoming year. Mayor 0' Connell said we are having a financial resource fair for our seniors that will be on next Wednesday, October 4th. This will be with our Council on Aging and our Finance team from 11 :00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. at 141 Oak Street which is the old Temporary City Hall or the Maxham School as some may know it. They are going to talk about things such as tax relief, tax deferral, our free trash bag program, payment plans with the Treasurer's office, our water and sewer abatement program, our helping hand fund which is a new program and much more. A lot of good programs and services that the City has to offer. They want to make sure people know that they can take advantage of. There will be a light lunch served. To register you can call 774-406-5899 or the Council of Aging office. Appointments: Reappointment of Nancilee Lemaire, 12 Kilton St., Taunton to serve on the Americans with Disabilities Act Commission for a term of three (3) years expiring August 2025. Motion was made to approve. So voted.  2 Reappointment of Diane Huggon, 270 Segregansett Rd., Taunton to serve on the Americans with Disabilities Act Commission for a term of three (3) years expiring August 2025. Motion was made to approve. So voted. Reappointment of Donna DiCorpo, 10 Craven Court, Taunton to serve on the Americans with Disabilities Act Commission for a term of three (3) years expiring August 2026. Motion was made to approve. So voted. Appointment of Alan Medeiros, 4 Winthrop Street, Taunton to the Historic District Commission to fulfill the unexpired term of Barbara Mullen expiring January 2024. Motion was made to approve. So voted. Communications from Citv Officers: Com. from the Assistant Executive Director from the Board of Retirement regarding the retirement for Accidental Involuntary Disability of David Simmons, an employee of the Taunton Fire Department, on September 18, 2023 under the provisions set forth in Section #7 of Chapter 32 of the General Laws of Massachusetts. Mr. Simmons' creditable service in the retirement system will total 28-years and 4-months. Motion was made to move to approve and send the appropriate scroll. So Voted. Com. from the Taunton Library Director notifying of a donation received from Michael Yelle and his family in memory of their parents Maria and George Yelle in the amount of $2,000.00. They request the Council accept this donation for the purposes of purchasing a new ADA compliant Youth Services circulation desk. Motion was made to refer to the Committee on Finance and Salaries. So voted. Com. from the City Solicitor submitting Comcast correspondence dated September 15, 2023 in regards to changes to Xfinity TV services. The Ovation channel will be relocated to the B2/Entertainment tier. The change will occur on or after September 21, 2023. Also, the INSP channel will be relocated to the More Sports and Entertainment pack. The change will occur on or after September 26, 2023. Motion was made to receive and place on file. So voted. Com. from the City Solicitor regarding the upcoming Election Charter question. The City Clerk read the communication into the record which discussed some details to the matter. The Law Department stated, in reviewing the Charter in advance of the upcoming election and after the Legislature passed the VOTES Act, they have identified items that the Council should be aware of, 1. The Charter retains the Election Office and Board of Elections Commissioners, but refers to the City Clerk having a role in scheduling preliminary elections and receiving nomination papers. Said reference to the City Clerk is an apparent error as, in cities that have established an Elections Commission, all of the City Clerk's functions relative to elections are transferred to the Elections Commission and the office established under it. If the Charter passes, it should be amended to delete the references to the City Clerk as to the elections processes mentioned above, so that the document consistently references the Board of Elections Commissioners and Elections Office with respect to election processes. 2. The Charter mandates that local preliminary elections occur only on the first or second Tuesday in September. By law, the State Primary Election is supposed to occur seven Tuesdays prior to the General Election. However, the Legislature customarily passes special legislation to change the State  3 Election date, so the State Primary is not always the same Tuesday in September. Because the Charter restricts the date of the local primary election, there will be future situations where, if the Charter is adopted, the State Primary and the local primary will fall on different dates in September. For example, in 2006 the State Primary was on September 16th, the third Tuesday in September. We recommend the Charter be amended to allow for more flexibility with scheduling local primary elections. 3. In state/federal election years, the City will need to hold a dual election. There will be two ballots - one for the local election and one for the state/federal election. With the staggering of terms under the Charter, there will be a local election annually, so state/federal elections will always correspond with local elections. This, by itself, is not a significant issue. However, with the passage of the VOTES Act while the Charter was pending, there will be a very large increase in mail-in ballots. The state and local ballots are separate, and have separate envelopes. There is a concern that with the substantial increase of mail-in ballots, there will be a corresponding increase in ballot return errors. Addressing this concern will involve a review of options with the Council and special legislation if a decision is made to amend the Charter. In light of the above issues, the question has been posed as to whether the City, acting through Municipal Council, could decline to place the Charter question on the ballot. As a special act applying to only one community, under the State Constitution the Legislature's authority to pass the Charter Bill was based on the Home Rule Petition of the Municipal Council requesting passage of the bill. The bill states that the Charter question shall be placed on the ballot for the next regular election after it is passed. However, because it is a special act, if the Municipal Council withdraws support for the bill, then the legislative mandate for it to appear on the November ballot loses its force. We have found no precedent indicating that a municipality must present a special act to the voters if its legislative body has voted not to proceed. Mayor O'Connell said before they begin, she wants to give everyone a reminder, herself included, of the importance of following our Council rules during discussion and maintaining decorum of the necessity to be recognized by raising your hand before you have the floor. Of course, members can disagree but the intentions of others should not be questioned when you are disagreeing. She also wanted to remind members that a point of information or point of clarification is a request for information, a question that you want to ask. It's not an opportunity to just jump in and state your points. Councilor Pottier said as one of the nine members of the Charter Committee, he thinks it's important to note that this has been in process probably since 2013. He thinks when the previous administration asked the DOR to look at how the City operates and to come up with suggestions and the fact that in that DOR report it specifically said we should start looking at the Charter. He can honestly say, that no member of the Committee, nor of the Council who has passed the Charter to this point, would have thought of the challenges of processing those ballets or initiating a local election the same time simultaneously to a State Federal Election. The thought, particularly in this case of mail in ballots, we might have voter nullification on a pretty large scale. Even if one person doesn't know how to vote or if their vote is somehow tainted because they just didn't know what envelope to put the ballot in, would be a challenge. Motion was made to advise the Election Director to not schedule the City Charter on the November ballot. So voted. Motion was made to refer to the Law Department and the Elections Department to try to come up with a way to cure this to the extent they can, to make sure that people aren't confused of the ballot box on the off years to assure that their votes are cast correctly and recorded correctly. The motion was not acted on and they went on to discussion. On discussion, The City Clerk read a letter into the record from Willitts S.  4 Mendonca, 199 South Walker Street, Taunton regarding consideration to edit the proposed City Charter. Motion was made to make part of the record. So voted. Councilor Sanders said as to the motion, and he would invite the City Solicitor to correct him if he gets any of his dates and facts wrong but he has gone back and forth about this one extensively over the past week, he does recall that the Council, what he believes was August of 2021, or at least the summer of 2021, had their final vote on this Charter, to move it on to the Legislature, he knows that it wasn't until what he believes was January of 2023 of the Governors final day in office, that Governor Baker signed the Home Rule Petition that brought this to our attention today. Also, if he's not mistaking, the VOTES Act was passed in June of 2022. He is a little concerned how through all the time that this has been waiting essentially from summer of 2021 through the VOTES Act in June of 2022, until January of 2023 when it was signed by the Governor and all the folks who have looked at this time after time and changes that have been made. He believes there were on going exchanges between the Senate Legal and other folks, and our Law Department. He knows that the language that would have prohibited the Mayor from acknowledging membership and unions from some of City employees was removed from the Charter under subsequent conversations with Senate Legal. There have been all these opportunities to go through this and here we are practically at the last hour. We have to give the Elections Commissioner instructions by the end of business next Tuesday and here we are discovering problems. However, he says problems but he's going to say not really significant problems in his humble opinion. The City Solicitor in his letter mentioned three particular issues. One, around the reference of the City Clerk which in his opinion is a minor thing that should take little to no effect to change subsequent to a vote of the community in November. In fact, from his conversations with folks whose expertise in this area which he trusts, this would be a minor request of the State Legislature to amend should the Charter pass in November. Second point raised by the City Solicitor, also a minor issue, are we going to have a change of dates for the preliminary election. Again, all the information he was able to gather, it is a minor issue that should the Charter pass in November, can be an easy fix through a communication with the State Legislature. With all due respect, the third item on the City Solicitors' letter, doesn't seem to be to him a problem at all. It's simply the consequence of how this staggered terms for elected officials would be implemented. He takes Council Pottier's point that none of us could have known how badly that was going to look now two-years later. He remembers the conversation they had about the Charter and him expressing his real concern about the expense of having annual elections. The chaos and the confusion that could potentially ensue because they were trying to blend a municipal election with State and Federal elections and while the full scope of the problems associated with these staggered terms effort seemed pretty clear at the time which is why he spoke against it then and unfortunately as he recalls, he remembers this because he was so shocked at the time when it happened after the Council scrutinized the proposed new Charter. After going through it line by line, vote after vote, the list of seventeen, eighteen things that were at different times suggested that they might change, we get to our last day of deliberations when they were supposed to be deliberating, debating and discussing this very issue, the terms for the Municipal Council, the School Committee and the other elected boards and then Council President Coute announces that we were all done talking about this, that the Council's role actually was only advisory to the Mayor and that the Mayor was going to make the decision about how the rest of the Charter was going to look and we didn't need to be voting on it anymore. Then they moved directly to a vote that whether or not to approve the Charter as a whole. He has to wonder if they have had  5 a thorough discussion about what the consequence about this annual staggered three year term might look like and thought better of it. He said as he sits here today looking at the letter from the City Solicitor thinking okay, one minor change that we could take care of without too much trouble. Another minor change that they could takeout without too much trouble and another component of the proposed new Charter that will function exactly the way he would expect it to function. Without a certain amount of chaos and expenses associated with running an annual municipal election. His explanation continued. He said he wants to be very clear he is not a fan of the new proposed Charter and fully intends on November 7th, to vote against it. He feels it is incumbent on the Council to put this in the hands of the voters on November 7th as it should be and he will be voting in opposition for the reason he has articulated. He will be voting in opposition to pull this off of the November ballot. Councilor Dooner wanted to state that saying this would be an easy fix through communication with the Legislature is an extreme down play when it took them a year and a half to move this forward and to get this communication out of them was like pulling teeth. She has always supported the Charter, that being said she would rather get it right before they are putting it on the ballot. She feels these are changes that can be made and should be made. She would rather see the right document move forward rather than putting forth a document they know has discrepancies. Councilor Duarte spoke on the point about staggered terms, as someone who is whole heartedly in favor of staggered terms, he thinks the City Solicitor lays out pretty clearly in the letter why this is now a much larger issue. Previously, it would have been a dual election that would have been conducted with additional staff at the polling locations and the same setup of mail-in voting but, the permanence of mail-in voting that's come about as a result of the VOTES Act which has resulted in such a substantial increase of the mail-in voting, is what the issue is here which is not something that they expected when the Charter was originally passed considering the VOTES Act was only passed awhile after they acted on this Charter. So, because of the disproportion amount of mail-in ballots that will come in now, it has a much larger chance of leading to ballot return errors for many reasons. Just in the mail-in voting that we have now for singular elections, there are a whole host of errors that result in people's ballots being rejected and needing to be cured and if they are not cured in time, then their vote does not count. He feels the biggest issue currently is people not signing the envelopes on the outside, which invalidates their ballot. When the ballots are not submitted correctly, or there is an error, they have to be returned to the voter, usually by mail, and the voter has to send it back again by mail. This all is in a very limited time frame, because the ballots are not printed well in advance of an election. Usually, they can only be printed after the primary proceeding it, so there is a very limited window for ballot errors to be cured. That's under a normal election at this point. When you add now that there will be a dual election, you're not only disproportionally increasing the number of ballots that are being processed by the Elections Department but you are also increasing the amount of errors that can be made because you'll be getting two separate ballots, in two separate envelopes that need to be returned in two separate envelopes, and both needing to be signed separately. So you can have people that put them both in one envelope, the wrong one in the other envelope, they don't sign one envelope but sign the other, so the number of errors is also amplified and also the number of ballots being circulated. These are not things that were anticipated at the time that the Charter was passed. He is all for the staggered terms, when it was just going to be more work but now this is a whole different level that will definitely lead to an increase amount of potential for error and issues with ballot returns. For that reason, he would much rather hold off and get this right then  6 having to revisit it. He does agree to Councilor Dooner' s point that sending anything to the Legislature, no matter how big or how small, there is no guarantee of what will happen to it and in what time. We have had Home Rule petitions passed by this Council about parking lots that have still never passed. Home Rule petitions about much smaller issues that just sit pending in front of the Legislature. Because of the importance of this document, he would much rather get it right the first time then having to go back. Councilor Borges invited the Elections Director into the enclosure. Mayor 0' Connell also invited Attorney Bond and Attorney Gay into the enclosure. Councilor Borges said she agrees with much of what was said by Councilor Sanders. She also does agree with the Councilor to her right regarding all the confusion that the staggered terms will cause. She struggles and has gone back and forth with this herself. She struggles with the language that is actually on the bill. In regards to speaking to the Attorney at the Secretary of State's Office, on many occasions over the last few days, she asked lots of questions as far as, what if they do remove this from the ballot, where does that put us? On January 5th, Governor Baker signed this piece of legislation, this bill, and in the bill it clearly states "shall an act be passed by the General Court in 2021 legislative session, an act providing for a revised Charter for the City of Taunton be accepted". It goes on to talk about that it shall go on the ballot during the next election. She struggles with the fact that it had been signed by the Governor, how we as a body can vote to just remove this from the ballot. She also contacted the Director of Elections and asked him how he read this language "shall be placed on the ballot" which would be the election in November. After this, she then asked the Secretary of State's Office again and he said that "they caution the City that they would potentially be opened to some sort of a lawsuit". She would like clarification that if the City removes this from the ballot, are they opening the door to any potential lawsuit by them, as a Council, voting to remove this. Attorney Costa said that in the letter he issued to the Council, he could have addressed that question more clearly because he thinks it's important to read the entirety of that section of the Charter because it's correct. It has mandatory language for sure which he thinks everyone who has reviewed the Charter recognizes. It says "it shall be submitted for acceptance to the qualified voters of the City of Taunton at the next regular election". He said there is a series of "shall" in the verbiage. Which, in the law, this states there is some sort of mandate. The next sentence is critical, it says "if a majority of the voters cast an answer to the question that is in the affirmative, this act shall there upon take effect but not otherwise". Right now what they have is a bill that was adopted by the Legislature, signed by the Governor, but it has a further requirement before any of it takes effect. Even the sentences he just read. It says "the entire thing takes effect if a majority of the votes are cast in the affirmative by the voters." The interpretation of this language, which there is different words they can use but, what this language means is that there is a process beyond just the Legislative Act in Boston. It's on the local level. The City has to take additional steps or else none of this takes effect. So it states a process but as it stands today, by its own terms, none of the act is in effect as a law. It only becomes effective as a law if the voters vote on it. So based on that, the City still has control over what direction it goes in. The whole concept of Home Rule is that the Legislature can only act with respect to a specific city at the request of the City Council, the Mayor and the elected leaders of the City. The mandatory language here is about a process. For this to become a law, those steps need to happen. If the Council decides that the City needs to take a break, that's something the Law Department will support because they believe the bill by its own terms supports that and decides to go in as the Legislature body for the City. Councilor Borges asked Attorney Costa if what he is saying is that this bill signed  7 by the Governor and approved by the Legislature, was just to give them the opportunity to place this on the ballot but, until the voters decide, it does not become law. Therefore, if the Council was to vote to remove this from the ballot, then they wouldn't be breaking any law as suggested by the Secretary of State's legal department she had spoken with and said "I caution the City that there could be a potential lawsuit". Attorney Costa said he doesn't trust that advice. We accept directives from State agencies if they are made in writing and signed by somebody. If there is an unknown person that's referred to that has said something on the telephone, as far as he is concerned, that legal advice doesn't exist. If the Secretary of State's Office wishes to give the City advice, and of this importance, they would expect to receive that in the proper way and not through second hand restitution that he as a City Solicitor wasn't aware of. That kind of conversation is very important to the City. They have had their own conversations with State agencies and for that kind of conversation to occur, is so important and he is a little disappointed that he wouldn't be informed of this and be on the call because that is legal advice that the Council was seeking from a State agency and for him to not be privy to that until this meeting, is just not acceptable. Councilor Borges said respectfully, she is asking these questions just in caution for herself to whether or not she was to vote tonight to remove this from the ballot. The question was never asked to the Secretary of State's Legal Department "will we be sued". She just asked the simple question, "If we weren't to put this on the ballot, what could potentially happen" and the answer from the Attorney was "I caution the City that they should be prepared for some sort of lawsuit". She wasn't asking for advice, that was just what was told to her. She just wanted to understand. As a Councilor she has every right to call whatever agency she wants. Discussion continued. Councilor Borges said it's no secret that on November 7th she will be voting against this Charter. She wasn't a part of the process. She has attending some meetings. She had her concerns with a lot of different things that were in the Charter. She thought there were a lot of great things in it. She completely appreciates all the work that the entire Committee put into this which, she knows was a lot of work. She knows that with speaking tO some people that were on the Committee, that there were already concerns about the staggered terms and what kind of confusion that was going to cause. Her explanation continued. She can't support removing this off the ballot and she feels it's up to the voters to decide. She would like to hear from the Elections Director what his position is on this and how does he feel about removing this from the ballot. The Election Director said this is a very fair question. He think it's important to point out that he has to administer the election and he is the Chief Elections Official for the City of Taunton and he thinks for the voters in the room and the voters at home, he would hate to weigh in one-way or the other because they have to conduct a fair election. He feels he can't weigh in on something like this. Respectfully, he said they are the elected officials and there is a letter from Counsel and he feels his opinion doesn't matter in this capacity. He just wants them to know they will conduct an election and he needs direction from them either way. He does need the language for the ballot if it's going to go on or a directive otherwise. Councilor Borges thanked the Charter Committee for all the work that they have put into this. Attorney Costa wanted to point out that the letter that is on the agenda, it points out a few issues and to a great extent the issues that have to do with administration. It's not illegal to have two primaries back to back. That's something that came to our attention basically through consultation with experts, the Secretary of State's Office and Elections Officials. They are the types of officials that would bring those types of issues to our attention and they did. So they placed those things before the Council so the Council is aware of them. Councilor Postell said how he looks at this is what is reasonable and what is going to be  8 the end result. They have identified there are discrepancies and issues within the Charter as presented regardless of the timeline which he will remind folks this Charter is over 100-years old or at best 100-years old. There is a reason why it hasn't been updated in over 100-years or completely digested into. There has been some amendments back then but there is a reason for that. It's a huge undertaking. In a vastly changing environment politically, surrounding COVID and other means to get folks involved in elections, get folks out to vote and involved in things, a lot has changed. He thinks it's important to recognize that this document is significantly old and it's outdated. It does not meet the needs of our community. It has withstood the test of time, if you will. Also, recognizing the effort that goes into it. There are a lot of things that have to change with it. We see that's where we are today. He looks at this as being reasonably expected to say, we have identified there are discrepancies, there's some challenges and we now recognize there are some confusions that may exist and now have been brought to attention. They sat through many nights of discussion of this Charter and there were very few people involved in this sitting in this audience. This Charter was taken across the City in City Hall sessions and there were very few people in attendance at those sessions to voice their concerns and ideas. Now we are coming up on election and everyone has a big problem with it over the last six-months or so. So if it was a big problem in the last six- months or so, they should have had the problem when they started the discussion. People should have been flooded in these sessions because it's their Constitution, their Charter. It's the City's, it's not the States. He knows the State has to weigh in on certain things and pass it through Home Rule Petitions, but he's sorry, it's not the States Charter. He asked, are going to put forth a document that we already know is inaccurate, that already is behind the times that we are trying to get away from, to just fail, when we can come back to the drawing board, address the problems, reevaluate and reassess. There is this method in policing called S.A.R.A. (Scan, Analyze, Respond and Access). We need to reassess what they have put forth to provide the citizens of this City a working document. A document that isn't going to be perfect as they said countless times, but a document that is going to be better than what it has been and present them with the changes. After waiting a year and a half from the state, and it to go back to wait for it to be even more perfect isn't going to be any more of a delay or a pain than what it was. So let's get it right and get it to be the most impactful, well served document for our residents, not just presently but also for future generations and future to come. His discussion continued. Councilor Coute said his thoughts were the first time the Charter came to his attention was that there may be some flaws with the document. His initial hope was that it wouldn't be a controversial change. They filed the document in August of 2021 and it potentially was going to go on the ballot two-years later. It doesn't sound like anyone other than the City Council had a lot of real urgency with this so the message that we should correct the document before we put it to the vote just sounds reasonable as Councilor Postell said. The message that we should steam forward with a flawed document just because, he doesn't agree with. Especially, since it will have had been over two-years since they had filed it. Yes, a very significant law was passed in the interim that changes dramatically how elections are officiated or conducted. While he was a big fan of the staggered terms, he thinks it would potentially raise the bar on the City Council. Based on the guidance he is researching now and the advice, it's going to be difficult with the significant votes by mail that are now law. That wasn't the case when they passed the Charter in August of 2021, the Act had not been passed. It's a lot of work to get this thing passed. That's why it had been over 100-years in the making. He knows that was one of Mayor O'Connell's first objectives when she took office was to try to  9 actually get some Charter changes to the finish line. He would hate to move forward if a few more changes may be needed. It just doesn't make sense. He referenced Mr. Mendonca's letter. He definitely supports straightening the document out and putting it on the next available ballot. He thinks they should move forward with the best document possible and he will support the motion because of that. Councilor Quintal said he struggles with this as well and he certainly agrees with Councilor Postell about people not getting a chance to weigh in at past meetings. This is a chance to have all the residents weigh in and vote on it. Ifwe don't get it on the ballot, and he does see both sides of this, but if we don't have the opportunity tonight to put it on the ballot to let everyone weigh in on this, he feels it's wrong and it will get lost in space again for years and years. He supports keeping this on the ballot. Councilor Duarte said just a point on procedure, not only if it passed would we have to submit a new Home Rule petition to make any necessary changes, but they would have to have a whole other election to approve that Home Rule petition. Moving forward, just for the sake of moving forward, in his opinion, is not only unreasonable, it's irresponsible. Councilor Dooner said Councilor Duarte said kind of what she was going to say and she thinks just moving it forward because we didn't find these changes within your own timeline, she thinks it's very irresponsible. She thanked the Elections Department, Law Department and the Mayor's Office for finding these discrepancies in the document. This is obviously something everyone worked really hard for and it's not easy to admit when there was a mistake in it. Everyone makes mistakes and it's not easy to admit that on a document that has so many eyes on it, that everyone was working on. She echoed Councilor Duarte's point that moving forward an inaccurate document is just down right irresponsible. Councilor Borges said she heard words of discrepancies and challenges and everything else but she really struggles with the fact that eight days before the language is due for the ballot question, that they are talking about this today. A Councilor mentioned that for six-months the Charter discussion has been going on and there is an election and everything else. So, why are we having this discussion eight days before the election. She honesty feels it's up to the voters to decide. She really hopes that there isn't some kind of plan here to have a Special Election in April when we have already seen what happened with a Public Safety Debt Exclusion, we saw what happened with Bristol Plymouth High School vote when voters just did not come out in April. So, she is hoping that if this does pass to remove it from the ballot, that this does not come back to an election until it's a general election in November of 2024. She feels it would be completely unfair if this was ever to go in as a Special Election where 750 voters come out to vote. Councilor Borges asked the City Solicitor as to whether or not it does have to go on the ballot on November of 2024 in the event that this does get withdrawn from the November 2023 election. Attorney Costa said if this doesn't go on this year's ballot, then it has to be re-approved through the Legislature and then put on per that bill. The Council would control the date. Councilor Borges asked if it goes back to the Legislature, and it comes back where there are changes in the language, and the Governor signs it to go on the next election, is there any possibility that there could be a Special Election that is going to cost the tax payers more money with less voter turnout in April. Attorney Costa said that is speculation. Mayor O'Connell said that this is a discussion for when it comes back to Council. Councilor Borges said she just was asking if it's possible. She asked that the maker of the motion add that it would not be considered for a Special Election in April. Mayor 0' Connell said we need to follow the law and follow the process. Councilor Pottier said they would have a new Council starting in January so we would basically be taking the vote away from that Council. He would not be comfortable adding that to the motion. Council Postell said  10 if he is afforded the opportunity another term, he would agree. He thinks the general election is probably where it needs to be. He also wanted to respond to previous comments, as to having the residents being able to have the opportunity to vote on this, but the vote in November is not going to identify where the challenges lie. It's an up or down vote. That doesn't mean they are going to be able to solicit, find out ideas and guard their feedback why people didn't support it to fix those problems. Now is the time. They have identified discrepancies, that's fact. Now they have the opportunity to further educate, further inform the residents of this community, and further garner their interest to come back and have the ideas and the honest discussions. Discussion continued. Councilor Duarte said to the point of when a new election would be if the Charter was amended, he thinks that discussion is premature because the original Charter language that was submitted to the Legislature specifically stipulated that it would be voted on in the 2021 election with the optimism that the Legislature would act quickly which they did not. The final language that ended up being in there was a negotiation between the Senate Counsel's office and the City Solicitors office because the 2021 election has obviously passed and the agreement was come to that the language which would be used for the next year election. It will all depend on how fast the Legislature acts on the Home Rule petition and what the City agrees to with the Legislature as to when the election will be. Councilor Pottier said he appreciates the Council's point as far as how Special Elections are not truly represented of the community as a whole because certainly the Bristol- Plymouth High School Committee and the Bristol-Plymouth High School Administration pushed for a Special Election in the spring in order to get that on the ballot. He appreciated the concerns in regards to Special Elections but he is prepared to make a motion. Councilor Borges said she wanted to go back again to just stating again, that we found all about this eight days before the language was going to be on the ballot. With a phone call to the Elections and many emails to the City Solicitor to find out what was going on, when this language is going to happen and all this kind of stuff and now were getting this thrown at us eight days before the language is due for the ballot. She thinks this is completely wrong. The comments made about the Legislature dragging their feet and all this stuff, she had made many phone calls to the Clerk at the State House to find out that maybe the Legislature was dragging their feet but there was also a lot of dragging the feet of the Law Department because they were waiting on information from the Law Department. It was a give and take. To sit here and blame the Legislature for all of this and not take any responsibility for it, is to her, just wrong. It was both sides. Attorney Costa said the Law Department never dragged its feet through the process. They had that allegation made by another public official and he believes they rebutted it, and gave a detailed rebuttal about each and every communication that occurred between the Legislature and the Law Department. There is no basis for that. Councilor Coute said he is not a fan of the practice of questioning the integrity and competence of our City Officers. He thinks it's just extremely irresponsible and a big turnoff but he'll still say thank you to the Law Department for their efforts with the Charter. It was a very difficult task and he thinks they perform well. Excellent work. Motion was made to instruct the Elections Director to not put the Charter on the November 2023 ballet on a roll call vote. On a roll call vote, five (5) Councilors voted in favor (Dooner, Duarte, Pottier, Conte and Postell), four (4) Councilors voted in opposition (Borges, McCaul, Sanders and Quintal). So voted. Motion passed. Motion was made to have these specific three issues referred to the Law Department and the Chief Election Officer to cure the challenges of these sections on a roll call vote. On a roll call vote, nine (9) Councilors voted in favor. So voted.  11 Motion was made to excuse the parties. So voted. Communications from Citizens: Com. from the Taunton Democratic City Committee extending an invitation to attend the Candidates Night for the offices of the Mayor, Municipal Council, School Committee and TMLP hosted by the Taunton Democratic City Committee and IBEW Local 223 on Monday, October 16th from 6-9 p.m., to be located at IBEW Union Hall and Training Facility located at 475 Myles Standish Blvd., Taunton. Motion was made to receive and place on file. So voted. Com. from Parride Pirrotta, 261 Weir Street, Taunton requesting No Parking Signs on a portion of Weir Street. He gave some details on why he is requesting these signs due to safety issues. Pictures were also submitted. Motion was made to refer to the Committee on Ordinances and Enrolled Bills and the Safety Officer. So voted. Petitions: Hours of Operations - RENEWAL 1. Speedway, LLC dba Speedway #2432, located at 943 County Street, Taunton. Motion was made to refer to the Committee on Police and License and the Police Chief. So voted. Personal Kennel License - NEW Petition submitted by Colleen Simmons, 25 Silverwood Drive, Taunton for a NEW Grade 1 (4-6 Dogs). Motion was made to refer to the City Clerk to schedule a Public Hearing. So voted. Claim: Claim submitted by Diane M. Torres, 20 Ashleigh Terrace, Taunton, seeking reimbursement for damages to her automobile from hitting a water cover on Winter Street. (Already Submitted to the Law Department and DPW) Committee Reports: Motion was made for Committee Reports to be read by title and approved. So Voted. Recommendations adopted to reflect the votes as recorded in Committee Reports. So Voted. Unfinished Business: NONE Orders. Ordinances and Resolutions: MGL to be Adopted on a Roll Call Vote Ordered That, At a Committee on Finance and Salaries meeting of the Municipal Council, held on September 19, 2023, the Municipal Council voted to accept Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 60, Section 3C which is a City Scholarship or Education Fund.  12 Motion was made to adopt on a roll call vote. On a roll call vote, nine (9) Councilors were present, nine (9) Councilors voted in favor. So voted. MGL to be Adopted on a Roll Call Vote Ordered That, At a Committee on Finance and Salaries meeting of the Municipal Council, held on September 19, 2023, the Municipal Council voted to accept Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 60, Section 3D which is a voluntary donation for the purpose of establishing an elderly and disabled taxation fund to defray real estate taxes of elderly and disabled persons of low income. Motion was made to adopt on a roll call vote. On a roll call vote, nine (9) Councilors were present, nine (9) Councilors voted in favor. So voted. New Business: Councilor Sanders requested that the Safety Officer assess Florence Street regarding limiting parking to one side of the street, per resident request. Motion was made to move approval. So voted. Councilor Coute made a motion to add the topic of a flashing light for East Taunton Elementary School on Stevens Street to the agenda for next week to be referred to the Safety Officer and the Committee on Police and License. So voted. Information only, Mayor O'Connell stated they just received news that one of our Taunton Police Officers is being transported to Boston Medical Center. He was stabbed during a pursuit. He was unconscious when he got to the med flight. Their thoughts and prayers are with him and his family. This whole community will be praying and standing right beside him throughout this time. Councilor McCaul gave a moment of silence to pray for the officer. List ofDocuments and Other Exhibits: • Agenda • Letter from Willitts S. Mendonca • Pictures of Vehicles on Weir Street Meeting adjourned at 8:19 P.M. A true copy: JLL/KLD  13 RECEIVED City of Taunton CITY CL[m<:s OFFICE Municipal Council September 26, 2023 2013 SEP 28 A \Gt OS The Committee on Finance and Salaries 1AUHTO\i. MA C\TY CLEi<.K The meeting was held at Taunton City Hall, 15 Summer Street, Tauntmr,MA:\J2'780 in the Chester R. Martin Municipal Council Chambers. Members Present: Councilor Phillip Duarte, Chairman Councilor David Pottier Councilor John McCaul Also Present: Patrick Dello Russo, CFO Christine Clymens, Treasurer/Collector Ian Fortes, City Auditor Charlene Bonenfant, Director of Human Services Gill Enos, Budget Director The meeting was called to order at 5:31 PM. 1. Approval of minutes from September 19, 2023. Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. McCaul to approve. So voted. 2. Meet to review the weekly vouchers and payroll for City departments. Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. McCaul to approve the payroll warrant in the amounto/$1,660,875.17. So voted. Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. McCaul to approve the accounts payable warrant in the amount o/$5,852,953.19. So voted. 3. Meet to discuss the request to establish a gift account for the Taunton Police Department comfort dog. Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. McCaul to invite in the interested party. So voted. Mr. Duarte read a letter from Mr. Dello Russo requesting the establishment of this gift account.  14 · Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. McCaul to make the letter part of the record. So voted. Mr. Duarte read the language of the requested Order to establish the account. Motion by Mr. McCaul and seconded by Mr. Pottier to approve the gift account. Mr. Postell noted that this is a common approach for many municipalities. So voted. 4. Meet to discuss the request to transfer from the Social Spending Stabilization Account to the Helping Hand Program Fund. Mr. Fortes explained that since this is a transfer from stabilization, a 2/3 vote of the Council would be required. The request is to transfer $350,000 from the Social Spending Stabilization fund to the Helping Hands Program Account. Mr. Duarte read the suggested Order. Mr. McCaul asked what the balance of the Social Spending Stabilization Account would be and Mr. Dello Russo stated it would be close to zero. Details of the program will be discussed next week. Motion by Mr. McCaul and seconded by Mr. Pottier to approve the transfer. So voted. 5. Meet to discuss the request to dedicate 25% or an amount not to exceed $250,000 from tax liens redeemed and directly allocate those fund to be the recurring revenue for the Helping Hand Fund. Ms. Clymens showed the tax title payments for the last three fiscal years. 25% on average would give $240,000 annually. Mr. Dello Russo stated that using this source of funding makes this a sustainable account. Mr. Duarte read the suggested language of the Order. Mr. Pottier clarified that this is a recommendation and not a mandate. Motion by Mr. McCaul and seconded by Mr. Pottier to approve. So voted. Motion by Mr. McCaul and seconded by Mr. Pottier to adjourn and thank the participants at 5:43 P.M So voted. Committee on Finance and Salaries September 26, 2023 Page2of3  15 List o(Documents and Other Exhibits Used: The Committee on Finance and Salaries Meeting Minutes from 9/19/23 Payroll Warrant #49 Bill Invoice Warrant #48 List of items over $100,000 Letter from Patrick Dello Russo dated 9/12/23 Order to Establish Gift Account for Comfort Dog Letter from Patrick Della Russo dated 9/14/23 Order to Transfer Social Spending Stabilization Fund to Helping Hand Fund Program Account Order to Direct Fund Helping Hand Fund Program Account Tax Title Annual Payments CITY OF TAUNTON Respectfully submitted, IN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL -~(.~!__'- Maggie E. Clarke Clerk of Council Committees RTS ACCEPTED. RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED. ~ Committee on Finance and Salaries September 26, 2023 Page 3 o/3  16 RECEIVED City of Taunton CITY CLERt\'S OFFICE Municipal Council September 26, 2023 ZD23 SEP 28 A IQ: 05 The Committee of the Council as a Whole TAUiHON. M.A. . . . _ . CHY CLERK The meeting was held at Taunton City Hall, 15 Summer Street, Taunton:-MA 0178D m the Chester R. Martin Municipal Council Chambers. Councilors Present: Council President Kelly Dooner Councilor Phillip Duarte Councilor Estele Borges Councilor John McCaul Councilor David Pottier Councilor Christopher Coute Councilor Barry Sanders Councilor Lawrence Quintal Councilor Jeffrey Postell Also Present: · Attorney Matt Costa, City Solicitor Jim Hawkins, State Representative, Attleboro Jean Warrish, Rocky Knoll Estates Carol Doherty, State Representative The meeting was called to order at 5:51 PM. 1. Approval of minutes from September 19, 2023. Motion by Mr. Coute and seconded by Mr. Pottier to approve the minutes from September 19, 2023. So voted. 2. Meet to discuss the request to adopt a resolution endorsing passage of House Bill 1327 and Senate Bill S875, "An Act relative to manufactured housing communities". Motion by Mr. Coute and seconded by Mr. Pottier to invite in the City Solicitor. So voted. Motion by Mr. Coute and seconded by Mr. McCaul to invite in the sponsor of the Bill, James Hawkins, State Representative Doherty, and the author of the letter that was sent. So voted. Ms. Doherty stated that she was attending as State Representative to support the residents' effort and that she is planning to testify on behalf of this measure tomorrow.  17 Ms. Warrish stated that she is asking the City to support the residents of the manufactured home parks who are mostly seniors. She believes that these bills, Hl327 and S875, will help keep things fair. There are seven manufactured home parks in Taunton and five are owned by large corporations. She indicated that she had 80 letters from residents of different manufactured home communities in the City expressing their support. Ms. Warrish explained that in manufactured home communities, the residents rent the land, essentially the parking spot for their homes. They pay monthly rent but do not know what the monthly expenses are. She believes that in all parks the residents need some type of protection. This Bill will allow for a taskforce. Ms. Warrish gave some rent summaries from different parks highlighting how the rents have increased. She indicated her hope that the Council would adopt the resolution so that they can go to the State House tomorrow with that support. Mr. Hawkins explained that in the past many parks were family owned but now they are being gobbled up by out of state corporations. He gave an example of one park that was on the books for $3 Million, the tenants made an offer to purchase of $10 Million, it was actually sold to a hedge fund for $13 Million, and was then flipped a year later for $19 Million. He stressed that these bills do not change the State law and does not cost the owners in the parks anything extra. Massachusetts has some of the best protection laws in the nation and this would just confirm that any changes are in conformity with State law. Ms. Dooner asked if landlords can still increase rents and Mr. Hawkins confirmed that landlords can still increase rents and indicated that this would just provide for a review. Mr. Postell suggested that this is an opportunity to resurrect an ordinance that covers the manufactured homes where there used to be a task force. He suggested that this be looked at to see how this would roll into the existing task force. Mr. Postell would like to see an annual report provided to owners and other information shared such as successes and shortcomings. While he will support this, he thinks that the Bill needs more bite but this is a start. He further suggested information sharing across parks. Mr. Pottier stated that he served on the task force in the past and the focus then was on evictions. He suggested that if owners knew that rent increases were coming then they could plan accordingly. He indicated that the owners are looking to get information and that this is the least the Council should be able to do. He expressed his belief that this is entirely reasonable and will support the resolution. The Clerk of Committees read the suggested resolution. Motion by Mr. Sanders and seconded by Mr. Postell to adopt the resolution as written. Mr. McCaul stated that the residents need some protection. He knows that this is time sensitive and he will be voting yes. Ms. Borges recognized Senator Pacheco who signed onto this Bill and is working with the AG on manufactured home issues. She wondered how this is different from what Senator Pacheco is working on. Representative Hawkins stated that he supports what Senator Committee of the Council as a Whole September 26, 2023 Page2of4  18 Pacheco is doing and they do not conflict with each other. Ms. Borges stated that she hopes that these changes will protect the homeowners. Mr. Duarte asked about pass-through expenses and Ms. Warrish stated that these include real estate taxes, water, sewer, license fees, and capital expenses. Mr. Duarte referenced an article from the New Yorker from March of 21 that claimed that manufactured home communities are becoming cash cows for investment companies. He suggested that this is a well-orchestrated scheme by people with a lot of money. He believes this a reasonable approach to the issue. Mr. Duarte suggested that this is not rent control but, rather, rent justification. He referenced the letter from the Massachusetts Manufactured Housing Association and indicated that he did not find the arguments compelling. Mr. Duarte gave his support for the resolution. Mr. Coute stated that he is an opponent of rent control but he does not view this as rent control. The Bills are just looking to enforce existing State laws. Ms. Borges supported the measure and agreed with the points that Mr. Duarte had made. So voted. Motion by Ms. Borges and seconded by Mr. Postell to make the letter of opposition and the fact sheet part of the record So voted. Motion by Mr. Coute and seconded by Ms. Borges to excuse the parties. So voted. Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. Postell to take a 2 minute recess at 6:33 PM So voted. The Committee returned to business at 6:42 PM 3. Meet to discuss marijuana related businesses licensing procedure and number. Mr. Pottier stated that he was wondering ifthere is an appetite to discuss adding a couple licenses as the market is becoming more mature. Mr. Coute indicated that he would have an appetite once all licenses are approved and the businesses are operational. At that point, he thinks that getting an update from OECD, the Building Inspector, and the City Clerk might make sense. In general, he believes the market drives the commerce. Mr. Postell would like to get the current businesses up and running. If the market determines that the demand isn't being met then this can be looked at again. Committee of the Council as a Whole September 26, 2023 Page3 of4  19 Ms. Borges suggested a committee to keep better track of cannabis matters. She would prefer to wait until that committee forms as she is not prepared to make any decisions tonight on this. Mr. Duarte stated that adding any new licenses would be to the detriment of the current licensees looking to succeed in the market. Mr. Sanders suggested this should be part of a larger conversation. He noted that the CCC has recently released some draft regulations regarding HCAs and protections around social equity businesses and if the cap were to be raised he would want to be consistent with that rmss10n. Motion by Mr. Pottier and seconded by Mr. Coute to invite OECD, Building Commissioner, City Clerk, and Law Department for an update on the status of existing license holders and for a discussion on the appetite for more licenses. So voted. Motion by Mr. Coute and seconded Mr. Postell to adjourn the meeting at 6:52 PM So voted. List ofDocuments and Other Exhibits Used: Meeting Minutes from the Committee of the Council as a Whole 9/19/23 Letter from Jean Warish dated 9112/23 Resolution in support ofH1327 and S875 House Bill 1327 and Senate Bill 875 Opposition to the Proposed Amendments to Chapter 140 of the General Laws from the Massachusetts Manufactured Housing Association Email from Melissa Caron, MMHA Executive Director CITY OF TAUNTON Respectfully submitted, SEP. ·2 6 2023 fl } · J/A.&'z_~ t _LA£iVLI~ /) J " • .-, /l I IN MUNICIPAL COUNCIL Maggii-E~Clarke Clerk of Council Committees ORTS ACCEPTED. RECOMMENDATIONS ADOPTED. r~l'Uf.J#'r"RK )f ~ Committee of the Council as a Whole September 26, 2023 Page4 o/4