Gloucester City Council, Sept. 22, 2026

Good evening and welcome to the September 22nd, 2026 meeting of the Glouester City Council. This public meeting of the city council is recorded on Zoom with a link that is posted on the agenda. If you are calling in on a phone, you can press star 9 to request to speak. If you are watching on a computer or device, there is a raised hand button that you can tap or press to request to speak. Please use either of these options during oral communications and public hearings to be recognized to speak. If technical difficulties arise and the Zoom link is interrupted during an in-person hybrid meeting of the city council and a quorum is present, the meeting may continue after efforts have

been made to reestablish the link. The minutes shall note the interruption. It is the finding of the city of Gloucester that no individual should be denied equal treatment or opportunity because of their age, ancestry, color, disability, including intellectual and developmental mental disability, family status, immigration status, gender identity or expression, military status, marital status, national origin, race, religion, sex or sexual orientation. This evening with us we have ward one counselor Scott Memar, counselor at large Patty A Page, counselor at large Anna Kimberly, W 2 counselor Dylan Benson, W three counselor Marjorie Grace, and Ward four

counselor um Franchesco Majora. We also um have with us in the audience we have our interim police chief Michael Williams and we have the chairman of the traffic commission Bob Ryan. We also have the school CFO Cody Marshall on Zoom. We have also remotely we have our city legal Suzanne Egan. We have here with us our city clerk Grace Porer. The also on Zoom is um we're online is our CEO Kelly Dolan and our city auditor Kenny Costa.

>> I pledge algiance to the flag >> of the United States of America >> and to the republic which stands One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Next order. Business. Madam clerk. >> Oral communications. The public shall have the opportunity at every regularly scheduled meeting of to be heard under oral communications on matters not appearing on the agenda. Oral communication shall allow any resident and/or property owner and/or business owner who has a request or complaint of any nature relative to city business to appear before the council,

seconded by councelor Grace discussion. Seeing none. All those in favor? I opposed. Eyes have it. 70 to zero. Two absent. Thank you very much. Bill. >> Thank you. >> Congratulations. >> Next order. Business. Madam clerk. >> The consent agenda. >> Anyone wish to remove anything from the consent agenda? Councelor Paige. >> Just briefly. Number nine.

number nine under um the mayor's report. >> Yes. >> Memorandum from the city fairing signs. >> Yep. Okay. Anyone else wish to pull anything off? I'd like to have a motion to accept the consent agenda as amended. >> So move. >> Second. Motion made by councelor Grace, seconded by councelor memark. Discussion on the consent agenda. >> All those in favor? >> I >> I post eyes have it seven to zero. Two absent. Councelor Page. >> Thank you. >> I I did um email Kelly Dolan and she sent me a pretty comprehensive um response to the cost and things of these

signs. Um it somewhere I picked up that the first 17,000 we voted in our previous meeting was phase one. Now we're asked for another 12,000 to install a portion of wfairing signing. So I have a couple questions. >> This will be this is going to be an F. So that's probably >> you want me to do it there? >> Probably appropriate time. Yeah, >> that's fine. I accept that. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um, shall we vote on item number nine? Make a motion to refer to BNF. >> Okay. You want to make? >> Yeah. Yeah. I'll move to accept nine as written. >> Refer to refer to BNF

>> to to go forward to BNF. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Page, second by council memar. Discussion. >> All those in favor? Opposed? >> Eyes have it. Seven to zero. are too abs next door to business madam clerk >> September 17th budget and finance standing committee report >> council memard >> thank you we have a few items for your consideration from our Thursday night meeting last week at budget and finance uh the first was a memorandum from the glouester public schools CFO requesting a payment of a prior year invoice with fiscal year 2027 funds and this is in the amount of $51,317 $1723 and I'll read the motion which was by

myself, seconded by councelor Page. We voted three in favor, zero opposed. To recommend the city council approve in accordance with Mass General Law, chapter 4464, payment of prior year invoices and obligations is presented in a memo from the school CFO, that's Cody Marshall, dated August 31st, 2026 in the amount of 51,31723 and this is to be paid with current year fiscal year 2027 general fund school department budgeted funds. And I so move. >> Second. Motion made by councelor memar and seconded by councelor page. Discussion. Councelor Page. >> We did go over this on budget and finance on Thursday.

Was this some kind of lawsuit by these employees that was mediated and settled? And if so, are we looking at this? Was over a strike. >> It was a union grievance. >> A union grievance. Okay. Are we expecting more of those union grievances or is this one and done? >> Oh, Mr. Marshall's with us asking that question. >> Hi there. Uh, no, I do not expect any more to come from this. This was a unique scenario given the strike was almost two years ago, but it was a grievance filed later than expected and uh yeah, this was a result of the settlement and arbitration, but no, I don't expect more to come of it. >> Thank you.

>> Any other questions? Council Benson, >> thank you. So, and this grievance happened several months or longer after the end of the strike. Correct. >> Yeah. I don't have an exact date of when it was when it was formally filed, but yes, it was several months after. >> Okay. Okay. So, it's in relation to the contract that they that they negotiated with the city, the school committee. Correct. >> Yeah. I was saying it was um it's 10 days at the all the units members for their daily rate uh during the strike. >> Be clear, I don't think this had this was not any striking members. This was the nurses. >> No, >> this was not any striking members. >> No. Yeah, this is separate from the

strike itself. It was as a result of the work done during the strike. >> Okay. Yep. Thank you for that. >> Yeah. Thank you. Okay. >> Any more questions? All those in favor I opposed. Eyes have it. Seven to zero. Two absent. Thank you, Cody. >> Thank you, >> Next up was the memorandum from our acting police chief requesting to pay a fiscal year 2027 invoice without a purchase order in place in the amount of $440.94. And on a motion by myself, seconded by councelor Page, budget and finance committee voted three in favor, zero opposed to recommend that the city approve, city council approve in accordance with Mass General Law chapter 4464

payment of prior year invoices in the amount of $440.94 for the West Marine Pro at East East Broward Boulevard in Fort Lauderdale for marine equipment received in fiscal year 2026. 6 with an invoice noted number is noted dated July 1st 2026 in the amount of $39745 and a second invoice >> 36745 >> 36745 thank you Grace and a second invoice as noted dated July 1st 2026 in the amount of $7349 to be paid with fiscal year 2027 general fund police department ordinary maintenance budgeted funds and I so move

Second >> motion made by councel melhart and seconded by councelor page. Discussion. Seeing none. All those in favor? I opposed. Eyes have it. 7 to zero. Uh and finally the memorandum from the acting police chief requesting our acceptance of a fiscal year 2027 state 911 EMD grant. This is in the amount of $42,628.96. Budget and Finance on a motion by myself, seconded by councelor Paige, voted in three in favor, zero opposed to recommend the city council accept under master general law chapter 4453A, a state grant from the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and

Security, a fiscal year 2027 state 911 Department Emergency Medical Dispatch Grant Program for $42,528.96. The grant period is from September 1st, 2026 through June 30th, 2027. And there is no local match for this grant. And I so move. >> Second. >> Motion made by council meard and second by councelor Paige. Discussion. Seeing none. All those in favor? >> I opposed. Eyes have it. Seven to zero. Two abs. Thank you. >> Next order. Business. Madam clerk. >> September 14th. Ordinances and administration standing committee report.

>> There are no items under this heading. >> Thank you. Next order of business. >> The September 16th planning and development standing committee report. >> Council Benson. >> Okay. I wasn't prepared but uh but I was just reading. So all right. So we have um a few things. The first item is a petition by National Grid to install um one um JO pole on Belleview A beginning at a point of approximately 37 ft east of the center line of the intersection of Belleview A to Condan Conent Avenue. National Grid is petitioning to install one new JO pole

Works. Two, in the absence of a detailed construction plan, the Department of Public Works request all proposed conduits and a permanences shall be placed so as to cause minimum conflict with existing underground utility services. Three, all excavations must be secured at all times. Four, all excavated trenches shall be patched flush with the surrounding asphalt using hot mix asphalt binder at the end of each workday to minimize pedestrian hazards. Asphalt shall be applied in two lifts of 2 in totaling 4 in. Five,

sidewalks must be restored with like material immediately after pole set. and six paving conditions must be approved by public works prior to issuance of road opening permit and I so move >> second >> motion made by councelor Ben and seconded by councelor Kimbley discussion >> um if I may there was some discussion um it was actually a lengthy discussion from residents in the area having concerns I don't know if they're here tonight um or anyone's online um there was going to be some discussion with um the neighbor who is looking for this pole petition to see if it could be moved, but I'm not sure if anyone is online to speak to that. And I know if

before they speak, should I read the committee recommendations or >> I know that we have someone. >> Yeah. No, by >> just we're trying to remember >> by Robert's rules. You're supposed to do that. >> Yeah, I know that. I just, you know, I don't do often. So, um, committee recommendation on a motion by councelor Gro, seconded by councelor Kimberly. The planning and development committee voted three in favor, zero opposed to recommend that the city council approve the preservation restriction agreement as defined in Mass General Law chapter 184 sections 3132 and 33 between the Society of the Preservation for New England Antiques, also known as the Historic New England

Lia um who would you like to make uh any any comments on this before Um, I'm here to answer any questions that you counselors may have. These are two restrictions. Historic New England currently holds two in Gloucester, one of which you voted on a few months ago. Um, and one that we have held since 2007. Um, one of these properties is privately owned by a private citizen and it is currently on the market. Um, and so this is a little bit um, hastier than than previously anticipated because we need to get this recorded before closing happens. Um and so hence why we are before before you tonight. And the other restriction um that I don't know if it has the motion has now been read. So I can hold off on the Temple Hayden

Cottage uh comments, but that is a property currently held in or by Historic New England, owned by Historic New England, which will likewise be listed for sale here very shortly and sold back into private ownership with preservation restrictions on it. >> Right now, we're just taking up the Haskell House. >> Okay. questions. Council Paige >> on the Haskell House. Uh once it changes hands, it will still be in private ownership. So, does it remain on the real estate tax role? >> It does. It will remain on the tax role and in the tax base. Correct.

I would just like to say that these are this first and the second one are are two just wonderful historical properties which will reflect the fabric of the community here. I know councelor Grace and I met at a open house for the Haskell House. It was first listed on a beautiful day there in the marsh. The greenheads were just coming out and they came out. But these are beautiful properties and it's wonderful that the city is taking this step with our partners at Historic New England to preserve the f this fabric, this historic fabric within our community. I think it's just really important and wonderful for our our current generation and for the future. Thank you. >> You grace. >> Thank you. Um yeah, it was it the

Haskell House is an extraordinary um example of architecture from you know the the 17th century and it if anything were to happen to that that it was torn down or you know irrevocably altered I think it would be an absolute travesty. Um it's a tangible part of history that I think it is so very important to um to preserve that for posterity and just um it's when you walk into the into that house it's like walking back in time. Thank you. Anyone else? Okay. All those in favor? >> I >> I opposed. Eyes have it. 7 to zero. Two absent. Next up >> now regarding the Temple Hayden Cottage on Eastern Point Boulevard. Committee

and Ruth Anderson temple moved the circa 1750. So it is very old. Stobridge house from Canton, Massachusetts to a plot of farmland on Eastern Point where it now sits. It's significant for its origins both the as a half house from the 18th century as well as its association with the early 20th century development of Eastern Point. Ruth Anderson was an acclaimed painter who actually studied under another eastern eastern point resident Cecilia Bow and Samuel Temple her husband was a Stobridge descendant and a well-known lighting designer. So the couple couple were very active in the local arts community and their history links the cottage to the wider artist colonies that flourished on Cape Anne at that time. The Haydens purchased

the property in 1944, hence the Temple Hayden Cottage name, and owned it until 2020 when they sold it to historic New England, concerned that intensive development by a future owner would negatively impact both the cottage itself and its neighbor, the Bowort or Bowport, the Sleeper McCann House, which Historic New England owned and operates as a house museum. So, we've spent the last 6 years really carefully evaluating possibilities for the future of the cottage and the west best way to preserve it. As a result, we are preparing to sell this property back into private ownership, thus back into that tax base, subject to permanent preservation restrictions that will ensure the future of the cottage, but

also protect the scenic and historic context of Bowortport. These restrictions specifically protect the exterior of the Temple Hayden cottage, understanding the need for alteration, upgrades, um, and development within the cottage itself to allow for modern living and such. Um, which is why it's maybe slightly a bit different. Well, it is a bit different than the Haskell House um, preservation restriction that you just approved. >> Yep. Any questions? Discussion seeing none. All those in favor? I opposed. Eyes have it. Seven to zero. Two absent. Next order of business. Madame clerk.

to zero two absent. Next order business madam clerk. >> Public hearing 2026 number 25 memorandum from the general council regarding proposed amendments to chapter 9 article one trash. Oh, I got to open the public hearing. Sorry. Um, open the public hearing. And, um, speaking in favor, uh, we have general counsel, you put this forward, Suzanne Egan. >> Yes. Thank you, councilors. Um, this proposed amendment to the code of ordinances reflects the changes to the city's uh, trash collection services.

So, our uh existing code of ordinances regarding trash collection speaks to the pay as you throw program and the changes that are before you tonight incorporate the operational changes that will come about with the new trash service. And so, it's it's mainly a um administrative change to the code of ordinances versus anything that's uh too pro programmatic. So, I'm happy to answer any questions if you have them, and I'm also happy to run through those changes if that would be helpful. >> Thank you. Anyone else like to speak in favor?

>> Do we have any communications? We do not >> questions from the counselors. >> Councelor Paige, >> I do see 9.2 trash collection C. I'm always confused with this wording. Owner of a building with four or more units. Isn't it supposed to be more than four units? It says four 92 C. It should be an owner of a building with my copy has five or more residential units. >> It reads four or more. >> So I should more more than four or five or right. >> It's five. It should be five or more residential units. That's what's in the

um the packet the OA packet that I that I looked at today. >> So we just need that corrected. Right. N >> Exactly. >> 9-2C. Good job. >> Thank you. I read this.

>> Oh, all right. So, then we need to amend it. You like to offer an amendment? I'll make a motion to amend section >> Oh, wait a minute. Not yet. Not yet. >> Not yet. >> No, sorry. >> More questions. >> Page. I'm not even sure it's in the the um change here, but I just want to make note that I I still have a pretty difficult time um charging users that aren't going to participate in the program based upon the fact that they own a unit. I don't I believe there just needs to be accommodations or

exemptions. It's very difficult for me to see people that don't use the service pay for it while people that use the service certainly agree to pay for it and do pay for it. But there we're hearing more and more um reports of people either home owning having ownership in family homes they're holding on to but don't really use them or people that have two homes and one is just being held vacant for a reason or you know used sparsely and and one unit can handle the second unit rubbish. It it's just it seems that this is needs to this program needs a little more

flexibility and I don't believe that that the the exemptions or the flexibility will cause an increase in fees. >> That's not in this ordinance. So that's under the you look at section 9-3D is where it talks about fees >> which we already voted >> right. It says eligible households. >> No. Promate regulations >> shall be assessed to all eligible households on the basis of the fee structure. So you know eligible households is a subjective term. It doesn't say units. It says >> they are eligible because they could be inhabited and need the trash picked up. So they're all >> and if they're not inhabited or >> but they're but they're still eligible

to be inhabited. >> They're not using the service. >> But that doesn't have anything to do with their >> I'm just putting on the record. I have a hard time with that. Thank you. >> Okay. That that's a discussion that we should have had at the last meeting with the fees. >> Uh we did. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Extensively. >> All right. Very good. Any more discussion? Any more questions? >> No questions. >> Actually, I just have a quick question just to remind because looking at this um so this is just housekeeping. Um solicitor correct? >> Yes. Essentially, it is. >> Yeah. And can you remind us like in this ordinance um does this require like so

because I've had some people uh reach out to me um if this is related if you if I may, Council President, that people will need to bring those bins off the street and into an enclo like off the into their property right after pickup. That's still required obviously now like people have to bring the recycling in. just to remind folks because I think people are having questions about that if that makes sense that question. >> Right. Um the provision in the in the code of ordinances with regard to placing your trash on the curb and removing that uh receptacle has not changed. So the only changes in this ordinance are um to the new trash collected collection process. >> So as of now people will have to bring

those once pick up they have to bring the bins in. Correct. >> Exactly. >> Thank you. I know cuz people have been asking, so I appreciate that. >> And and that's in section um I don't have Oh, that is in section 911 and that's subsection A. It talks about when the rubbish shall be placed at the curbside and then when it shall be um also picked up. >> Thank you.

Okay. Any more questions? Going to close public hearing. >> Now you can um How do we want to do this? >> I'm gonna read the recommendation and then um madame clerk has put everything on the screen for everyone to see. That's everything is the recommendation. read the recommendation that too and then move to accept committee recommendation on a motion by council gray second by council Nolan the ordinance and administration committee

voted two in favor zero opposed one absent to recommend that city council amend the Glouester Court ordinance chapter 9 trash recycling and litter as follow. Chapter 9 trash recycling in litter article one in general as presented. I so move >> second. >> Should I make that amendment to the motion? >> Motion made by council majora seconded by councelor Grace. Is everyone okay with the way the motion was presented? I know. I know. I'm just asking if if everyone's okay with how that was done first. >> Yep, that's fine. >> Okay. All right. You can make your amendment. >> All right. I move to amend uh section

9-2 trash collection C. Any owner of a building with five or more residential units to replace four with five. >> And I so move. >> Second. Motion made by councelor Page, seconded by councelor Benson. Discussion on the amendment. >> All those in favor? >> I I post eyes have it. 7 to zero two absent. Thank you very much um councelor Paige for pointing that out. Now on the main motion. Any any discussion on the main motion? Okay. All those in favor? I >> I >> opposed. Eyes have it. Seven to zero.

Two absent. Next order. Business. Madam clerk. Public hearing 2026 number 21. Council order 26 number six. Grace and Nolan. Amend GCO chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicles section 22-285 parking of trucks, trailer trucks, and other commercial vehicles. subsection B by adding Washington Square for its entirety from 10 p.m. through 6 a.m. >> I'll open the public hearing. And who would like to speak in favor? >> Council Grace. >> I thank you. Um, first of all, just a quick apology to the people who on whose doors and mailboxes I left notices that

I neglected to specify Washington Square, which caused a little confusion. Um, sorry about that. Um this was brought forth by a couple of residents on the the on Washington Square who reside there um [clears throat] who have brought it to my attention. It's basically for for more than two years now about the issues of uh the large commercial vehicles parking on the street making it difficult for um emergency vehicles to get through and also um causing issues with parking because the large you know 12ton vehicle takes up um much more than one parking place. Um and but mostly it's about the safety issues of of emergency vehicles getting through. Um during the day, you know, it's a little bit easier. People

are not home, but at night when um the road is is inundated with parked cars and you have a 12 um,000 pound vehicle blocking the way for a firet truck or an ambulance to get through. Um you know, seconds save lives. And it and it's a very um it's extraordinarily dangerous if if a vehicle is trying an emergency vehicle is trying to get through and they have to go knocking on doors to find out who owns a vehicle to move it so that they can get through to wherever it is that they're going. Um you know, be it for a fire or for a medical emergency, whatever the case may be. um you know a small road like that cannot incorporate large you know um vehicles commercial vehicles and trailers and tractor trailer trucks blocking the

roads on a on a nightly basis. So that's basically it's a safety issue. Um you know it's only overnight during the day as I said it's it's you know people aren't there so the vehicles can still get through for the most part. Um, but the road is extremely narrow and when you've got a large vehicle that's, you know, chooses to even park on the sidewalk to make space for people to get by, which is a um against the law in and of itself, a $100 fine every time you do it. Um, supposedly uh it's, you know, it could somebody could [clears throat] be harmed, somebody could lose their home, somebody could lose their life if an emergency vehicle can't get through in time and seconds save lives. And if you

know, if um a fireman or an EMT has to get out and go knocking on doors to get a car moved, um I would I would think that we would want to make sure that our neighbors are safe. Thank you. >> Anyone else like to speak in favor? Anyone like to speak in opposition?

Council is in receipt of one um communication received by the deadline to submit from Sarah Doherty who um is in support of this ordinance amendment. You did also receive another communication received after the deadline that was forwarded to everyone but cannot be read into the record due to timing. >> Thank you. >> Questions from the counselors? Councelor Paige, >> I do have a question maybe for Bob Ryan. What is the rule for um parking commercial vehicles on any city street? That's somewhat of a vague question. Uh there are several rulings, there are several ordinances on different streets.

Uh be it private roads, be it uh public roads, tractor trailers, and so forth. They're all restricted and outlined in the city ordinances. Does that answer anything? >> Yeah, that that's fine. It wasn't. >> Yeah, >> I can I can reference the ordinance like I'm I'm aware on Harbor Loop it it's dedicated commercial Roger Street >> trailer truck not commercial >> right >> sorry >> trailer truck not commercial >> oh trailer truck >> trailer truck 18 wheelers they're defined on Roger Street Aberloop uh different areas of the city Flanigan Square uh there are several but they're all spelled out in the city ordinances >> thank you >> okay and just to follow up with

councelor Grace if I may concur. Uh safety issue on Washington Street traveling from Granite Street looping around to Washington Street uh just for a regular passenger car. It's difficult, let alone tractors, trailers, or bigger trucks. Okay. And I'll introduce myself when I come back up. >> Thank you. You were invited up.

I'll take the committee recommendation. Committee recommendation on a motion by council grace. Seconded by myself. The ordinance and administration committee voted three in favor, zero opposed to recommend that the city council amend the Boston court of ordinance chap 22 traffic and motor vehicle section 22 through 285 parking of trucks, trailer trucks and other commercial vehicles subsection B by adding Washington Square for its entirety from 10 p.m. through 6 a.m. and I so move. >> Second. >> Motion made by councelor Maja, seconded by councelor Grace. For the record, the myself is council MUA. Um, discussion seeing none. All those in favor? >> I opposed. >> Eyes have it. Seven to zero. Um, two

absent. Next order. Business. Madam clerk. >> Book hearing 2026 number 26. Council order 2026 number 14. Memhard. Amend GCO chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicles section 22-292 fire lanes by deleting Rackcliffe Street westerly side from its intersection with Fremont Street in a southerntherly direction for its entire length to dead end and adding Rackliff Street both sides from its intersection with Fremont Street in a southerntherly direction for its entire length to dead end. >> Thank you. I'll open the public hearing. Speaking in favor,

at the end of Rackip Street. Um which and I had my camera and so uh I took a picture of the uh engine number one twice. Once as it was it had already turned around and was at the head of the And then it was starting to back down. So I took that picture and another picture. And point of the pictures is that when the fire engine came up to the top of Fremont Street, it could not make the turn. So uh some of the fire people were let off. They carried their equipment down to the very end of Racker

Street while the driver turned away from the fire and went up the street so that he could be straightened out and back down. And so while he was spending that extra time, these other firemen were down there starting to work the fire. Um that was an unfortunate but um important demonstration of why Rapler Street should be uh fire lanes on both sides that there are no vehicles interfering with the fire vehicles that travel down street. And in addition to which um

under 22-152 the fire lanes on private ways are to ensure at least a 10-ft unobstructed path which um it would be pretty difficult if you have vehicles parked alongside the street. So um again for that reason uh we support that that the fire lane be declared on both sides of the street. There are also some others here who would like to speak in favor of this motion. So >> they they come up individually. They get three minutes.

feel comfortable, not able to get down the street. It's very difficult at best turning onto that street. Um, if cars are parked there, there is very little visibility when you come up to that intersection because of the a slightly ra rised yard and the vegetation there. So when you you have to get in past the intersection into the intersection before you can see it's and if there are cars or trucks parked there particularly if they're larger vehicles such as panel trucks that are construction mark of you there you know it's difficult for to get around the corner if if there are cars parked there and someone parks across the street from like a a delivery truck or a

landscaper's truck is parked in the house directly across the street from me, which means there are cars parked all along the street on my side where they're allowed to park. And if somebody's temporarily there, it's impossible for anybody to go down the street of an emergency vehicle until they locate the driver of the truck. The other thing that happens is if you're driving up the street and cars are parked there and someone comes around the corner, it's a one-way street. So, people have to back up around into the intersection. It's not a good situation. I recommend that we eliminate the parking on the street. Thank you. >> Thank you.

there. And I was glad that it wasn't a real fire because that would could have, as Council Grace said, you know, seconds or minutes might mean lives and certainly a property. So, I I do request that this proposal be accepted and I think it would be for better good everybody on Rackless Street. Um, and also just a little aside, I've always asked my guests and family to park elsewhere um when they would come if there wasn't room in my driveway. that I I'd say there's other places on Rocky Neck and there's the parking lot. So So be it.

truck what they need. So both doors go flying open and they're coming and going. So there's absolutely no room on the road. And as the fire chief the fire chief had said he didn't want parking on the street, it became crystal clear to us that is absolutely right when it when it's needed and that's the real concern and we know that the police chief also understands the support that we it can't support the parking. So, I'm just saying once again, please please remember that we all deserve to be safe and we need the the street to be open. Thank you.

Safathia Romeo Taken, Safathia Romeo Taken, Greg Berger, and now Paul Lunberg. This is probably the tightest street I've ever seen in all these years. Uh the recommended width of travel lanes to accommodate two lanes of traffic range anywhere from 20 to 24 ft. However, after visiting Ratco Street, I learned that Ratco Street is no wider than 14 to 15 ft, thus creating an unsafe condition for its residents should an emergency arise. When brought to uh Eric Smith's attention, Chief Smith, he then suggested that the city's Department of Public Works engineering department conduct the sweep paths analysis to determine if in fact fire apparatus

could enter and exit Raco Street safely and it was determined that it the vehicles could not. Chief Smith, based on the study, determined that it was paramount that fire lanes be established on both sides of Rockwood Street in order for the fire apparatus to enter and provide the safety of its residents. As requested by council, F. Smith on May 20th, 2026 made a formal recommendation to establish fire lanes on both sides of Rack Street for public safety and was approved by Paul uh Mayor Paul Lundberg. In summary, the city of Alosters Police Chief, the City of Alester's Fire Chief, the Glouester traffic commission all unanimously support this order for the

residents of Rack Street safety. And I ask that each and every one of you support this order as well. And just to cite uh and concur section 22152 of the city's uh code of ordinances leaving vehicles unattended on private ways so as to block access for firearms. It shall be un unlawful for any person to leave a vehicle unattended within the limits of a private way furnishing means of access for fire rice for any building. The city council shall have the authority to designate private ways and parts thereof listed in section 22192 as fire lanes with restrictions thereon as necessary to ensure at least a

doing a little research and in and uh about the parking in this back in 90 1982 the councils there including uh Renee Nut Brown Nut Brown Kadi Carolina Connor all knew that in the transition of the Rockaway condominiums from the hotel it was going to create some issues. Brad Cliff Street actually lost two spots on on this transition. All right. So then they did a study and in that study their concern was safety and parking and

as as uh Renee Gross Nutberg Nut Brown once said the biggest of the immediate problems is parking. It's perennial in Rocky Neck. So now you're gonna you're about to take away two parking spots right now for and this is from 82. That is 44 years of uh trucks going down trash trucks going down. Uh fire uh well even fire trucks for that matter and and city trucks. They've gone down for 44 years. What's changed?

I ask you, what's changed? All of a sudden, Red, this end of Radcliffe Street is a danger and then you're using then you're using these ordinance, right? Well, let me tell you, if you use these ordinance, what's next? Fremont Street, WY Street, they're all tight quarters. Rocky Radcliffe Street is really not much w smaller than WY Street or Fremont Street. In fact, if you try to go up Fremont Street, chances are I'm always looking for the scratches on my car because it's so tight. And yet there's parking on Fremont Street and then there's three three spots on Fremont. You going to go after them? No, I know you're not. I know you're not.

But the thing is, what's changed? What's causing all these problems? For 44 years, nothing went wrong. Everybody knows that when you went down to Fremont Street, you had to back down for the fire. The fire people knew that. They knew it then. Carolyn Okconer, she was in the city council. She she voted for it. Combat. They all knew that parking was going to be an issue and safety. But they passed it. They passed it. And now you're asking to take away two spots. How many spots do you think there are in that area? Five, six.

This is not the way to to answer this solution. There has to be a better way. Rocky Neck has always had problems. And yet, here we go. We're going to say, and then remember there's the fire lane when you turn left. Okay? when there's a fire lane and like I said, the fire trucks have to back down. If they're going to come straight in, they have to come in by the other side of Rackless Street by the condos. And it's a one-way street. And it's a one-way street. And it's been a one-way street for almost a whole year, even though it's supposed to change. But it hasn't changed. It's still a one-way street. What has changed to cause this problem? I know what it is. is the dynamics of

the neighborhood. But I'm not supposed to say that, but I'm saying it anyway. This This is wrong for the neighborhood. This is wrong. This is wrong because WY Street falls into the same category. Horton Street falls into the same category. Fremont Street falls into the same category. You can get them all shut down if you want. Please, please think of what you're doing. Rocking Neck has always had parking problems. And now, not to beat a dead horse, but for 44 years, nothing has been wrong with that. Nothing at all. Life went on as usual. Life went on as usual.

But now, huh, I can't. The fire truck. They know they have to back down there. That's no surprise. And when the and when they did that traffic study and put that 10 or 15 feet there for the fire lane and put those two legal they are legal approved city parking laws and I'm going to call them now public enemy number one and public enemy number two because that's what it's all about. And the cars that are they say that they were blocking this, they're not supposed to be there, right? They're not supposed to be there. What am I going to say? It's an uninforcable ordinance. They know they're not supposed to be there. Where where are you going to park? At

least you gave them two spots, but now you're going to take it away. This is wrong. Rocking neck is too tight to think that you going to take two spots away. That leaves us three. Do the right thing. Use good judgment. There has to be a better way to address this problem than to eliminate two spots that Carolina Carter voted for it. KMAD voted for that. They knew. They knew there was safety issues there and they knew the neighborhood needed parking. They knew it. It said in this paper in the Times, read the Times in September of uh September of 82, October 82. They

addressed this. They even formed a committee to address it. Please passing this ordinance. What are you telling the rest of Rocky Neck? What are you telling them? You might as well shut down Wy Street and Fremont Street. Fremont Street is probably shorter than than Radcliffe Street. Okay, think about it. What has caused all these problems? There has to be a better way. That's my story and I'm sticking with it. Thank you. Anyone else like to speak in opposition? Oh, this is an opposition. You You spoke already.

in general, people don't want to make waves. That's why they try. They don't want to be abused. They don't want to abuse anybody else and and that's all I have to say. Everybody goes out of their way. >> Thank you.

Just one question. Um and I believe the gentleman I don't know your name sorry the Kane said that that area has like landscapers that come to the neighborhood. If you put the U fire lanes on both sides where are these vehicles going to park in someone's driveway? Is there a parking spot for the businesses to do their work or will they be parked in the driveway? Because if this passes, they cannot park there to do anyone's work, yard work. That's I'm asking you, so I don't know if you want to go up to the mic. I just want to make sure that if we're doing no parking that no one parks there even >> come up to answer questions >> but just the questions >> actually it probably should be for Mr.

Maslo. >> Oh anyone Maslo? >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Well, he presented right. Sorry. >> I might be wrong. Hold on. Sorry. Hold on. >> Go ahead. >> If you can I don't want to argue with anybody. I just want to >> The question is the question is isapers park. >> I have a I I happen to live in a house which was constructed on what was formerly the the the what do you call it the parking place the carriage house for the Rockaway Hotel. All right. And and we actually own the lot beside us. Sir other people. Sir, excuse me. Sir, the

question is is >> three parking places in >> sir. You can't rebuttle right now. This is not a rebuttal question. Sir, >> I we make we make the we only have one car. >> I asked you the parking places available to people. That's all I'm trying to say. Okay. Is we try to make the parking the parking places are available. >> We only use one and we make them available to anybody who needs them. That's all I'm trying to say. >> Okay. Okay. For your for your spot, the landscapers can park in your in your you can fit the dump truck and the trailer in your driveway. >> If I recall, your question was >> is landscapers and contractors. >> Where are they going to park?

this street, where are these trades people going to park? They're going to have to be moved into the other streets in the neighborhood. Is that correct? >> I think that they have a very large driveway that leads on. >> There are two driveways at 13 rackless. >> Right. That's 13. But there's several other um build houses on the street. >> Well, first off, are we talking public safety here? >> Well, we could talk about every street in Gloucester when it comes to landscapers. So, um, we're talking about where where do you anticipate these vehicles will park? Contractors and landscapers. Where will they park when there's no parking on the street?

>> but would those areas also be available for public parking? >> Public parking? It's not up to me to say. >> Thank you. >> They're p well they're private driveways. So don't I don't know. >> Property on Rackcliff Street. We all live on postage stamps for property. Most of us don't even have landscapers. One or two of the houses do have landscapers and they park on their property to do it in the driveway. It's just not a big problem on Lo Street. The property is too small. I mean, I I I don't say it's not a problem, but yes, they would not be able to park on the street. >> That's a Grace question. >> Yeah. Um, there were fire lane signs on

Ragcliffe at one point in time and they were they were removed. What happened to those? We had we asked DBW to remove one sign just to move it >> when we had our driveway gone from a single car to a double car. >> So >> wait wait wait and excuse me. No, no, I haven't finished answer question. >> Mike Hale, I went and talked with him and asked him what we were going to do and he said he put the sign on the flat on the telephone pole at the corner of Fremont and Rackliff with two arrows fire lane in two directions and that was his solution for that sign. If there was another sign later further down the road, I know nothing about it. >> At what point in time did you enlarge

your driveway? >> How many years ago? >> Probably 10 years ago. >> And prior to enlarging your driveway, was there an issue with people parking? >> No, people didn't. People never used to park across there. They didn't. We had to park our car and that's why we went to a double driveway because we didn't like having to park our second car over there when it was down because we had we didn't have we only had room for one car. So this whole we we arrived here tonight basically because when you enlarged your driveway, it escalated into a problem with parking on the street. >> No, no, no, no, no, no. That's not why we're here tonight. We're here tonight. As parking started to grow on Rack

Street, it became clear that this was unsustainable. And as you see from the letters and the neighbors, nobody was happy on it. Can I just add I had my property for 35 years and for up until 10 years ago that carriage house had property had parking for three cars in front of it because there was that much space between the street and the building. So that's why Carolyn O' Connor and the others wouldn't have thought it was an issue back then. And I just put in a parking spot in front of my house this year for um service vehicles and whatever myself, extra guests, whatever. Um so I feel

like I have parking. The people across the street from me have parking. Gabby parking. People at the end of the street have parking. There's really almost no one that doesn't have space for an emergency. I mean for um their landscapers except for the people with the grass but you know they could always move it they had to. So just to re you know kind of um build upon what council marot said about landscaping trucks. It's just do you understand that it's all vehicles. It's whether your grandkids come to visit or the landscaper comes or the pizza delivery guy decides to hang out. It doesn't whoever whatever the case may be, nobody can park on that street. Um

and I'm assured that it will be patrolled extensively to make sure that you know if if this goes forward that you adhere to what you're requesting 100%. Not only do we agree, it's putting us back to where we were before the sign on the other side of the street was moved that created this opening to parking. The the lack of clarity on that sign which says so many feet to the to the corner, no parking, but it doesn't say what's happening behind it. So that's when parking started to happen. And before that, no one was parking. So yes, we will go back to that and

we'll be happily living in that condition. Besides, I'll add one other thing. In the years that have changed in the past years, u street or the condominiums, uh people have two parking lots each underneath and there are people there with three cars and at on street there are whatever's there. not involved street kind of they would come up and claim that they can park our street but >> well I think that what they were trying to point out is that there's narrow streets all over Rocky Neck there's

narrow streets all over the entire city of Gloucester there's many streets downtown that shouldn't have parking on them because it creates a safety hazard you know that's that's I believe that's what his point was Okay, that made >> and and the the the lieutenant the fire lieutenant who was there on the site visit said you know the cluster fire department deals with this on a regular daily basis and all throughout Gloucester the narrow streets. So while it's a safety issue it's a safety issue throughout our city and if we tried to make no parking on every street that it's a safety issue we would be really in a huge bind. Um so council Benson. >> Yeah. Can someone just uh so a couple

things. Um first question is remind me um council president um what is the position of the fire department on this? They're supportive of this or have they not made a official position just because there's been a lot going I just want to >> No, the chief wrote he said in favor of a fire. >> Okay. Um and then my other question is um if I may to those that spoke in opposition um if they may is do you think understanding your points are you also thinking that this could set a precedent? >> You need to make room at the podium. >> Yeah. If this could could this set from what I'm understanding from you could this set a precedent to lead to other streets. Is that your concern?

>> Yeah. Yeah. you can do and just make sure that if you understand my question, I think I think I'm understanding what you're saying. You feel that this could set a precedent for other streets. Is that what I'm is that part of your concern? >> Well, what my concern is that if you're using what Bobby had Mr. Ryan or Bobby had had said that, you know, the street is too slow, too small on that end and then, you know, it violates the width of it. Fremont Street's the same width off smaller. WY Street fits in the same category. You c you can't cherrypick what you want to do with what street. You can't cherrypick it. Look at you. If you pass that on and tomorrow someone

could turn around and say, "Look at there's no P." Do you ever go up Fremont Street? Every time I go up Fremont Street, I have to check my car for scratches. There's I'm surprised a fire truck even makes it up there. Tell you the truth to answering the question. >> Yeah. So, if I may, you get quite I get excited too when I feel passionate about stuff. So, just so you think that it it's a slippery slope. It could lead to someone on Fremont Street asking for this, too. >> I'm That's basically I appreciate. Thank you. >> Can I just say All right, forget it. I was gonna >> You know what? I was just going >> question for you that you may that you can answer maybe. Um are you concerned

of spillover of trades people who now will no longer be able to park on Radcliffe Street? Is that a concern that they would then be pushed into Fremont into WY? Yes, true. But free Fremont Street, this there's three three spots. I we fight with the the Rockaway Condominia people park there. It's not open. It's not easily to park there. Okay, there's three spots. It's not easy. And the remember the fire lane, the fire hydrants on the right hand side. The fire the the the fire department knows they have to go down to the right hand side. They can't go on

the left hand side. They know that. >> Thank you. >> Go get them. >> There's a question. Wait a minute. >> I have a question from the residents of WY of >> Radcliffe >> of Radcliff I'm sorry of Lower Radcliffe Street. If you all have driveways and they're utilized as you say, who is parking on the lower end of your street to cause these obstructions? He he has the the man in the middle that he needs to speak because he's he was the presenter, right?

As I understand your question, if there are cars parked down at the end at the dead end of Rack Street. >> No. If you all have driveways and you all utilize them and some of you have made accommodations to widen them for your vehicles whose vehicles are parked on Radcliffe Street causing these obstructions. >> Um, it could be anyone. It could be anyone who's looking for a place to park. And because there are there are signs that are confusing, they are able to put their cars in a place that was was um no parking. Uh or I was led to

believe it was no parking. And after that sign was put there so many feet to the corner you couldn't park it it left the rest of it well I guess I can park down below that that was on the east side the east side of the street. So um you're asking me who would else be parking wherever >> you know you you must have a sense of who uses you. Is it tourists that are going through Rocky Neck? Is it guests of other households? Is it a random selection? I'm not clear

who's obstructing your street >> at the time that the at the time that uh we were asked about construction people gardeners gardeners come when people have gone to work or whatever. So it's not >> I think she >> he's saying landscapers come in in service. You say gardeners. >> Yes. But it's at a time when other cars aren't parking because they've gone wherever. Uh there's a there's a flow of cars that are parked on the street and uh

sometimes it's for a day, sometimes it's just a short period of time, but during that period of time then uh the the the gardeners or whoever will use some else to park >> the people that are parking on Rackler do not live from Fremont Street down to the dead end. We all leave that open. The people that park, there are people either on Wy Street on uh the other side of Ripo Street. Sometimes they park because they own two three cars but have two spaces. So, a car has to go on the street. Sometimes they have company, maybe they have company for the weekend. Their company needs to park or they want

to park their car so their company can park at their house. It's a lot of it's longterm parking. It ends up being that somebody parks and keeps the car there for four or five days, a month maybe. We had a car this month summer for two months on >> Sorry, one at a time, please. >> As far as I understand, I don't think there's parking on either side of WY Street. So, the people who are arguing about this Okay. Sorry. >> Anyway, >> um we're just asking questions to get answered. >> Thank you.

>> Can I have um Bob Ryan come up please? I have um just >> thank you >> um a follow-up question I guess with regarding the sizes of the streets and what and how they compare um based on what the gentleman said back there based on the sizes and then that's pretty much my first question. >> Okay. Like the width of the streets each lane should be at least 10 ft. We don't have that on on the lower end. To answer the question, who's parking there? The people on WY Street are parking there. I took a poll some time ago back the end of last summer. Uh we talked about who's parking there. I came up with the idea if someone has a cookout, where do they park? They said, well, within 300 yards,

we have a 54 vehicle parking lot right on the other end of Fremont. You walk over the hill, 300 yards, you got 54 spaces. Maybe not 54 available, but you're going to have 10, 15. So, if a landscap is coming to the house, I asked some of the uh residents, the landscaper comes, where do they park? We'll move our cars maybe down to the public lot, the landscaper pulls in the driveway, but not that many have landscapers. Does that help? >> Yes, it does. just because you know he mentioned it and that was a I felt like an opportunity to ask a good question. Um can you talk into the size of the streets? Um how they compare to the two streets that the gentleman has said that

has parking just for reference. >> Frank I didn't go down and measure WY Street so I can't answer that. Or the other side of Rackcliff I was only concerned with from Fremont Street to the dead end that width on emergency vehicles getting down there. I did not measure the other ones. With all respect to Mr. Delberty, known him all my life, with all due respect, uh he said the city council uh issued no parking and so forth. The council does not have the authority to issue no parking on private ways other than fire lanes. And that's the that's our city ordinances. You can't regulate no parking in any private road in the city. That's a fact. Suzanne Egan, she can come aboard and answer that. We went through this. That's why

it's fire lanes rather than no parking run. City council doesn't have the authority. If we impose fire lanes from the fire chief, then you can put fire lanes. That's the only authority the council council page. >> Thank you. >> So we have no authority in this ordinance. >> You do for fire lanes only, but Mike had alluded to no parking. the city back in 1982 or 83, they couldn't regulate it. It was a city ordinance. The council couldn't do it. But anyway, fire lanes. >> So, we're calling this a fire lane. >> Fire lanes. That's what you're voting on tonight based on the recommendation from the chief that President uh uh G had received. You can vote on fire lanes

only on private ways. >> Does a fire lane have to be a certain width, a minimum width? >> Yeah, it has to accommodate >> I think it does. has to accommodate fire apparatus. That's correct. Yes. >> But I think there's a minimum width designation for that. >> That I'd have to defer to Chief Smith, but he couldn't get they did the sweep path analysis. I think uh uh Grace, we had passed that out. Uh when they did the study, the apparatus couldn't make the swing. And that's why he's recommending putting two fire lanes on both sides of Racko Street. And the council has the authority to vote that in. >> And I I appreciate your clarity, Bob.

Repeat this for me again. >> Private way public access. That's how these roads are done. >> The city council has no authority to e to say no parking, residentonly parking, anything. The only authority we have is to designate a fire lane. >> That's correct. So, we need to review all these residentonly parking areas they've just put up, right? If they're a public way, private way, public access, we don't have that authority. >> Going back uh councelor Paige before your time, I think, and I brought this to councelor Mhad's attention, we set up a couple years ago, we have 44 uh resident sticker parking only streets in

the city. on the private ones. There was like 18 private ones. We had no authority. So, anybody got a ticket, >> how would it challenge that? Anybody got a ticket, they could come back. A matter of fact, I asked for how many citations were issued? Over 3,000 citations. Now, think about it. 3,000 times, chief. $100. What? $100? Think about that. 3,000 times $100 the city took and really didn't have the authority to do that. Okay, that's >> you sound like you have a real handle on this, Bob. We need the traffic commission to look at all these >> private way public access roads and if we're in violation, we need that addressed, >> right? I have a list of all the streets,

public streets, private streets in the city. In order to regulate no parking, take it a step further, to regulate and for all the counselor's benefits, to regulate no parking or private ways, we have to have 60% of the residents sign a petition to come before the city council. Okay, Scott, we've gone through this many times. 60% of the residents on a private way on a private way petitions to council, then you can vote for no parking. But we can't unilaterally like Mike said back then I guarantee they didn't have we can look at the records we didn't have 60% of the residents that said okay make it no parking they didn't >> no parking is one area above does it

also apply to residentonly parking >> which >> yes can on a private way public access can the council regulate residentonly parking >> not on a not on a private No, but again, that would be something I would defer to Suzanne Egan on that. >> If it's a pri if it's a private road to Radcliffe Street. >> Yeah, tonight we're talking fire lane. >> Yeah, fire lanes also, >> which you have the authority to do, councelor Paige. >> Councelor Grace, >> um I have a question for councelor Mhmard. Sorry. Um this was it came into your wheelhouse, I want to say 2019. Am I correct with that? And the reason that this was all brought forward was originally um because of the Maslos

having difficulty backing out of their driveway. That's what I read in all the documentation that we were sent. Um is that correct? >> Um so I I've been working with Jake and Karen Maslo for at least 11 years on these matters. um and their concerns about egress from their parking lot based on people parking behind the no parking here to the corner sign as Jake was describing. Um there is an a pre-existing fire lane on the Maslo's side of the street. There was some issue about the signage for that. People didn't want all the signage that was there. And so the Maslos took down one no parking sign, fire lane sign in order to enlarge their driveway,

removing parking that they had pre-existing on the Fremont side of their property. Uh, as I said, it's been placed on a fire pole. Now, um, but yes, it goes back to a parking issue. Um the fire lane fire safety issue was not paramount 11 years ago in the conversations that I had with Jake and Karen. Uh again, we've had extensive conversations back and forth. Um this has been a concern of theirs. I've been in their kitchen and discussed it and gone over the various ordinances working with Bob. Um I Yes. So, I'm trying to get to the bottom of what happened to the original Firelane signs. Um, I've asked [clears throat] the question three times and I've gotten

a different answer all three times. So, I want to know definitively what happened to the original fire lane signs. Who removed them? Who gave orth authorization for them to be removed? Are you do you know any of the history behind that? >> I do. >> Care to share? uh at the end of Rackcliffe Street is the home that Carolyn Okconor previously occupied with her husband Bill. Their son Bill O'Conor Jr. uh was concerned about enforcing the fire lane on the Maslo's side so that his mother had access to emergency vehicles. Uh he was quite upset when he witnessed and recorded on his Door Dash, whatever it's called, camera uh the Maslos and one of their neighbors removing and vandalizing an existing

sign in their driveway to remove a no parking fire lane sign which was then put in their backyard. >> So it wasn't Director Hail that >> uh I Mike has some has had some frustrations with this issue and I can't speak for him. Thank you, >> Council Grace. Can I just mention there's a fire lane sign there with arrows >> today, right? We did the site. We saw those signs. >> Interesting. Okay. But it's originally there were signs on Raglift that already had fire lanes established and those were moved. >> Okay. Again, without going back in history, >> concern with safety going forward. If something were to happen, fire trucks can't get down there, what do we do?

It's going to have to be answered somehow. Uh, but you know, again, I should I think it should be filing. >> I absolutely respect that, but I think that we need to have 100% honesty about what happened to those original signs. >> Okay. Okay. >> No, no, no, no, no. >> I'm all set. Okay. >> She She asked the question of you already and then she Thank you, Bob.

side and fire lane on the left. They don't go all the way down the street. And no matter what you put on that street, the fire truck on Wy Street could never get down because we don't have that other street. We are just a street and then a wall. So this I mean they do tricks to get around and they do a great job. But everyone in my street because of these women and and this city council that came to to Rocky Neck and set it all up so that there everybody was safe in this area that there were fire lanes, people could get in and there was some parking because she states right here and this is says parking is premium headache in Rocky Neck forever since 1982. And Mr. Ryan mentions their parking lot down in Rocky Neck. If I

come home from work, I could never get a parking spot in there. Everybody in the neighborhood uses that, not just Rocky Neck. It's a wonderful spot. We're all lucky to have it, but it's not just for the Rocky Neck people. You can find trucks there for months at a time. The strong the park the two parking spots they're talking about only used probably on big weekends. I don't see cars there. But when you brought up the situation of that construction truck the other day, right in the in the spot they're talking about, there was a construction truck right there. It wasn't a big one, but it wasn't a small one, but he had to park there to do work wherever he was doing work. So, um, >> to wrap it up because

>> done, but I just wanted to know that this these people took the whole community and the city council and they all made it safe for all of us. >> Thank you.

Okay. Committee recommendation. Any recommendation and a motion by council, seconded by council gra ordinance administration committee voted three in favor, zero opposed to recommend that city council amend the colostrum chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicle section 22 through 292 fire lanes by deleting rackliff street wing side from the intersection from Fremont Street in a southern direction for entirety length for it entire length to dead end by add street both sides from it intersection with Fremont Street in a southern direction for it entire length to dead end and I so move. >> Second. >> Motion made by council major, second by councelor Graves. Discussion, >> council major

and um I know in O and I I I did vote in favor and I'm not sure which way and I I ultimately respect Bob Ryan and the chief and the and the fire department based on their recommendation and that's what why I voted the way I did in ORNA. But it was great to see both sides. I know the gentleman O and was not able to speak um in the OA OA. So I'm glad you actually showed up here to speak and it was just good listening um to you. Thank you, >> Grace. >> Um I just want to state that I I always always always believe that safety is paramount and safety is number one. However, that being said, I think it needs to be said out of respect for Mr. to delever and for Gail Saraphene and

Ray Saraphene and anybody else that lives in that neighborhood that this did not start out as a safety issue. This started out as a neighborhood dispute and it morphed into a safety issue when people did not get the results that they wanted. I granted it is history but it is important and I think that the people that are in opposition to this need to have the validation that that they are not wrong in what they feel and I think that we need to be honest about things and this did not start out as a safety issue. It is a safety issue now and because the fire department did their safety report on this, I have the greatest respect for Chief Smith. Um, and and I understand why we are here tonight. However, I still think that it

needs to be noted that this did not start out as a safety issue. It morphed into one when the results, desired result was not obtained six or seven years ago. Thank you,

There are so many streets in our community that are inadequate. Inadequate in ways of size, inadequate in ways of dead ends where safety vehicles cannot turn around. Sometimes there's new developments that are built and literally the developers get away with the lack of turnarounds for these safety vehicles. Um I don't know that, you know, we should assess every road like this. It's it's difficult. Um

Again, I do think these things become a slippery slope. I've seen all just just as an analogy, I've seen one neighborhood after another after another go for residentonly parking. And I even question whether the state of Massachusetts would agree with that once they, you know, they pave these streets. Sometimes they're public roads. They're supposed to be open to the public. I understand that the tightness of this area. I've I've visited there. I I I know the area fairly well. I think that there could be other workarounds on this particular street for parking.

>> Which would ensure safety. Just following up. Um, again, I've I've worked with this issue uh in the Maslos and the neighbors for a long time. I am very concerned about the precedent of other similar streets. I'm very happy to maintain a fire lane on the one side that exists, but I'm concerned that by adding a second fire lane on the opposite side of this particular street, we're creating a hardship uh for very valuable uh parking resources in this neighborhood. and pre from a pres from a point of view of precedence in other communities we're setting in other neighborhoods and similar smallcale streets. So I've made the motion and brought it to the uh the subcommittee on behalf of the Maslos. However, I would

not myself personally behing it. >> Thank you. What else? >> There a way for it to be amended to have a fire lane on one side? there is >> um yeah I mean I'm I'm looking at you know the map of the area right now and every street around it on Rocky Neck and I'm very familiar with Rocky Neck um and uh it's you know you should have seen it when the Rockway was going. Um, talk about parking. Uh, but the Rockaway when it was a hotel and

bar. Uh, but this would have a couple of effects. they would have us um if we create that on this street for that particular reason then we would be negligent in our duties to not create it on every street that was similar and that's just not a possibility that we can do um so while I understand that everyone on this street has a driveway I can see it on the map um some goodiz driveways it uh And there is a I mean there's a really good turnaround down the end. I think that's probably a private driveway, but it's pretty sizable.

Um it's a it's a pretty sizable driveway. Um but you're not going to get an engine. An engine's going to back down there no matter what. Um that's what the the lieutenant of the fire department told us when he was we were at the site visit. they would either come straight down the one way, the wrong way, um is how they would get down there. Um so we I mean if we did it here, we'd have to do a Wy Street, we'd have to do a Fremont Street, have to look up at Clarinon Street. Um you know, it's just the whole the whole area is is and then we have all of downtown which is just filled with these these streets where people have no choice but to parking the

street. Um they're very fortunate in this neighborhood. Um majority of them on WY Street they have parking the hotel or the uh the condos now is parking underneath although I'm sure there's still over there. My also my concern is the trades people um you know because they are and we see them everywhere now. Um and for some reason we're still in a um a renovation boom um in these types of neighborhoods which are causing you know a lot of vehicles extra vehicles to be in a in a very tight neighborhood. So, while I I absolutely sympathize and understand the reason why, I still I

have those concerns that that any that this will be just pushed further out. And I know it's just two parking spaces, but I tell you, two parking spaces on on a Rocky Neck are very precious. So, anyway, those are my concerns. If it does go forward, I would like to have something added to it that if there is um a push out of parking that that does have a negative effect on the rest of the neighborhood that we should be uh notified about that different action if this does move forward. >> Thank you. Also, Grace, >> would we benefit from um postponing a

vote on this to have more um discussion about the other roads around it and and do some comparison for the widths of the road is if we've only looked at Ratcliffe and um what we've been told by the residents of the other roads that they their roads are just as narrow and the problem exists there. So, I would entertain a motion to continue this um for further research. >> I think I think the only purpose that would serve as if we were going to make them no parking also. Is there a way to almost to temporary to postpone and to do a temporary fire lane to see what the results will be for

like a month test period? I'm not sure if that's within our ordinance, but can that area be blocked um legally with the DPW or whoever or the chief police and then to see how then we can actually get more data from today until October 22nd or whatever. >> I think we have all the data. I don't think there's any more >> but the data this data will provide the the no parking spots. >> Who's going to who's going to collect that? I'm just there's no there's no that I I can't see that that would >> solve anything other than, you know, um us not doing our job tonight. I would comment in response to councelor Maja's comment that the issue here is

primarily during the summer season. We're talking about June, July, and August. Other than that, it's not really an issue like many parts of the city. I mean I we you know we all everybody got the letter from the chief didn't they I mean it's it was a while ago that that came through six months eight months 10 months ago Bob was the letter came from Chief Smith Chief Smith Chief Smith's letter came quite a while ago

post this morning. It just makes us not be doing what we're supposed to do. I make a motion to postpone and see if it passes. That's that's a >> I just I you know I just have I'm I have a hard time with this simply because as as I've stated what what led us to this point that bothers me that we it morphed into something because the desired result was not not achieved. That being said there is a fire lane on one side. Lieutenant Sees was um at the site visit and he was like yeah we we will always get a fire truck down here because we will either go the wrong way down one street or it backs down. And I also said in OA that we set a precedent because there are dozens and dozens of streets

within the city of Gloucester that this is a problem. You can walk in a half a mile radius around here and see it where the fire station is has this problem, you know, because the streets are so narrow, you know. So I think it does it it creates a precedent. And if we do go forward with something like this, then we need to do the right thing, due diligence, and we need to look at every street in the city because it is unfair to say that it this this needs to be safe, but this one is okay because of whatever reason. I think we need to be fair across the board. And I don't and you know, I as I said, I'm on the fence about it. I I 100% respect the safety aspect of it. Um, but I also know I was there at the site visit and the

questions that I asked and Lieutenant Seis who was there was was like, "Yeah, we get through these little streets all the time."

>> Councelor Kimberly, >> no. Councelor Mota, >> no. >> Councelor Mehard, >> no. >> Councelor Paige, >> no. >> Councelor Benson, >> no. >> Councelor Grace, >> no. >> Councelor Gross, >> no. >> The vote is zero in favor, seven opposed, two absent. The motion um fails.

um next is public hearing 2026 number 27 council order 2026 number 10 majota amend GCO chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicles section 22-270 parking prohibited at all times times in section 22-291 towaway zones by adding Wheeler Street both sides from its intersection with Shore Hill Road to its intersection with Howard Road. >> We'll open the public hearing. >> Speaking of favor, >> um the I've been working certain people unfortunately they're not here. Um I would love to be able not saying that I'm not able to do my job. I will be able to postpone this for the next um meeting, Mr. President. Madame Clair, just so I can be able to have the

resident here as well. >> Hey, um we take these up every quarter. That'll be postponed for three months. >> Fine with that. >> Okay. Okay. All right. So, we're continuing um till the December meeting, December 8th. Yes. Thank you. And I'll be able to get the people here as well. >> Next is public hearing 2026 number 28. Council order 2026 number 11. Benson amend GCO chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicles section 22-284 service or loading zones by deleting Main Street Northerly side in front of number 134 one space 30 minutes limit

and adding Main Street Northerly Side in front of number 124 one space commercial vehicles only 8 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 30 minutes limit. >> Open the public hearing. Council Benson. >> Thank you. Um over the past several months, downtown business owners, particularly businesses in and around this part of Main Street, have raised concerns regarding the loading zone. Businesses have reported that delivery vehicles, including UPS, FedEx, and freight carriers, are frequently unable to access the space because it's occupied by passenger vehicles. Um, other concerns have have been raised that the current signage creates confusion for residents and visitors alike and obviously delivery vehicles.

Um, this ordinance um does not clearly distinguish currently does not um distinguish between commercial and passenger vehicles. Um, again the ordinance simply makes the signage clear by specifying that these spaces are for commercial vehicles only. It's really a matter of housekeeping. Um following discussions with the Gloucester Police Department, DPW and the traffic commission, specifically um the chair here, um additional enforcement was implemented. However, um it was determined with discussions from the traffic um chair that the change um the language on the sign itself would require an ordinance amendment. Um they also um said that the ordinance referred

>> Any questions? I mean, cleaning up the >> be clear. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Very good. >> Anyone to speak in opposition? >> We have any communicate? >> We do not.

>> Would you like to read the motion there? Council me committee recommendation on a motion by council grace, second by councelor Nolan. The ordinance administration committee voted two in favor, zero opposed, one absent to recommend the city council amends code of ordinance chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicle section 22 through 284 service or loading zones by deleting main street northern side in front of 134 one space 30 minute and adding Main Street northern side in front of number 124 one space commercial vehicles only 8 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. 30 minute limit and I so >> second >> motion made by councel mato seconded by councelor grace discussion seeing none all those in favor

>> I post eyes have it seven to zero one absent next order business madam clerk >> public hearing 2026 number 29 council order 2026 number 15 memard amend GCO chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicles section 22 2-279 30 minute parking by deleting Eastern Avenue in front of number 18 between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in the area beginning at pole number 2741 on the westerly side in a southerntherly direction for 36 ft two 30 minute parking spaces clearly delineated. >> Open the public hearing. >> Those speaking in favor? >> Again, this would be a matter of largely

housekeeping. Uh there was a commercial business on the corner here, the Florists, which has been out of business for a number of years. So we would we're proposing to remove the uh uh reserved parking uh for the business and making it available to uh the residents in the neighborhood. >> Thank you. Anyone else speak in favor? [laughter] >> You're here. >> I should have brought my roller skates. [laughter] Uh concur with uh council mead. I was getting phone calls. Why do we have 30 minute parking on east? And uh I said can't guess why any of the florists went out. Russell's florist went out and I

said why don't we uh remove the signs and I contacted Scott to have them taken out of there. Leave room for residents in the area. That's all. >> Very good. Thank you. >> Anyone else in favor? Anyone like to speak in opposition? Seeing none. Um, communications. >> There are none >> questions. No close public hearing. Majo, would you please read the uh call me committee? >> Committee recommendation on a motion by council grace. Second by council no one is administration committee board. Two in favor, zero opposed, one absent. To recommend that city council amend the clause report chapter 22, traffic motor

vehicle section 22 through 279 30-minute parking by deleting Eastern Avenue in front of number 18 between the hours of 8 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. in the area beginning at pole number 2741 on the western side in the southern direction for 36 ft. Two 30 minute parking spaces. Clearly, what is that? Can I >> second us? >> Motion made by council me, seconded by councelor Grace. Discussion. >> Seeing none. All those in favor? >> I opposed. Let's have it. 7 to zero to absent. Next order. Business. Madam clerk. >> Public hearing 2026 number 30. Council order 2026 number 20. Gross. Amen. GCO

direction from the lot entrance to the trailer truck only parking zone. >> Hello the public hearing speaking in favor that'll be me. We uh we had a meeting at with at Gorton's about safety on uh Roger Street and it was a pretty uh robust discussion about the entire length of Roger Street going from you know Tally's Corner down to the lights and even beyond. And um but one of the things that came out of this was that right in front of Gorton's there still been some near misses even with the the um extended with the no parking areas that we made by the crosswalks before. So with the suggestion of uh Chairman

Ryan, you know, we moved it out to 100 feet on one side and 110 feet on the other side. And uh and so that's and the the only people that this affects is Gortons themselves. and they are handling it will handle their parking issues internally. So it's not displacing anyone. No businesses, no there's nothing that gets affected by this other than themselves. Um so that's it. I don't know. Do you have anything you would like to say, Chairman Ryan or Chief Chief Williams was also in this meeting as well as the administration? Um Senator Tar, Representative Tar. >> Yes. Uh >> yeah. uh meeting took place at Gorton's uh headquarters, what it was called, the

safety meeting. Uh we had uh the council president, uh the police chief, myself, councelor Grace, uh we had uh Bruce Tar, Drew Tar, uh Kelly from the mayor's office, uh quite a panel and uh round table throwing out ideas before we conduct. And uh Mr. President, you can just about a safety uh study that we're going to put in motion. We're going to put a safety study in motion. Uh they did one over in Raleigh recently. Uh but again, there's been a lot of near misses there. We had a fatality down by the senior center not too long ago. Uh and the whole idea talking to the Gorton people, I thought it was great. Uh they

have four parking lots. They can accommodate over 400 cars per shift. I wrote it down. Per shift. They have uh uh 260 employees. So I mean there's adequate parking and the cars that were parked just before the crosswalks for line of vision or sight of vision. I passed out a few photos either Silverados, Taho, Suburbans, and they all work in the plant. So the idea was put the word out, make it no parking registry. Let them park in the parking lot more than enough space. So, we're not displacing the general public, tourists. Those are the people that are employed at Gorton's and Gorton accommodates them. So, uh this is a start to make it much safer there. They've tried all kinds of things, but I

think, you know, with the 100 foot line of sight, I think it's going to help out. Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you, Bob. Um also, it it it doesn't eliminate any of the tractor trailer parking on Roger Street either. It stops before that. Um, anyone >> remind Oh, sorry. You didn't say questions yet, so I apologize. >> No, we still have to see if anybody's in opposition of it. >> Sorry. >> Anybody speaking in opposition? No one online. Do what want who has their hand raised? Um, communications. >> There are none. >> Okay. Questions from councils. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, and thank you for bringing this forward as I was unable. Fortunately, you were out of town.

>> I I was unfortunate and I did try to join this the the the team's meeting. Um and it didn't work. But anyway, um just can you just remind me how many spots we're going to that will be lost from this? Is it just >> It's just two, right? >> Like four. >> Four spots. Okay. >> Yeah, I have the photo. That's why I like it. So, four Yep. Yeah. And and it was worth that you reminding that these spots were like businesses like people were going to the cruise port. Those aren't the people parking here. So that's important to note as well and I appreciate you noting that. So um no, that's that's all I had

and I will be supporting this and I appreciate you bringing this forward. >> Paige, >> I do have a question. Is Gorton's running 247 now or do they have hours? I think they're on a two shifts. I'm not sure. >> Two shifts. >> Yeah. >> Is it valuable to put an end time on this at the end of their shift so that at night people could use it? >> Morning shifts. I I don't think >> I think that could lead to still a public safety issue. I think eliminating them completely is public safety. >> They could they could at some point go to three shifts again. >> Yeah. >> That's fine. People start eating a lot of >> McDonald's fish. McFish sandwiches.

>> We can hope. >> Donald.

>> All those in favor? >> Oh, I got to close the public hearing. >> And you got to read the uh >> Council Grace has got to read this one. >> Oh, Council Grace, >> she can make the motion. >> Sorry, >> I got ahead of myself. >> Are we going to have a discussion or we going straight to the motion? Great. Oh, you go straight to the motion, then we have discussion. >> Okay. Um, committee recommendation on a motion by myself, councelor Grace, seconded by council me. The ordinance and administration committee voted three in favor, zero opposed to recommend that the city council amend the Glouster code of ordinances chapter 22 traffic and motor vehicles as follows. Amend section

trailer truck only parking zone. And I so move >> second motion made by councelor Grace, second by council meter. Discussion council Grace. >> Thanks. Um yeah, this this impacts nobody but Gorton's and Gordon is the one that brought this forward. They reached out to me um as did Chief Williams and um Mr. Ryan months and months and months, I want to say probably more than a year ago about getting to get to if we could do some sort of a meeting about this. Um and it finally happened, you know, a few weeks ago. Um you know, there's no residences there. there's no other businesses that are affected and Gordon's brought this forward and the only one that's affected by it is Gordon. So I think that in you

know we've already lost one person um and we've had many many near misses there and I think that um to prevent another tragedy from happening it's the right move. That's it. >> Anyone else? >> All those in favor? I opposed. Passes seven to zero with two absent. Thank you very much. Thank you, Chairman Ryan and Chief Williams and Barnaby for hanging around >> and Mary um for next order business. Madam clerk, >> council vote memorandum from the city

clerk requesting to reduce early voting hours for the first week of early voting for the November 3rd, 2026 state election. Okay. Did I make this motion? Somebody else should make the motion. U motion move to reduce the early voting hours for the first week of early voting for the November 3rd, 2026 state election. And I so move. >> Second. >> Motion made by Council Benson, seconded by Councelor Paige. Madame Clerk, would you like to um address your reasoning for with this request? >> Sure. The state um state law allows the

early voting period to be reduced by 50% with a vote of the city council for the first week of early voting. We're required to have two weeks of early voting, including two weekend days leading up to a state um election. So, ever since this law has been in effect, um the city clerk's office has requested from the city council to reduce the hours for early voting on the first week. It does um honestly alleviate a burden on staff um to enable us to be able to focus on the high volume of vote by mail that we are processing. Um I was able to pull some numbers. I'm sorry I'm not more prepared for this, but um I I

pulled the 2024 numbers. In September 2024, the September state primary um there were 77 inerson early voters. And in November, there were 2,238 for vote by mail for those same elections. Um, in September we mailed out 4,605 vote by mail ballots and received back 2,693. And for the state election in November, we mailed out 8,662 ballots and received back 7,969. So you can see there is a high volume um of work that goes on in the office to

process those. um we have to be very diligent with that. All applications have to be entered manually. Signatures have to be verified against the returned ballots to the applications. Um so there's just a lot of focus and attention on the from the clerk's office on that process. So having a week where we're really dealing with just for half of the time dealing with the the early voting, it does help us. I have not received any complaints from voters in the past that the first week had reduced hours. Um, you know, I think two weeks leading up to election day does provide people with ample opportunity to find a time that works for them. Um, as well as the vote by mail, which people

definitely utilize. discussion. Council Kimberly, >> how many steps is it between the time that you get the the ballots and the time? >> 12 manual steps per ballot from receipt of the application to tabulation. Uh, is there any way that this could deter anyone from voting? >> I think technically yes, if someone only had one opportunity to vote on one of

those days, to be honest, it it could. However, we do have vote by mail applications are automatically mailed out by the state of Massachusetts to every voter in the Commonwealth. Um, so people can avail themselves to that. They can avail themselves to absentee voting as well as election day voting, full week of voting, the week leading up to the election and on the two Saturdays leading up to the election. >> How important is it for you to have volunteers to help you at the poll? Um having a good uh pool of election workers is very important. Um election workers do have to go through training

and we have to make sure that the people we're putting out there are ready for that task. But the more people we can have on standby who can come to election worker training, um I'm hoping in the future to be able to have pole worker information sessions just for prospective pole workers to give them a better idea of what the job is going to be. Um having people who are willing to step up and and be reserves on election day and work elections is is very valuable to the clerk's office. >> Thank you. You mentioned Saturday. Um it's not on your your proposed hours. >> We're not allowed to reduce that. It'll be six hours on the two. Each Saturday will be six hours.

>> Oh, got it. So So those are still available Saturdays. So it's not just these five, it's actually seven and the S and the absentee if they can't they're not going to be here on election day and they can't make it to any of these, they can still come in. They have legitimate reason to do an absentee ballot at any time. It really isn't super hardship. Elections have been elections have been killing the clerk's office. Um >> we like grace. [laughter] I I just have a question and just council grace >> for our listening public. You're not eliminating the first week of early voting. You're just lessening the number of hours that it's available. Correct. >> Correct. Thank you.

>> So, we would still the plan would be to have 8:30 to 11:30 Monday through Wednesday and then 11:30 to 6:00 p.m. on Thursday to get the afternoon and evening crowd and then um 8:30 to 12 on Friday. >> Benson, >> thank you. Um, and just remind me, so with the reduction, it's like how many hours are we losing if you if if reducing those if you if that makes sense. >> It would be a 50% reduction. >> Okay. So instead, it would be >> if we were So Monday through Wednesday would be till >> 11 >> city hall till 11:30. But if it wasn't, it would be till city hall closes. Is

that okay? And then Friday would be the same, right? So it doesn't matter with Friday it wouldn't you would you would do it till 4 if you didn't reduce the hours or it would be till >> on Friday it would be till 12:30. >> Okay. Yeah. So you're just losing that. Okay. Um thank you. Appreciate it. Right. If >> I may um I'm not a question, but um I understand the the concern the the struggle that your office has with staffing and all of that. I'm just not comfortable reducing any vote any hours for for the ability for people to vote. So, I won't be supporting this, but I I don't want you I don't want your office

to take that as because I know and I and you know how I would feel. I would want to add more staff and I know the the work that goes into it and I've been to many I've been to the preliminary or the primary this one and saw the work that goes into it and I appreciate everyone's work. Um but just I'm just not comfortable reducing any hours for for voting. Thank you. >> Council Paige, >> I'd like to say that I know um Grace has worked in that office for a long time. I think that voting has changed dramatically over the years and the burden of her office has increased beyond what they can even keep up with. And if if the city clerk is asking us

for an accommodation, I will fully support that. >> Thank you. And I just would like to say that um there isn't anyone sitting at this dis that wants to restrict anyone's voting rights. Um this is this is a um well a majority at this table is people who would not at all tolerate limiting people's voting rights. This is a a common sense compromise. Still makes it available. Absentee voting is available for people who cannot make it. I think that this is a a a smart move knowing intimately how difficult it can be during um elections and we seem to be having numerous elections in Gloucester

um you know two specials in the last two years or three years three specials right three specials >> great >> um plus primaries and it's just been an incredible burden and I think if they that office has so much other duties that they have to perform during the course of the day that have it to have it being eaten up by this and and these polls are not um banned by volunteers. They're paid personnel. Um so it uh >> I have volunteered at the polls for free before. So that's that's what I was getting at. >> Um so I think that this is a uh you know a common sense compromise. I don't think

it's really inhibiting anyone on their their right to vote. And I know that most people up here really feel passionately in that same direction that there's, you know, if this was in any way going to really restrict anyone's right to vote, I don't think this would have a prayer of passing. Council Paige, >> would it be valuable um for the city clerk's office when there is election uh work and things to be done to maybe divert or close the office for maybe other routine business so that they can focus on election work?

Um, council has been gracious enough to or council president and vice president to allow us to um, close on some of the days leading up to an election and um, I might be coming to them again if we have a big batch of vote by mail ballots ready to go out. We have almost 4,000 already applications that we've entered. Um, so yes, when we really find ourselves in a bind, um, that is very helpful, but at the same time, we want to be mindful of all of the other services that we do offer to the public. Um, and and continue to provide those as well. >> I mean, you know, you people don't I mean, they sometimes they

take time off from work to go to the clerk's office and they go and it's closed. What's it doing closed? I mean they, you know, it's a little hard to communicate that. So it's it's really kind of a hardship on the community. I mean, well, we it it worked, but there's then there's that work that doesn't get done, you know, and it sort of sort of creeps up. And I would like to say, you know, as the clerk said that on the mail and voting, it's they have to handle things 12 times. So I would really encourage people to vote in person um for the integrity of the elections. It's that's the best way to assure that your vote is counted. So, while it's convenient, you know, we all got the postcards, um it's it's it's not the

most um sure way to make sure your vote gets counted and it's also it's doesn't make it makes the job for a very um staff that has a whole lot of other work to do. Um, so I would encourage everyone to please go go vote on election day. >> I would like to ensure people that their votes will be counted. >> I lost in the mail. >> Do I remember correctly, Grace? I believe you have the longevity in the office that the prior city clerk had forwarded a request to eliminate mail in ballots. No. Am I I dreamed that I >> think so. I

>> I think so. And I think the council denied that request >> to eliminate >> Yeah. mail and ballots >> not for state elections. Um there is an option for city council to choose to not offer vote by mail for local elections. >> Local. Okay. >> Um yeah, if if I could just follow up. Um, we in our office do everything in our power to make sure that any ballot that we receive goes through the proper process and gets to the polls. But even the postmaster um for this region has has said to voters in general that the way ballots get rooted now, they don't get processed locally. They go to um whatever processing plant, which can

seriously delay ballots. So, if you get a vote by mail ballot, please just return it as soon as possible rather than wait close to the election to return it because then you might run into an a sticky spot where it's not going to make it back in time. >> Box outside. Thank you. >> Say that again. >> Huh? >> Say that again into the microphone. >> Oh, sorry. So, and just to just I know people if with all those issues with like postage and everything, if people are able, they can put it on the put it in the box outside. Correct. Yep. >> Add one more thing while we're talking about by mail. Um if if counselors who you know talk about this with with your

constituents, please just let your constituents know the importance of signing the affidavit envelope on the inside. we cannot process a ballot. Um, we have to reject a ballot if that affidavit envelope is not signed. We do mail out a second ballot, but that obviously slows things down for the the voter. So, just those little things, making sure it is signed and sealed um and sent back in a timely manner is going to really up your chances of us getting it and having a ballot that we can actually um check in and take to the polls on election day >> and then put it in the machine. So yeah, but just to clarify if I may. So if someone doesn't sign the affidavit though, they are notifi you they are not

>> if it arrives on election day that notification is not very helpful. >> We do try to call people if they provided us with the phone number just to let them know that we received the ballot back. It wasn't signed. We have to reject it. So we need to get to the polls >> so they can go on they if you get get it like a day before election day and that's it. you try to call them and then they can go on election. >> There are some people that don't provide us with a phone number. So there's no way for us to reach >> very important to sign the affidav. >> Thank you. Else all those in favor? >> I opposed. >> No. >> Um motion passes six to one with two

absent. Next door to business. Madam clerk, >> councelor's request to the mayor. >> Hey, councel Kimbley. >> I have not at this time. >> Hey, council me. I request have been mailed. >> Council meard, >> I would just like to join everyone in uh welcoming our new trash and recycling bins. Uh ward one my driveway. We received them this afternoon. They're beautiful. They're bigger than I thought. They're fairly rugged and uh the roll out by the DPW and Cassala has been really pretty good considering and we have a week or two to get things sorted out and then we're October 1st

they're put into use. So I'm sure there'll be a lot of adjustments and details to see to but I think we're we're on the way. So welcome to the new age for all of Gloucester. >> Council Paige, >> no requests. Thank you. Council Densson, no requests at this. Councelor Grace, >> um just to add to what um council member Hard had to say, just a reminder that this goes live on October 1st. So that's a Thursday, next Thursday. So your regular your trash on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday will of next week will be the same. And also that gives um almost a whole extra week for these barrels to be delivered. So um there's been a lot of scuttlebutt out there about, you know, I haven't gotten my barrel yet.

What's taking so long? we're going live. Remember that if your trash is collected um on Wednesdays, you have a whole another week to wait. So, there's still time. So, and to be patient. Um, and my request to the mayor is that I would I would like to have some sort of um whether it's a spreadsheet or email chain, whatever the case may be, that when there's a large project that's going to happen in a ward um that that would significantly impact a ward or a neighborhood within a ward, that the ward counselors be contacted about that project um from the get-go and kept in the loop about everything rather than having to play c us having to play catchup when things get to the public hearing. portion of something. Um I

think it's important that um counselors are knowledgeable about what's going on and there's a gazillion in one boards and commissions in this city and sometimes it's really difficult to be on top of everything that's going on. Um councelor Paige is really good at it. Um you know, but it's it's I think it's important that the the counselors be notified of upcoming projects in their wards. um not when it's already, you know, nine miles down the road, but from the get-go. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Motion to adjurnn. >> So, make a motion to adjurnn. >> Second. >> All right. Councelor Paige made a motion

to adjurnn. Councelor Benson um seconded it. Councelor Grace whispered it. Um and uh all those in favor >> I I opposed >> eyes have it seven to zero >> two absence.