Appointments & Briefings Committee — March 17, 2026

But do we have a— 1, 2, 3, 4, 5.

Oh, we do, we do.

Oh, we— no, we have one.

1, 2, 3.

No, we have 6.

No, there's 3 of them.

Oh yeah, I know I was counting them wrong.

Smile.

Hey, Brad.

Oh, so you know I sent you— sent you guys all the, uh, pending list Guys, I didn't make any of those motions.

I know.

Yeah, you didn't.

We have some so old that I want to talk to Leo about consolidating our parallel products, get rid of some stuff.

But Brian, I want to work on, you know, all the motions, parallel products we have like on the— Yes, I want to work on that.

So you want to get rid of them?

Yes.

So I want to make sure we update it though.

I don't want to get rid of them with no further action, but we're going to put new ones on the agenda.

To update where we're going through now, the court case, and we're at this point.

Okay.

Some of the stuff is gone, but other stuff is still present.

Okay.

Gotcha.

You're good to go.

I'll go.

I got the list.

She comes on.

Let me know when you're ready and she'll bang it in.

Do you need a mic test?

Testing, 1, 2, 3.

Oh, test, baby, test.

Everyone set?

We all set?

Okay, okay.

Yeah, good evening everybody and welcome to the Committee on Appointments and Briefings.

It is March 17th, 2026, and it's 7:01 in the chambers.

I would like to I said my colleagues in government.

We have Councillor-at-Large Ian Abreu, Councillor Ward 2 Scott Pemberton, Councillor-at-Large Brian Gomes, Councillor from Ward 6 and President Ryan Pereira, Councillor-at-Large Shane Burgo, Councillor Ward 3 Sean Oliver, and Councillor-at-Large James Roy, and myself, Naomi Carney, Councillor-at-Large.

Thank you very much all for coming.

Note, this meeting is being live-streamed and recorded.

City Council and committee meetings can be viewed on the City of New Bedford's homepage under Quick Links, then Meetings.

Thank you.

Do we have anything to be read into the record?

We do.

We have 2 letters to read into the record.

This one's from Councilor Lopes.

Dear Chair Carney and honorable members of the committee, I am writing to inform you that I will be unable to attend tonight's committee meeting due to a work commitment.

Please read this letter into the record to make my colleagues and the public aware of the reason for my absence.

Second letter is, uh, from Councillor Choquette.

I am writing to inform you that I am not able to attend tonight's committee meeting due to a previously scheduled business commitment.

Please read this letter into the record to make my colleagues and the public aware of the reason for my absence.

Motion to receive both items on file.

Second.

Motion made to receive and place on file by Councillor Oliver.

Second by Councillor Burgo.

All in favor say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Item number 1 is citizens input time, not to exceed the first 30 minutes of each meeting.

Each individual recognized is allowed to speak for a total of 3 minutes.

1A is, uh, Mr. James DuPont.

James DuPont.

Mr. DuPont.

Good evening, Mr. DuPont.

Can we have your name and address for the record?

James DuPont, 118 Elm Street East, Rainham, for the minutes.

Thank you.

Good evening, Madam Chair and members of the New Bedford City Council.

I come with a message of grave and immediate importance to the property owners and voters of New Bedford, the members of the New Bedford City Council, the administration of the City of New Bedford.

The issue is twofold.

First, it concerns the decades-long underfunding by the Massachusetts State Legislature of the several categories of local aid, including but not limited to Chapter 70, which, as you know, is one of the biggest factors in setting the local property tax rate and hence how much the residents in businesses in New Bedford are asked by you to pay.

After Prop 2½, the cities and towns were limited in how much they could raise the prior year's levy, and consequently many local services, mostly education, were annually reduced due to insufficient legislative appropriations to local aid in Chapter 70.

This brings up the second point: where does so-called state revenue come from?

In fact, and indeed, it comes from every resident and every business in every city and town, including New Bedford, Which, in turn, leads me to ask this question: Why isn't the money being taken out of cities and towns, then appropriated and returned to you, in order to reduce how much the city has to ask its property owners to pay?

It's been my experience that our state legislature has never made full funding of aid to education or local aid a priority.

Members of the majority party bemoan how tough things are this year on Beacon Hill, while the minority party members shrug their shoulders and say, there isn't anything I can do about it.

Last year, Rainham's budget process resulted in a failure to pay its requested share of the regional school assessment.

After a failed Prop 2.5 override, a large layoff of BR employees followed— 40 teachers.

A resident I discussed this with said, it sounds like bad management.

I responded that it wasn't bad management, but rather a shortfall caused by our state legislators not fully funding local aid and Chapter 70.

His response: it sounds like our local officials mismanaged their relationships.

With our state legislators.

Madam Chair, the time has come for all local officials, including the members of the New Bedford City Council, to demand that their state legislators change their vote on local aid from the current, here's what's left, to, here's what New Bedford is legally entitled to under the general laws of the Commonwealth.

As long as our state reps and state senators are lauded for getting half a loaf, then the local residents and businesses will be told to make up the difference.

And you, You people in those seats, you, not the governor or the legislature, will bear the public's ire when taxes go up and services go down.

As the guardians of the local tax dollar, it is time you, each of you, demand that the legislators who represent New Bedford vote to fully fund all categories of local aid so the council won't have to ask the local taxpayers to make up for another shortfall in state funding by raising local taxes or an override of Prop 2.5.

If the state then has a shortfall, let them raise taxes.

Or do massive layoffs instead of forcing the City Council to do it for them.

Thank you, Madam Chair and members of the City Council.

I'll leave a copy of my remarks with the secretary for the record.

Thank you.

Thank you so much.

Second.

Motion made by Councilor Gomes, second by Councilor Virgo.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Thank you.

Item number 2 is communication, Mayor Mitchell to the City Council, submitting the appointment of Cristobal Jose Escobar, New Bedford, Mass., to the Veterans Advisory Board, replacing Christopher Holkamp, who has resigned.

This term will expire December 2026.

It was referred here on December 11, 2025.

February 17, 2026, it was, uh, tabled.

Number 2 is before you and it remains on the table.

Motion made by Councilor Abel to remove from the table.

Second?

Second by Councilor Burgo.

All in favor say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Mr. Escobar.

Mr. Escobar.

Table.

Well, Councilor— Madam Chair, through you to the, uh, the clerk, do we have any communication?

This would have been a second time.

Yeah, no, we wouldn't— no, we haven't received anything.

Oh, okay.

I was invited though.

You were not.

I know that.

Thank you.

So I would like to make a motion to refer out to the full city council.

For— wait, we have some people coming in here now.

No.

Oh, that's from the— refer out to the full city council with a favorable recommendation.

Motion made by Councilor Burgos to refer out to the full City Council for a favorable recommendation.

Second by Councilor Combs.

Anybody on the question?

Councilor Burgos.

Yes, so, um, on this item, again, uh, I've— this was referred back in December, uh, of 2026, and, uh, since this has been referred, we've had 2 other Veteran Advisory Board appointments, and I'm very thankful to this body for appointing those 2 appointments since then.

I missed this one.

It was obviously sent to committee as we normally would.

As I've explained on the last 2 during council meetings, this is the typical process that we would do in any committee meeting.

The Veterans Advisory Board is going through a very rare situation right now where they're struggling to build back up to meet a quorum.

Also, they're in a rare situation where all the members are veterans, and a lot of times these veterans have different ailments, they have different limitations when it comes to, in this case, maybe attending an in-person city council meeting on the second floor.

Floor.

In this particular matter, I think what might have taken place— and I can double-check before our next council meeting— this gentleman might have believed that he was all set.

So that's why in this case I would ask the body to indulge me in sending this out to the full city council for approval, check back in with this candidate to make sure he's aware of the situation, and ask that we approve this for the full City Council to get this board back up and running again.

As I reiterated, this is a board that is lacking in a quorum to meet, and these are members that have served our country proudly and are trying to, to get back on board.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Berto.

Councilor Oliver.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Um, although I do understand, uh, the sentiments of the colleague who spoke before me, um, and I think the body's been willing to work with, um, the needs of this board.

Um, this board needs people who are going to show up.

I know I'm going to sound, um, like I'm against this person sitting there, which I really am not, but it is— it takes communication whether they, you know, it or not, uh, whether you knew you're supposed to show up in February or now or whatever it may be.

I do know that, as my colleague spoke before me, said there are some limitations, but one of those expectations is again to show up.

So I would like the opportunity to speak with this gentleman to make sure that we are on the same page and not just continuing to fill these positions just because the board is struggling to fill them.

So I would suggest to not send this out, and let's go through the process with this one because maybe something— maybe something's up and the person cannot actually commit to the board.

So I hope that my colleagues will take that into consideration as well.

A letter of invitation was sent out on March 4th to Mr. Escobar.

Yes, so we were just double-checking to make sure that he was informed.

Of this meeting, and, um, and he was informed of this meeting.

Point of order.

Okay, Councilor Roy, point of order.

Yes, Councilor, did our colleague from Ward 3 make a motion there?

Okay, no.

So the motion on the floor is still to refer to the full City Council for approval.

You can ask for roll call, or you can still ask for motion to table.

Motion to table.

Okay.

So a motion made to table by Councilor Oliver, which does go after the— precedes the, uh, the prior motion, and seconded by Councilor April.

All those in favor to table, say okay, say aye.

No, roll call.

Sorry, on tabling, um, Councilor April?

Yes.

Councilor April.

Councilor Baptiste?

Yes.

Yes.

Councilor Baptiste.

Councilor Burgoyne?

No.

No.

Councilor Carney?

Councilor No, Councilor Bergo.

Councilor Carney?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Carney.

Councilor Gomes?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Gomes.

Councilor Oliver?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Oliver.

Councilor Pemberton?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Pemberton.

Councilor Pereira?

Yes.

Yes, Councilor Roy.

That passes 7-2.

Um, motion passes.

You missed one.

Councilor Roy, why do I— I'm sorry, James, I'm gonna go sit near you.

Okay.

Yes, I mean, and we go way back too.

I'm so sorry.

Councilor Roy.

Yes.

Yes.

Thank you.

So that passes 8 to 1.

That passes 8 to 1.

And for the record, I'd like to show that Councilor Baptiste from Ward 4 is here, and he came in while we were doing the discussion.

Thank you.

Number 3 is, um, A petition, uh, Casey Swift and Justin Swift, East Freetown, Mass., doing business as Swift Sales, 127 West Rodney French Boulevard, New Bedford, Mass., requesting a waiver of residency in accordance with Section 15-38 of the city code to obtain a license to deal in junk, old metals, or any other secondhand articles, referred here on November 13, 2025.

December 16, 2025, it remained in committee and February 17th, 2026, it was tabled.

So number 3 is before you and it remains on the table.

Okay.

Their information before we remove from the table, are they present?

They're not.

Do we have— oh, let's see.

The Swifts.

Kaitlyn Swifts and Justin Swift in the room?

No.

This would be the 3rd time that it's heard.

So just a motion to refer.

Out to the full City Council for no further action.

Just a parliamentary inquiry, uh, Madam Chair and Mr.

Clerk, don't we have to remove from the table for us to refer it out?

Yes.

So, okay, so motion to remove from the table, right?

So we're gonna— we're gonna motion to remove from the table.

Okay, motion made to remove table by Councilor April, second by Councilor Pemberton.

All in favor for moving to the table— removing from the table, say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Motion to refer to the full city council for no further action.

Motion made by Councilor Fergal, second by Councilor Pemberton.

Roll call on the question.

Really quickly, just for the general public, um, I looked into this too.

I just want the general public to be aware that a letter has been sent to their East Freetown address as well as their New Bedford address.

There was an attempt also made by our clerk's office.

They're nowhere to be found.

They have They haven't made any inquiries back to us, uh, on each occasion.

This is third time's the charm, I guess, in that regard.

So, um, we have done our— the office, our council office has done their due diligence on this matter.

Um, I, I'm not sure why.

So that is why I have made the motion to refer out for no further action.

Just so people are aware, we are trying to make the attempt and they're not showing up.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Anybody else on the question?

Seeing none, all in favor say aye.

I withdraw my roll call vote.

Okay, all in favor say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Number 4, it's communication.

City Clerk, Clerk of the City Council submitting an application for a new private livery license on behalf of Celestin Wilkind of 1 Warwick Street, New Bedford, Mass., doing business as Chris Transportation, 1 Warwick Street, New Bedford, Mass., license to expire June 30th, 2026.

The matter was referred here on June 8th, 2026.

On February 17th, 2026, it was tabled.

Number 4 is before you and it remains on the table.

Point of information, are, are the applicants here?

I'm asking right now.

I don't think they are.

I— Celestin Wilkind.

Celeste and Wilkins.

They are not present.

You want to just leave it on the table?

Okay, we'll just leave it on the table.

Okay.

Number 5 is a written motion, Councillors Combs and Oliver, requesting that the Committee on Appointments and Briefings meet with the MBTA South Coast Rail officials for the purpose of discussing the safety of the Purchase Street train corridor Uh, the installation safety fencing from Minuteman Car Wash South and the support wall on South— on Purchase Street from Penniman Street to the train station, and further requesting that the Purchase Street support wall will have the same facade as the train station.

It was referred here on January 25th, 2024.

On June 17th, 2025, it was tabled Um, number 5 is before you and remains on the table.

Madam Chair, let it remain on the table.

We don't have anybody here from MBTA.

Nobody here?

No.

Okay.

All right, all right, stays on the table.

Okay.

All right, so now number 6 is a written motion.

Councilors Gomes, I'm assuming that you folks are here on St. Killian's.

Yes.

Okay.

Oh, okay.

Yes.

Okay.

Do you want to take them out?

Yeah, we know.

Number 6 is a written motion.

Councilor Gomes requesting that the Committee on Appointments and Briefings meet with Derek Santos, executive director for the New Bedford Economic Development Council, along with board members of the New Bedford Business Park, for the purpose of having a discussion on implementing language in the business park's governing rules to protect against any future trash and recycling businesses that handle hazardous waste materials from the being— from being located in the business park.

Putting this safeguard in place would protect the business park from any hazardous waste, trash, or any other detrimental materials.

It was referred here on December 11th, 2025.

Number 6 is now before you.

Motion received and placed on file.

Second.

Motion made by Councilor Gomes, second by Councilor Pemberton.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

That was— Derek is here.

Huh?

This is simple.

We shouldn't be too long with this.

No, because we have— I was— we have the other one right behind us, so— yeah, no, I'm just saying in general that with this— yes, this is a yes or no.

Either you can or you can't.

Where is Derek?

Right there.

Derek, you want to come up to the podium?

Thank you, Derek, and thanks for coming.

Good evening.

Thanks for being here.

Um, I think the motion is self-explanatory.

Is there used to be wording within the, um, bylaws?

Bylaws.

Thank you very much.

I was thinking something else.

Bylaws of the, um, business park.

And I'd like to make sure that that is in there.

And that we never have to run into a situation like we have.

Yep.

The Industrial Foundation places deed restrictions on when it sells a piece of property.

Those deed restrictions are in place for a period of 30 years.

Those deed restrictions have changed a bit over time.

When the park was first established and starting selling land in the early '60s, they were There were brief restrictions sometime around the '80s.

They were expanded a bit, and then later on they were expanded even further.

On the Industrial Foundation's website and in its printed guide are the most recent restrictions on any parcel that was sold by the Industrial Foundation.

If a project If a, if a business in the park wants to do any project at all, the first thing that we do is Ramon looks up the deed restriction that was actually recorded, because that's what, that's what the Industrial Foundation can enforce from a deed restriction.

And that's what we ensure compliance with.

Anything— if a project requires any other permitting from the city, state, or whatever, if it's the, if it's the planning board, for example, they'll ask the Industrial Foundation usually to provide comment, and we'll usually provide that comment by saying the deed restrictions were complied with, here's what they are.

And if there are other comments, the Industrial Foundation Executive Committee instructs us what to do and we communicate that.

There are no more parcels for the Industrial Foundation to sell in the business park, so there are no more deed restrictions to put on any additional parcels.

So you're telling me that this is a waste of time?

Who's the lands for— you— let's— I don't mean to do this to you, Derek, but you've been in this building before and you stood before us and you told me that there was nothing for sale up in, in, in the business park, only to see signs up in the business park of, of different parcels for sale.

There was one not too long ago, right after you take a right there, that came up for sale.

There was further up, um, there's parcels for sale.

There's parcels for sale on the other side of Dartmouth.

Of fact, a new technology was just done just above, uh, I think the Dartmouth line.

Correct.

None of those parcels are being sold by the Industrial Foundation.

Who are they being sold by?

Private parties.

I didn't, I didn't realize that private parties own properties within the business park.

I thought the business park was owned basically by the business park.

We had land available, companies would come in and take advantage— not take advantage, but take advantage of setting up their business there.

I wasn't aware that— so when the business park started, it was all private land?

The business park is really no different, Councillor, than imagine a residential subdivision, a road and private lots.

The developer sells the lots.

Once those lots are sold, whoever bought that lot, that's their house and their property.

It's the exact same thing.

Okay, so those, those lots were sold then?

Yes.

Back in the day?

Yes.

Okay, so my question— my, my motion here was simple: no more trash, no more things that are detrimental to the city of New Bedford.

The business park originally, when it came here— I've been around for a little while— was for the 21st century of, uh, of, um, factories or, or manufacturers within the park, and that kind of, um, We did it right.

I just want to guarantee that we, we do not put ourselves in a situation such as we put ourselves in with the Polaroid property and how that all took place.

A lot of that, many of us were not aware of, of what was going on at the time in the business park, because maybe some of us would have stood up and said, wait a minute, what's going on?

Let me finish.

I want just a guaranteed somewhere in the bylaws or whatever that this will never happen again in the park.

And I believe that this can be done.

I believe that it was there before and then it was taken away and then whatever happened happened.

Go ahead.

The deed restriction for the Polaroid property— well, you asked the question.

I'm just trying to answer it, right?

Expired about 21 years ago.

So there was no mechanism for the industrial foundation to enforce a deed restriction that had expired.

There's no mechanism for that.

So the way to, to, to guarantee what you're looking for, the Industrial Foundation has no role.

There are no more parcels for it to sell.

It can't put new deed restrictions on anything.

But if someone left, if someone leaves in the next 10 years and they decide to sell that property, someone can come in with a crane and knock everything down and put a trash place there.

That's what I'm trying to prevent.

If someone— if someone sold a piece of property and the deed restrictions were in place, the deed restrictions as they are for every project would get enforced.

Isn't there any bylaws by the park?

So what's— what's the— what's the industrial park about previously and all that?

What was that all about?

The mechanism that the Industrial Foundation used well before we got there, starting in the 1950s, was to sell properties, to restrict the— not the use.

Use is restricted by zoning.

That's what you're talking about is use.

Zoning is forever.

And municipal zoning, both in the city of New Bedford and the town of Dartmouth, is what restricts use in terms of site design, landscaping, building materials.

That's what you're going to see in the guidelines for the park.

And for 30 years, right, those restrictions are in place.

After 30 years, as each parcel gets sold at a different time, right, they're all on a— it doesn't all happen at once.

It happens over, over a period of time.

And if a parcel gets sold and somebody wants to do something that is outside of the deed restrictions, if they still exist, right, then Ramona and I review those plans.

We let the executive committee of the Industrial Foundation know.

And if it will say, you know, you— this is something that you cannot do.

That has happened.

That has happened.

There were— what happened then with Polaroid if that deed had expired for almost 21 years or whatever?

What happened with that, that that got to locate— Parallel got to do what they got to do there?

There were no— I don't mean to go there because I didn't want to go there.

All I wanted was a flat yes or no answer.

Can we put something in place to make sure it never happens again?

You want a yes or no question?

There's no way— there's no way of protecting that park, that business park, in any way of this happening again or something coming to the park that could be detrimental to it?

The Industrial Foundation does not own any of the parcels in the park.

So therefore, no, it cannot enforce deed restrictions on parcels that it does not own.

It can only enforce deed restrictions on parcels where those deeds— where those restrictions still have time left on them.

So any parcel that was sold in the, you know, '50s, '60s, early '70s, those deed restrictions have, you know, expired.

Any parcels that were sold more recently within 30 years, right, those deed restrictions still exist.

On parcels where the deed restrictions still exist, Then the Industrial Foundation enforces those deed restrictions.

Okay, you're educating me on the deeds and stuff like that.

Yeah.

But so what is your job there, Derek?

How do we get— is your job to attract businesses to the, to the park?

Am I correct?

Are you mean the EDC?

My job is I'm the executive director of the EDC.

Okay.

There are no parcels left to sell in the business park.

There is parcels left to sell, but they're in private ownership.

Yes.

You've already explained that to me.

Okay.

But so say I own a piece of property up there.

Yep.

And I want to turn it into Smash Glass.

I can just buy the property and do so?

No.

Okay.

Give me an explanation why no.

If I want to buy a piece of property in the business park and run a smash glass operation— that's an example.

Yeah, to use your example, right?

If that property has deed restrictions on it from the industrial foundation, right, it's unlikely that it would meet the criteria of not being obnoxious use, right?

And you'd be stopped right there.

If you bought a parcel where the deed restrictions had expired there would be no role for the Industrial Foundation.

That role would be with the City of New Bedford between site plan review and the building department.

So you would have no say in that?

It would come to the city to deal with anything like that?

Correct.

Thank you very much.

Nothing further.

I don't need any other questions from him if my colleagues are happy with that.

I apologize for having him in here.

All I was doing was try to protect the park from this ever happening again.

And I understand that this wording was in there somewhere a long time ago in the bylaws, but I guess them have been burnt and we go on, on what we have now.

Yes, you are, you are right, Councilor Gomez, because Mr. Davis stood here several years back when this all started and, and told us that it was in the bylaws.

So he didn't make it up.

He, he, after he resigned, he came here when that whole parallel park was up and told us that.

So that's right.

And again, Madam Chairman, always looking to— is to protect the park from anything of the future that could be detrimental, as this project that came along has been, and the work and the money that has been spent by the taxpayers of the city in New Bedford.

And the fight continues, um, with everyone against parallel products being there.

That's all I was looking to do.

Derek, thank you very much for being here.

Have a great evening.

Thank you, Councilor.

Thank you, Councilor Gomes.

Councillor Pereira.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

So Derek, you alluded to it a little bit.

Um, obviously there are deed restrictions on parcels, uh, that were sold later on.

They're still— those 30 years are still ongoing.

So those, those are in place on certain parcels in the industrial park.

Yes.

However, all parcels in the industrial park and in the city have to follow our zoning laws.

You are correct.

So in our zoning laws where we have now made changes to ex— to not allow these certain facilities, uh, in, in all these zones, that'll take place in industrial park as well?

You are correct.

Okay, so we— so the council, by, uh, passing those certain ordinances in the table of use, have protected that all?

You are correct.

Okay, thank you, Madam Chair.

Just to clarify, uh, you know, I understand, uh, when this, uh, happened, you know, the council was looking— and the council to my right knows better than anyone else, or just about as much as anyone else— that we were looking for any and every way to stop this from ever happening again.

And, and, but, but we— the council did the master of all moves by banning it on our zoning, which covers the entire city.

So that, that is protected now throughout the city, and that's thanks to, to, to leadership on this council.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Derek.

Yes, thank you, Councilor Pereira, in clarifying the zoning for the people that are watching, because yes, now the zoning's in place.

Thank you.

Councilor Abril.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Derek, very quick, um, when we were discussing a few minutes ago, or it was brought up about the bylaws for protection, uh, through the Industrial Foundation, I, I was looking at you and you kind of made a little face and you were shaking your head a little bit.

And if, and if I misread you, I apologize, But was that— is that not correct?

Like in the past, when it was alluded to Mr. Davis, and I just want to clarify that.

Yes, Councilor.

So terms get used in an interchanged way.

The bylaws for the Industrial Foundation as an organization, like any nonprofit, have existed since its inception.

They make no reference to design standards or uses of The properties in the park, they refer specifically, when you're talking about the bylaws, to how that organization is going to run itself, right?

Number of members, officers, meeting times, that type of thing.

They're very typical bylaws, I think from 1955.

The regulations, which sometimes get referred to as the park's bylaws, right, the park regulations, and are posted as the park regulations.

But even if you read the regulations, it says those, those are essentially regulations that are restrictions that are placed on the deed.

I fully understand how anybody, a member of the public or anybody else, would interchange those, but they are, they are separate legal documents.

Thank you, Derek.

Thank you, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councilor April.

Anybody else on your second council call?

Thank you very much, Madam Chairman.

Again, thank you for being here.

I know what we were told back in the day, and that's what I was going on.

Um, I, I understand about the zoning and all that stuff, but I, I've always thought that the original industrial fund, um, was a foundation of members that almost like a condo association that watched over the park, what came into the park, what didn't come into the park.

Just want that to be understood.

That's certainly true.

We work with park companies on almost a weekly basis.

We work with them on enhanced security.

We work with them on enhanced maintenance of the park.

We're doing a spring to-do list.

We do that every spring and every fall.

We make sure that they're aware of any security updates in terms of notifying police either in New Bedford or Dartmouth if they're there's an incident in the park, whether that be on their site or as the weather gets warmer.

Council, I'm sure you know, there are some folks out there who will drive their cars too fast in the business park from time to time.

We give them the protocol on anything like that.

If there's any business in the park that has a question, that has— is looking to do an expansion, Horatio's is a good example where we worked with those guys on their permitting.

Ramon worked with them specifically on, on the incentive package to make that expansion actually happen.

So we're constantly working with, um, working with companies in the park, and when they want to do something, referring them back because they don't know, back to their own deed restrictions on this is what's applicable, this is what's not.

Almost always the city's zoning requirements and site plan review requirements are more restrictive than the— than what's in deed restrictions.

Almost always.

The foundation back in 1955 did not choose a model.

We wish they did, where instead of selling land, they entered into ground leases, right, and had perpetual ownership of property.

You understand what this council was thinking?

I understand exactly what you want.

No, you understand what I was thinking.

Yeah, absolutely.

I'm not as well-versed on that.

No, no, no, no, no.

And that is not an uncommon model.

So it's— we fully understand when, when anybody would make that assumption.

That's a completely valid assumption.

The Industrial Foundation in New Bedford chose not to do that.

They chose to essentially say, we're going to work to essentially build a city street, and then we're going to sell off property, right?

And when the revenue from those properties is, is complete, essentially the foundation will sunset.

The foundation will sunset and will go away probably in somewhere between 12 and 14 years, something like that, with their current, current model of finances.

If things stretch out a little bit longer, it might be a little bit longer.

If some expenses are more, it might be a little bit less.

But that organization was designed to sunset and not be perpetual.

If they had held on to the land and had ground leases or even built buildings and had tenants come in, They would have had much more control.

They would have had perpetual income.

But there was a strategic decision made that said that's not the model that we're going to follow.

And at no point in their history, and not since we've been there, have they decided to change that model.

By the time we got there, there were only 2 parcels left for the foundation to sell.

We're Plummett Suppliers now, which Ramon recruited to that site.

And what the parcel is called, Lot 11.

Which DF Pray had, which now is a staging area for Eversource temporarily for their project in the North End.

Ramon also recruited DF Pray to that.

Once that's done, there'll be future development at that parcel, but they have no other parcels to sell.

What's going on right next to the railroad track with that parcel of land that was up— it's up for sale?

Are you talking about where the railroad tracks are?

They've put some temporary campers there.

But that whole land was, was, was cleared, cleared, and the signage is up.

Yep.

The foundation sold that parcel to DF Pray for, for development.

Um, in the interim right now, Eversource had approached DF Pray if they could use that parcel for staging for a lot of the north end projects that Eversource is doing right now.

That's what's happening now.

Um, that's what that stone is and all that's about with the fencing in, because half of it is not then it's just— yep, correct.

Or whatever.

Correct.

Uh, Field Engineering, who's done a lot of work in the park— Bob Field, um, had worked with DF Pray.

We've— we had seen the plans for the, uh, uh, the schematic concept for development, and the Eversource piece is there temporarily.

When those construction projects end for Eversource, they leave, and then DF Pray looks at, okay, how do we go back to the redevelopment plan?

Okay, um, again, Derek, thank you for being here.

Thank you for your explanation.

Please understand that this councilor is somewhat very frustrated, and you know I am, and many of us are, with the project, with the parallel project up there.

And again, all I was looking for from you, sir, was that protection that as the eyes and the ears of the park, that something like this never get past you or whatever without you sounding the alarm or whoever's in your place to sound the alarm to the city, or at least its representation, so immediate action could be taken and we're not getting caught up into the run that we got caught up into with parallel products, which was already there smashing glass and everything.

And a constituent had to call and let me know that that was happening, and then it all broke loose.

We're on the same page.

Thank you.

When we have the tools, we absolutely use them.

Thank you, sir.

Yes, sir.

Ramón, thank you also for being here.

Thank you, Madam Chairman.

No further action.

Thank you, Councilor Gomes.

Anybody else have any questions for Derek?

Sorry.

See, that's okay.

Seeing none, motion's been made for no further action, made by Councilor Gomes, seconded by Councilor Pergo.

All in favor say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Thank you, Derek and Ramón, for coming.

Item number 7 is a written motion.

Councilor Gomes requesting that the Committee on Appointments and Briefings meet with the Archdiocese of Boston's Planning Office for Urban Affairs to discuss the project timeline and the proposed design for the former St. Killian's Church property on Ashley Boulevard.

It was referred here on January 22nd, 2026.

7A, motion to receive and place on file.

Sorry, checked.

Okay, so 7 and 7A, motion to receive and place on file.

The written motion and the project timeline and design plan.

Thanks, Leroy.

Excuse me.

Motion made by Councilor Roy, seconded by Councilor Burgo.

All in favor say aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

Thank you for waiting for us, and, um, you're on now so you can state your name and address for the record, and then you can get into explaining about the project.

Welcome back to the city of New Bedford again.

Appreciate you being here.

Thank you very much.

Appreciate being invited.

I'm Shayna Corman Houston, the director of real estate— the director of real estate at the Planning Office for Urban Affairs.

Our office— our offices are at 10 Post Office Square in Boston.

And I do have printed presentations.

Thank you.

Motion received and placed on file.

Second.

Must be made by Councilor Gomes.

Second by Councilor Abril.

We already received and placed that on file.

That was 7A.

Oh, I'm sorry.

Oh yes, yeah, I think you did.

You, you added both of them in your motion.

Yeah, Jenna, save one for the chair.

Is one on my desk?

It's the same one.

Sean, is mine on my desk?

No.

It is now.

The council president is our IT guy.

Um, Dennis, where's my— where's my nice color one?

She wanted one on her desk.

Oh, I was going to bring it up for you, but that's fine.

That's mine.

She does have one.

I don't know why she asked.

I don't know why I would need one.

I do now because I'm giving it to her.

Because you know how I feel about it.

While we're waiting, we appreciate you being here and coming down again.

We had met last year, and you know how I felt about this project.

Again, thank you so much for coming.

So good evening, counselors, and, and thank you for having us.

Um, as I said, I'm Shayna Corman Houston, Director of Real Estate at the Planning Office for Urban Affairs.

And I'm here with Joe Harrington, the Vice Chancellor of the Archdiocese of Fall River.

We're here to discuss the proposed redevelopment of St. Killian's Church at 300 to 306 Ashley Boulevard.

All right.

So the planning office was formed in 1969 by the Archdiocese of Boston as an independent nonprofit with a mission of developing high-quality affordable housing.

Over the past 55 years, we've developed more than 3,200 units throughout eastern Massachusetts with another 1,200 to 1,500 underway.

We provide diverse housing solutions ranging from mixed income, senior, family, and supportive housing for vulnerable populations.

As well as homeownership and mixed-use development.

All right, so as you know, St. Killian's has been vacant for many years, and the Archdiocese was seeking a way to leverage its unused properties in a way that would strengthen the diocese's financial position position, as well as advance its social justice mission and benefit the neighborhood.

So PUA has a deep— has deep experience in this sort of project, and so we connected to work on that.

We initially envisioned a project with 15 workforce homeownership units and a 44-unit rental building with a mix of incomes focusing though on 30% and 60% AMI units.

So low and very low income households and a design that was intended to respect the neighborhood.

So we met with several of the councilors, including Councilor Gomes, as well as Josh Emerol from the Office of Housing and Community Development with those early plans, and we really appreciate the feedback feedback we got from you and from the mayor via Josh.

There we go.

All right.

So the feedback that we heard was strong support for the homeownership component, a desire for more workforce housing, recommendations that parking be secured, which we will do, and an interest in preserving the church, which unfortunately we're not able to do, or if that were not possible, a more distinctive design.

So we went back, we put pencil to paper, and this is what we've come up with that we're bringing to you today.

What you see— what you see at the bottom of the page is a 4-story, 46-unit affordable and workforce rental building with 49 parking spaces and an outdoor patio.

Up at the top of the page in the church— the former church parking lot is 15 for-sale townhomes with 16 parking spaces.

All right, so here's a view of the townhomes.

The homeownership townhomes, uh, at 3 stories, there believe a very appropriate scale for the neighborhood and with the pitched roof and the residential character.

They're mostly 2-bedroom units, a couple of 3-bedrooms, and they're intended to be for households at 80% of area median income with sales prices that are appropriate for those households.

And I've put up at the top what those incomes are approximately.

What we expect those sales prices would be.

So, and then across the street, this is our revised design of the apartment building where we attempted to pay homage to the church with the bays as towers with arched windows as well as the pitched roof.

The building has grown just a little bit to 46 units.

And we explored the possibility of further growth.

To do that, we'd have to lose parking.

Right now we're at just over 1 space per unit.

As well— or the other option would be to go up another story, to go up to a 5th story, which would also put us below the 1-to-1 parking ratio.

So those are 2 things that we would absolutely consider.

But for the moment, this is what we're laying out.

So these are just preliminary floor plans.

We're looking at an onsite management office, laundry, a community room, and wherever possible, we include a gym in our properties.

And here's the income mix.

This is where you see the biggest change since we came and met with the counselors in the fall.

The number of bedrooms, the unit mix of bedrooms of 1s, 2s, and 3s is not that different.

But we've substantially increased the number of 80% AMI workforce units.

This was based on you all's feedback and also in particular the mayor's feedback.

And so we've pushed this as far as possible, in part by increasing the number of 30% AMI units, extremely low-income units, to balance it out due to the nature of the financing.

So the result is that we've gone from 14% workforce units in the rental building up to 44%.

And if you look at the project holistically, when you include the homeownership component, We've gone from 35% workforce units all the way up to 60%.

So what happens next?

We've just about wrapped up our due diligence work, and we're waiting on some input from the mayor on the updated scheme before going live with it.

When we received the invitation.

So I really appreciate the invitation.

It pushed us to go live.

So in the coming weeks and months, we'll be bringing it around to various departments, you all again, probably public stakeholders for feedback.

And all of that is gearing up for The zoning process, which we hope to begin this spring after a conversation with the planning department about whether they have a preferred path.

The goal is to have zoning in place and be able to apply for state funding by the end of the year.

Now, to do that, we're going to need to ask for a funding commitment from the city.

This is a total $38 million project when you combine the rental and homeownership together, and, and the state would expect some contribution from the city.

And so when the time comes, we would want to have a conversation with you all about what seems fair and appropriate to you.

My sense is that, that the homeownership component is going to move a little bit ahead of the rental component, about a year ahead.

And so my goal is that that portion would be under construction by the end of 2027, with the rental about a year behind.

So that said, thank you for your time, and, uh, if you have any questions— Thank you.

Okay, Councilor Gomes, on your first.

Thank you, Madam Chairman.

When you— we've got a great presentation just as always.

When we met with your whole staff back late last summer or whatever, most impressed by everything that I've seen.

And you have my full support and I told you that and I'll stay on that.

Just because of the need and the vibrance of this project, I think resonates with that— not resonates, but will rejuvenate make some of that area, that neighborhood— not only will it support the stores and things on Acushnet Avenue, it just— it'll do something to a piece of land that we loved as a church, but has a time comes when it has to go.

Um, what do you— when you say you're looking for something from the city, monies from the city, and what do you mean?

And it's a type of grant form or whatever?

So the state— the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, which provides the bulk of the funding for our projects, requires that a municipality make some sort of financial commitment, a grant or a forgivable loan or interest-free deferred loan, something of that nature, to any project.

And the amount is sort of up for discussion.

They consider the municipality in question and other supports that the municipality might offer.

Would they consider, you know, like say the city did the road work and the sidewalks, is that a contribution?

That is certainly a contribution.

I think they would likely want to see sort of paired with that at least a nominal financial contribution, but the— but seeing infrastructure work put in by the city would, would absolutely count as a— and also tax credit.

That's— yeah, possible TIF.

Absolutely.

And, and I think having a conversation about what seems appropriate to the city and, and what it is that the city has to bring to bear is, is something that would be very important to us.

I'll give it this time again.

I'm in full support of your project.

It's been great with your staff and everything.

When we met, it was plain and simple.

It was put out there and we knew that it was needed, and it was, uh, very enlightening, at least to this council.

And I'll stand where I stood with you that day.

Anything that you need, we've got to move things along, the permitting or whatever.

Once this— you get the shovels in the ground want to be there to help you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, Councilor Gomes.

Councilor Pemberton.

Hi, I just want to thank you again for, uh, being here.

That was a good presentation.

Uh, I actually, uh, represent that area, so it's, uh, it's actually a, uh, very, uh, delightful to see something that's going to happen there.

Uh, I hate to see the church go, but, uh, You know, it was a beautiful church, but, uh, but it's much needed apartments.

So, uh, and by looking at the designs, it's actually a beautiful design.

Uh, so anything that I can do as well, uh, I'll support this.

Uh, and I'll give you my number, my card after the end.

But, uh, again, thank you again.

Thank you, and very nice to meet you.

How's that?

Anybody else?

Yeah, we're looking at each other.

Thank you.

Um, with, with the homeownership piece, I know this is still kind of in its infancy and there's still a lot of— um, is the idea to, um, uh, are you— is somebody going to be in charge of the property, or when you're selling them off each unit, uh, is that homeowner now in charge of property, or is there going to be a management company for that entire site?

The— what I envision and what we've done previously is, is that there will be a homeowners association.

People will pay fees.

The management company for the rental building across the street will be in charge of snow removal and facilitating trash and things of that nature, but it will be a very limited role.

There will not be interior shared hallways or anything of that nature, so the management needs should be limited.

They'll make sure the landscaping is taken care of and the outside lights stay on, but inside the 4 walls is the responsibility of the owner.

And the, the rental property across the street where the church sits now, does— once that project— once the project is up and running, if everything goes to plan, does the diocese have any more stake in the property or it's gone over to this new management team?

So We've talked about 2 models.

We've talked about an outright sale model and we've talked about a ground lease model.

And I don't think we've come to final conclusion on that yet.

But I think our vision was a partnership, an ongoing partnership in terms of the relationship.

Regardless of the ownership structure.

One of the things that we— one of the models that we talked about was possibly having Community Action for Better Housing, which is a ministry of the Diocese of Fall River, involved in the program management after the development is done.

So the diocese looks at this as a long-term partnership.

Yeah.

I guess closest to where we are, here in the city of New Bedford, what's a project that my colleagues and the general public can look to that you guys have already done similar to this?

That's a very good question.

I should have brought— I should have brought a map or a list with me.

Um, and could you— could you provide a, a list to our clerk?

Oh yes, you can send it at a later date.

Yes, I'll email it that way.

That way we can all take a look at it and— yep.

Absolutely, I'll email it.

We have, um, we have one— we have a number underway in Marlborough and Brockton, um, and I'm gonna have to look at a map to see what we have that's closer than that.

That's fine, but you do get— you guys have stuff in the pipeline relatively close to us that we could, you know— okay, so if you could get that information to our clerk so we could take a look look at it.

And then again, I think you alluded to it, but I assume that there's gonna be some sort of public outreach as well, like a neighborhood meeting or things like that.

Okay, awesome.

All right, so definitely link up with the good councilor from Ward 2.

He puts on some meetings throughout the ward so that way folks can come and hear, you know, what it is that you guys are looking to do.

So thank you this This is all good information.

I appreciate the time, Madam Chair.

Thank you, Councilor Oliver.

Councilor Burgum.

Thank you.

Thank you for coming tonight and presenting and giving us an update on this presentation.

I was really excited when myself and my colleague was— were able to see these plans originally.

Obviously, I'm disappointed that you're in the situation that you're in, having to increase the AMI situation from 14% to 44% for the 80%.

But I know the situation that you're in due to our administration who does not care for affordable housing in that regard.

I hope that you don't have the same issues in Attleboro or Brockton, the other projects that you have.

Recently, I had gotten into a lot of hot water when I criticized this administration, because when people ask what are the barriers to affordable housing in this city, and I said it's this corner office.

You are just one example of many in this city that come in trying to help the residents of New Bedford in this situation, and this administration— anyway, I'll get off my soapbox in regards to that, but my question is more so In regards to the timeline, if this administration, which they're known for dragging their feet when it comes to people trying to do business in this city, whether they're market rate or affordable, whatever the case, workforce, you name it, trying to get work done in this city takes a lifetime.

And I know, I know it's not in this presentation, but in the original presentation when we met this, you know, last year, um, there was a time span, uh, obviously starting now in 20— well, now we're in 2026 and then 2027.

I know closing and what have you, and it wasn't going to be a completion date till 2029, I believe, was the original expectation.

Um, are we still on task to meet those kind of time frames of completion for this large project, or Is the logjam in this administration and their hindrance to build housing in New Bedford going to stall even harder for you?

So we have 2 key milestones to achieve this year in order to stay on track.

And one is zoning the property.

If the property is not zoned by December, then, then there will be a delay.

Delay.

And the other is— have— is that by December we need to be able to show some resource commitment from the city.

The reason for those 2 things is that the, the state funding round is going to be early this year.

It's going to be in December.

And those are 2 threshold items for them to even consider the application.

So in order to stay on track, those are the 2 things we need to achieve.

We— I heard from Josh Emeril this afternoon, and he's coordinating a meeting with the mayor for us.

So that is good movement.

And, and so I'm hopeful that, that we'll be able to move forward.

Great, that's wonderful.

I, I have full faith in Director Amaral.

Um, stick by him and he'll lead you there.

Um, the other one, I don't know, but, um, that's great.

And I, I know that Director Amaral will definitely connect you to the resource.

I know he's already shared with you during our previous meeting, uh, the possible resources grants that the city might be able to award, not maybe in the amount that you're looking for, but something, which is great.

So I know I'll be following along.

I'm sure my colleague that has mentioned from Ward 2 will be following along in regards to making sure it's zoned by December 26th.

That sounds like the most immediate deadline, December of this year, making sure that that's the first of many goalposts.

And please reach out to the council if we can be of any assistance in this project, because I think it will be very beneficial not only to that area but to the city as a whole.

So thank you for coming again tonight.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilor Burgoyne.

Anybody else?

Great.

Um, Councilor, would we like to just— I don't know how the council feels about about the project.

I, I hope they support the project, as you've heard from a few of us, or whatever.

Excuse me.

I'd like to leave this here so that we had something here just in case we are contacted by the diocese or yourself that we need to talk to the council, or we, we need assistance in something, that we able to bring this back up.

I don't know how the council feels about that, but I— instead of, you know, filing a new motion.

We have this here.

As this project moves along, if it needs to be used, we will use it in the manner that we can to assist you.

Yeah, absolutely.

We can, we can keep this on the table.

Yes, we can move to table it and keep it here.

And before, before we go into the motion to table again, I want to thank you for being here tonight.

It's been a pleasure to work with you.

I, you know, it was funny because because I forgot that our city council president also was at the meeting along with former Councilor Maria Trieste, who now— the Councilor Pemberton is the newly elected councilor for that ward, so you will be dealing with him.

But just want you to know that we're here to support this project.

I am very excited, and just as excited when we met you on that day.

I mean, just as excited today because I, I think it just brings something fresh to the city of New Bedford, and the, the structure of the whole project benefits a lot of different people.

Homeownership, good rents, a place to put your head down.

You, you seem to cover it all, and that's what was most impressive to this councilor when this project was put forth, and I appreciate you.

I do believe, I do believe that, uh, you've got the full council support on this project.

Um, this seems like a great project.

I'm sad to see the church has to come down.

I've been in that St. Killian's many times.

It's beautiful.

It's, it's going to be sad to see it come down like any other churches, but, but anyways, it's, it's for a good cause and it's on holy ground, so that means a good thing.

So if, if just brief to the guys, to the is if this all comes to fruition and the church is taken down, would you please consider some type of pieces of the church?

Right, like the bricks, something.

There's many people in this community, and I'm sure you've heard, we've heard the stories, they got married there, the kids were baptized there, their mother came here.

There's a lot of connection with that church.

And if in some way, somehow, during the demolition that some pieces of rock or the building itself could be offered to those that would like it, I would appreciate that.

Thank you.

Yeah, or, or even if we had something prior to the demolition out in the parking lot in front of the church for the parishioners that used to attend there and a lot of the Catholic Diocese that's around here that would like to go and pay homage to that, that land before it comes down.

That would be great if we could do that.

Get the community together to do that would be great.

I know a lot of people will show up.

We have a good strong faith Catholic group in this area, so I think that would be great.

And it will be an opportunity for the diocese to show off what they are attempting to do here in the city of New Bedford.

Absolutely.

Thank you.

We do have more churches.

Did you look at the rest of them?

Okay, we have a motion that Councilor Roy made, a motion to table, seconded by Councilor Pemberton.

All in favor of the table say aye.

Aye.

Motion to adjourn.

The ayes have it.

Motion to adjourn by Councilor Roy, seconded by Councilor Pemberton.

All in favor say aye.

Aye.

Opposed?

The ayes have it.

We are adjourned at 8:07.

Thank you all for coming.