City of New Bedford Meetings
Search and subscribe to city meeting topics that impact you
Newsletters
Subscribe
← Back to video
Ordinance Committee — June 24, 2026
−
Fit
+
IN
0:00
OUT
0:00
Length
0:00
▶ Play selection
Export clip
Keyboard:
I
set in,
O
set out,
←
/
→
nudge playhead 5s.
0:16
Good evening.
In
Out
0:17
It is June 24th, 2026 at 7 PM, and this is our Committee on Ordinances.
In
Out
0:25
Note this meeting is being live streamed and recorded.
In
Out
0:28
City Council and committee meetings can be viewed on the City of New Bedford's homepage under Quick Links, then Meetings.
In
Out
0:34
I'm joined in the chamber tonight by Ward 2 Councilor Scott Pemberton, Ward 1 Councilor Leo Choquette, Ward 5 Councilor Joseph Lopes, Ward 6 Councilor and Council President Ryan Pereira, Councilor at Large James Roy, and Councilor at Large Second Vice President Naomi Carney.
In
Out
0:52
And I am Chairman of Ordinance Shane Burgo.
In
Out
0:55
I'll ask the clerk if there are any letters to read into the record.
In
Out
0:58
I have one letter to read into the record.
In
Out
1:00
This is from Councilor Baptiste.
In
Out
1:01
I'm writing to inform you that I will be unable to attend tonight's committee meeting due to a family commitment.
In
Out
1:06
Please read this letter into the record to make my colleagues and the public aware of the reason for my absence.
In
Out
1:12
Motion received and placed on file, made by Councilor Lopes, seconded by Councilor Pemberton.
In
Out
1:18
Anyone on the question of receiving place on file the letter from Councilor Baptiste?
In
Out
1:22
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
1:24
Any opposed?
In
Out
1:25
The ayes have it.
In
Out
1:26
I also received a text communication from Councilor Abril explaining that he, uh, he would not be here this evening due to a work commitment.
In
Out
1:33
Item number 2.
In
Out
1:35
Is it— is that what I asked?
In
Out
1:36
Yes.
In
Out
1:37
Okay, Clerk Lawrence would like to take up item number 2 without objection.
In
Out
1:46
All right, I'll ask Clerk Lawrence to read item 2.
In
Out
1:49
Item number 2 is a communication.
In
Out
1:51
Dennis W. Faria, City Clerk, Clerk of the City Council.
In
Out
1:53
To Ryan J. Pereira, City Council President, requesting an increase for 3 administrative and recording fees, vital record amendments, junk collector dealer fees, and business certificates, doing business licenses, DBA licenses.
In
Out
2:07
It was referred to us on May 28th, 2026.
In
Out
2:10
Number 2 is now before you.
In
Out
2:13
Motion received and placed on file, made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
2:16
Anyone on the question?
In
Out
2:18
All those in favor say aye.
In
Out
2:20
Any opposed?
In
Out
2:21
The ayes have it.
In
Out
2:24
Clerk Farias, how are you today?
In
Out
2:26
I'm good.
In
Out
2:26
I'm well, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
2:27
How are you?
In
Out
2:27
I'm just so blessed.
In
Out
2:29
Thank you for being here today with us.
In
Out
2:32
Mr. Chairman, thanks for inviting me tonight and also for taking me out of order.
In
Out
2:36
I'll be very, very brief.
In
Out
2:37
Councilors, if you've had a chance to read the letter that I submitted to all of you a few weeks ago, what we're looking to do here is just fairly simple.
In
Out
2:45
There's 3 fees that we're looking to increase.
In
Out
2:48
The first one is our amending vital records.
In
Out
2:50
That fee, we're looking to increase that from $40 to $50, which is the state average.
In
Out
2:55
Which we're currently below right now.
In
Out
2:57
What that is, is there's a lot of work that goes into amending vital records.
In
Out
3:02
90% of it comes from when— is really from birth records, when people don't sign properly or don't check the birth records at the hospital.
In
Out
3:11
They go in, you know, they're either excited about having a birth or whatever it is, or they just don't pay attention for whatever reason.
In
Out
3:16
Sometimes one of the parents aren't there to sign, and then they want to amend the record later.
In
Out
3:20
This is happening more and more and more now.
In
Out
3:22
And the work is getting more and more involved.
In
Out
3:24
You know, names are a little complicated and things.
In
Out
3:26
So, you know, the hospital staff does their best, but afterwards they got to come in and do the amendment.
In
Out
3:31
There's quite a bit of work there.
In
Out
3:32
So we want to just come up to the state average in that regard.
In
Out
3:35
And then just jumping down to the DBAs and the business certificates, we also want to bring that up a little bit.
In
Out
3:40
Those licenses, as you may know, they're good for 4 years.
In
Out
3:44
And what that really is is a business certificate, but it's a DBA.
In
Out
3:48
And the state average is actually above $50.
In
Out
3:50
We're looking to increase that from $40 to $50.
In
Out
3:54
That license is good for 4 years.
In
Out
3:55
That won't change.
In
Out
3:58
Cities like Fall River, for example, charge $60, and they actually also charge $15 to end their business when they go out of business, which we actually think is foolish, which didn't make sense.
In
Out
4:10
We kind of ended that one about 12 years ago when I came on board with your help.
In
Out
4:14
We got rid of that.
In
Out
4:15
So those 2 things we can— the council can do just by giving us permission.
In
Out
4:20
The other thing with the junk dealer fees, we actually have to change that by ordinance, unfortunately.
In
Out
4:25
So I'll ask you to do that as well.
In
Out
4:27
And that is we have about 25 junk dealers and then another 10 or so in the city that also deal in gold and silver and precious metals.
In
Out
4:36
So we're looking to double each of those fees from $50 to $100 and then $100 to $200, which again is comparable to other municipalities in the state.
In
Out
4:49
Any questions from the floor?
In
Out
4:53
Chair recognizes Councilor Roy on this first.
In
Out
4:54
Thanks, Mr.
In
Out
4:55
Chair.
In
Out
4:55
Hi, Dennis, how are you?
In
Out
4:56
I'm well.
In
Out
4:56
How much revenue are you estimating, um, uh, what will increase with the revenue with these changes?
In
Out
5:04
Uh, in total, Councilor, um, it'll probably be around another— I wrote that down here— 7 We're looking probably about maybe another $10,000 into our office, which is— it doesn't sound like a lot, but for our office it's significant.
In
Out
5:19
Okay, thank you.
In
Out
5:20
You're welcome.
In
Out
5:20
Thank you, Mr.
In
Out
5:21
Chair.
In
Out
5:23
Chair, can I ask Councillor Pereira on this first?
In
Out
5:25
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
5:27
Dennis, so in regards to the junk collector dealer fees, you said that has to be done via ordinance, correct?
In
Out
5:33
Is that something you would like us to have drafted now and, and move along, or move along this so we can enact those fees, and then you'll submit an ordinance later on?
In
Out
5:44
Thank you for asking that question, Councilman.
In
Out
5:46
What I'd actually like you to do for the, for the, for the other 2 is to, to move on those tonight because you can do those tonight.
In
Out
5:50
Yeah.
In
Out
5:51
This one, I'd actually like you to table that because I just became aware of, uh, some new state regulations that have changed, okay, which affect our dog citations, which also have to be changed by ordinance.
In
Out
6:02
Okay.
In
Out
6:02
So it might make sense to just kind of do that all at one time and save some money on that On the advertising of the ordinance.
In
Out
6:07
So go ahead and maybe pass this, uh, those 2.
In
Out
6:10
Yeah, the, uh, the vital records and the DBAs would be great tonight.
In
Out
6:16
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
6:18
Anyone else?
In
Out
6:21
Anyone on the second?
In
Out
6:24
All right, seeing none.
In
Out
6:26
So, Mr. Chairman, because this is a communication, um, in which Uh, it's all together.
In
Out
6:33
Do you want me to just refer out the communication and then make a related motion to keep in committee?
In
Out
6:39
What would be the best?
In
Out
6:41
I would think you just make— I guess I refer to the council, David, but I would assume you just make the motion to increase the fee at this time and then we would leave.
In
Out
6:51
But the council needs to do that, doesn't it?
In
Out
6:52
No.
In
Out
6:53
Yeah, if you could come to the microphone.
In
Out
6:57
Oh.
In
Out
6:57
I guess not.
In
Out
7:03
Okay, so Mr. Chairman, I make a motion to refer to the council recommendation to increase the fees for vital record amendments and business certificates, DBA licenses.
In
Out
7:18
Motion made by Councilperson— by $10 each.
In
Out
7:22
No, it's No, it's $30 to $50.
In
Out
7:24
That's $20, right?
In
Out
7:26
$40 to $50.
In
Out
7:27
$40 to $50.
In
Out
7:28
Oh, $40 to $50, and I thought you said $30 to $50.
In
Out
7:30
Each one, each one.
In
Out
7:32
Okay.
In
Out
7:32
By $10.
In
Out
7:33
So it's $30 to $40.
In
Out
7:34
I made a mistake.
In
Out
7:39
You can say it as written.
In
Out
7:42
Yeah.
In
Out
7:48
Items number 1 and 2.
In
Out
7:50
1 and 3.
In
Out
7:51
1 and 3.
In
Out
7:52
$50.
In
Out
7:59
Well, that's what it is currently, right?
In
Out
8:00
No, it's $40 currently.
In
Out
8:02
Item number 1 from $40 to $50.
In
Out
8:05
Yeah, $40 to $50.
In
Out
8:06
And then item number 3, $40 to $50.
In
Out
8:10
$40 to $50.
In
Out
8:18
Oh, that's going to remain.
In
Out
8:22
So that would be the vital record amendments and business certificates, DBA licenses.
In
Out
8:27
Okay, that's been referred by you and seconded by Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
8:34
Anyone on the question?
In
Out
8:37
All right, seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
8:39
Aye.
In
Out
8:40
Any opposed?
In
Out
8:41
The ayes have it.
In
Out
8:42
Make a motion to table item number 2 at this time.
In
Out
8:45
Motion to table made by Councilor Pereira, second by Councilor Pemberton.
In
Out
8:49
All those in favor say aye.
In
Out
8:51
Aye.
In
Out
8:51
Any opposed?
In
Out
8:52
The ayes have it.
In
Out
8:54
Thank you, Clerk Farias.
In
Out
8:55
Thank you, councilors.
In
Out
8:56
Appreciate it.
In
Out
8:57
We are now back at item, uh, 1, a public hearing.
In
Out
9:01
Item number 1 is a public hearing continued on a communication, Mayor Mitchell to the City Council, submitting an ordinance.
In
Out
9:06
Amending Chapter 9, Zoning, Establishing Form-Based Code Districts, referred on April 9th, 2026, duly advertised in the Standard Times on Monday, May 13th, 2026, on Monday, May— and on Monday, May 20th, 2026.
In
Out
9:21
On May 27th, 2026, it was heard and the public hearing was continued until June 24th, 2026.
In
Out
9:29
1A is an ordinance.
In
Out
9:30
It was referred here on April 9th, 2026, duly advertised in the Standard Times.
In
Out
9:35
On Monday, May 13, 2026, and Monday, May 20, 2026.
In
Out
9:40
On May 27, 2026, the public hearing was heard, and then it was continued until June 24, 2026.
In
Out
9:48
1B is a communication.
In
Out
9:48
Jennifer Carloni, Director, Planning Department, Councilor Shane A. Burgo, Chairman, Committee on Ordinances, advising that the planning board held a public hearing on Wednesday, May 13, 2026, to discuss a request made by the city council for the planning board to review and make a recommendation relative to adding a new Section 6000 establishing form-based code districts, further amending Section 2230, Table of Principal Use Regulations, inserting new Appendix D, and amending Chapter 1200 and definitions with regulating maps of new zoning districts.
In
Out
10:23
The planning board voted to send a favorable recommendation for the ordinance amendment with the recommendation that the city council further review and consider height limitations in the downtown area FBC district, especially in the areas moving west along Kempton Street.
In
Out
10:40
It was received on May 27th, 2026.
In
Out
10:43
May 27th, 2026, there was a public hearing which was continued until June 24th, 2026.
In
Out
10:49
1, 1A, and 1B are before you.
In
Out
10:52
The hearing to be continued.
In
Out
10:55
So it's already opened, it's already continued, no motions are needed.
In
Out
10:59
Um, I assume Assistant City Planner Lauro is here to present, or the continuation of the discussion.
In
Out
11:09
Okay.
In
Out
11:10
Mr. Chairman, would you like us to receive and place on file the email communications from Assistant Director Ann Lauro?
In
Out
11:17
Yes.
In
Out
11:18
I would like to make a motion to receive and place on file.
In
Out
11:20
Motion received and placed on file made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
11:24
Anyone on the question?
In
Out
11:26
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
11:28
Aye.
In
Out
11:29
Any opposed?
In
Out
11:30
The ayes have it.
In
Out
11:32
Thank you, Chair.
In
Out
11:33
Um, good evening, councilors.
In
Out
11:35
Um, again, this is a continuation from, um, the last time we were here.
In
Out
11:39
We did a full presentation.
In
Out
11:40
We had the consultant with us.
In
Out
11:42
I'm happy to review that again if there are any specific questions about anything within the form-based code.
In
Out
11:53
However, I do want to mention or note that when at that meeting in May, you did direct the planning department to do 2 items.
In
Out
12:05
One was to meet with developers and design professionals relative to the administration of form-based code.
In
Out
12:12
Which we did, and I will speak about that in a moment.
In
Out
12:16
And the second item was relative to building story heights in the downtown subdistrict, which is what you have some— you have maps printed out, and I do have it out on the smartboard as well.
In
Out
12:31
And there was a direction for us to meet with the neighborhood that was— would would have been impacted by, um, 14-story height, particularly in the Kempton and County Street corridor.
In
Out
12:46
Although we were unable to organize a meeting with the neighborhoods, we did have a very collaborative and productive meeting with Planning Board member Camille Kazan, who actually was the person who raised concerns relative to the height in that location.
In
Out
13:03
She is a planning board member.
In
Out
13:05
She grew up in that neighborhood and still resides in that neighborhood.
In
Out
13:11
So talking about the heights, since we're already on that subject, we had initially proposed in the pink areas, and I saw Scott Service do this.
In
Out
13:25
Now I'm going to be like Vanna.
In
Out
13:29
All right.
In
Out
13:29
So, um, the pink portions are what were originally proposed as the 14-story heights.
In
Out
13:37
We did that because in the downtown we did want to be able to provide density, um, of height because we are a land-poor city.
In
Out
13:47
And we did not propose that in any of the other districts, nor would we in any residential areas, even though we do have residences in the downtown.
In
Out
13:57
It's an— it's a different urban type of residential lifestyle.
In
Out
14:02
So recognizing that 14 was too high, based on our conversation with Ms. Kazan, we've lowered it to 8 stories.
In
Out
14:13
And this is the modified map.
In
Out
14:17
So we reduced the area of the pink into 8 stories, and then West across County Street, we brought it even lower.
In
Out
14:26
On actually the east and west side of County Street, we brought it down to 6 stories.
In
Out
14:32
And then on the other side of Kempton Street, closer to Mill Street, it doesn't read that well color-wise, but that's 4 stories.
In
Out
14:40
So it's a gradual height difference between the neighborhoods.
In
Out
14:46
It's a very— what we think is a very good transition height from neighborhood 3, 4, 6, and then the 8 stories.
In
Out
14:54
So 14's gone down to 8.
In
Out
14:57
Are there any questions relative to that portion of it?
In
Out
15:02
Chair recognizes Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
15:04
So, and I just had one understanding that the— and I'm going to look at the picture, I'm sorry, because I don't remember them all— the New Bedford Hotel is 11 and Olympia Towers is 10.
In
Out
15:15
Why didn't we say 10 instead of 8?
In
Out
15:18
Because I brought— that was my initial, and Camille felt— still felt uncomfortable with the 8.
In
Out
15:23
Okay.
In
Out
15:24
And, um, and honestly, we could have done that, and there's another way of doing that, and I'm just going to bring that up because what you're looking at is, is this.
In
Out
15:34
And so we did, we did a context study, and that's— I should have pointed that out.
In
Out
15:40
I apologize.
In
Out
15:41
Of what the heights are of some of the tall buildings and where they're located.
In
Out
15:45
And we could have done, particularly in this area where the Regency is, kept that at 10 stories and then do this portion as 8.
In
Out
15:55
It would have required more modifications within throughout the entire code because everything's connected.
In
Out
16:00
So if somebody did want to come in with a 10-story, they just go through a zoning process just as we would now as an appeal.
In
Out
16:11
And if we— again, zoning can be changed.
In
Out
16:15
And if we find that people are coming in and saying, I really want to do 10-story, then we'll just come back to you, um, and, and, and present that.
In
Out
16:23
I understand completely.
In
Out
16:24
So I appreciate the additional information.
In
Out
16:26
Thank you.
In
Out
16:26
And thank you, Council Chair.
In
Out
16:32
Councilor Peralez first.
In
Out
16:35
So just 2 questions.
In
Out
16:37
First, in discussing the meeting you had with designers and developers, the overall sentiment basically was, was received well, and the idea is something that they want to see brought forward?
In
Out
16:51
Yeah, so as you know, developers particularly do not like to operate in uncertainty.
In
Out
16:57
So knowing ahead of time what the requirements are and what type of relief they may or may not need is really spelled out very clearly through form-based code.
In
Out
17:10
We do have 2 folks here, one a developer, one a design professional, who can also, I'm sure, speak about that meeting.
In
Out
17:20
And then the other questions put forth were based on administration, how the form-based Code will be administered through the permitting systems, and we discussed that.
In
Out
17:32
Okay, very good.
In
Out
17:33
Um, and then if the council— and, and I'd like to hear from my colleagues further— but if the council does want to proceed forward with the change to the story as stated in the bottom of your email here, further, uh, you would need some time to make those changes?
In
Out
17:53
I would probably need one day.
In
Out
17:55
Okay.
In
Out
17:56
To go— maybe, maybe 2 or 3 days to go into the materials and, and make the edits because it's only related to height.
In
Out
18:06
Okay.
In
Out
18:07
All right, very good.
In
Out
18:08
Thank you.
In
Out
18:08
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
18:10
Chair recognizes Councilor Baptiste on his first.
In
Out
18:12
Thank you.
In
Out
18:13
Um, hi, Anne, how you doing today?
In
Out
18:15
Hello, Councilor.
In
Out
18:16
Good.
In
Out
18:16
Um, I'm glad that you made modifications.
In
Out
18:19
You know, we all thought the 14 was way too high.
In
Out
18:24
Which I just want to— that lowest School Street is really— I think at— what do you have it at, 8 now?
In
Out
18:32
I think that's pretty good because of— just because Hobbyview being at 6, you know, you got Olympia at 10, but right across the street you got the Y, you got the Zaitarian.
In
Out
18:44
And the only real lot that you have open area spaces, like where the Crystal Cafe lot used to be.
In
Out
18:50
So that's probably the only spot that you build up over there.
In
Out
18:54
You know, my, you know, my main concern before was the residential neighborhoods in the, in the area, making sure that they was being— they was looked after and not being, you know, bulldozed, having big buildings next to them.
In
Out
19:07
But I think that's a little bit, you know, condensed up in there.
In
Out
19:11
How do you think that this zoning right here is going to trickle more?
In
Out
19:16
Because a lot of this is in Ward 4 and it's going to trickle more down that Purchase Street corridor.
In
Out
19:22
And how is that going to— how is that going to intertwine with what you have going on?
In
Out
19:26
So in that area too.
In
Out
19:28
So these are 3 pilot areas that we've put forth to kind of test the waters of how this works.
In
Out
19:37
It's a new form of zoning, both for external folks to use and internal staff to administer.
In
Out
19:45
So as we move into other areas, as I stated before, it's about retaining character.
In
Out
19:54
So when we start getting into neighborhoods, you're not going— you're not going to see heights.
In
Out
19:59
If we start going, as you mentioned, further south onto Purchase and Pleasant Street, going, um, you know, south towards, towards like maybe Wing Street and those neighborhoods, you're, you're going to be looking at the retention of that neighborhood character.
In
Out
20:15
The tallest buildings are probably 2.5 or 3-story buildings in those neighborhoods.
In
Out
20:20
So it's very similar to what we did down at the Goulet Square, which I don't have a map, it's not on this map, But Goulet Square is a bigger area.
In
Out
20:30
And when we got— when we got into the neighborhoods, or actually, I can talk about it here, that gold color in the downtown, those are the residential blocks in the downtown.
In
Out
20:42
That's 2.5, 3 stories.
In
Out
20:44
So— and that's what we was worried about, just keeping that low.
In
Out
20:47
Yeah.
In
Out
20:47
And as we make sure that— yes.
In
Out
20:49
And if we advance this into neighborhoods, that's going to be the same approach.
In
Out
20:53
So, so why is the area up around McDonald's— is that Middle Street?
In
Out
21:00
Yeah, up around McDonald's blacked out and the area around— oh, that's the one you changed right there, right?
In
Out
21:08
Yeah.
In
Out
21:09
All right.
In
Out
21:10
So, so does it end at where McDonald's is or does it start where that development is right after McDonald's where that fence starts?
In
Out
21:17
The McDonald's right now is 6 stories.
In
Out
21:20
All right.
In
Out
21:21
It's 6 stories.
In
Out
21:22
McDonald's?
In
Out
21:22
Yes.
In
Out
21:23
All right.
In
Out
21:24
Yeah.
In
Out
21:24
It's not 8.
In
Out
21:26
McDonald's is not 8 stories.
In
Out
21:27
When you get to County Street, whatever is facing County Street.
In
Out
21:30
But that plot right there is 6 stories.
In
Out
21:32
McDonald's ain't going to go 6 stories.
In
Out
21:33
But next door to it, is that still 6 stories as well where the apartment building is, or does that start where— what, across the street?
In
Out
21:42
The King's— you know how McDonald's is on the corner?
In
Out
21:44
Oh, oh, no, no, no.
In
Out
21:46
And then that fence and then that building right there.
In
Out
21:48
Yeah.
In
Out
21:48
The one on Elm and Middle Street.
In
Out
21:49
Yeah, that's 8 stories.
In
Out
21:51
That's 8 stories.
In
Out
21:53
We just want to make sure, like, you know, that area is— you know, there ain't much over there either.
In
Out
21:57
Are they planning on building a big courthouse in that area?
In
Out
22:02
Have you heard anything about— I have not.
In
Out
22:05
No, I'm not.
In
Out
22:07
I know in the state they're having a lot of problems.
In
Out
22:09
I know the courthouse is having a lot of issues with mold and a lot of people getting sick and them having that old building.
In
Out
22:16
So I've been hearing a lot of noise about about them trying to build a— So I know the courthouse, it's amazing.
In
Out
22:22
As a preservation planner, I want to point out that old buildings are the best buildings because they will last for hundreds of years.
In
Out
22:31
You have a courthouse, I don't know the exact year that courthouse was built, but it's probably no less than 30 years ago, and it needs to be demolished because it's so bad.
In
Out
22:40
So I know that the administration has lobbied our legislature in the state if there's a new— for a new courthouse, obviously, to be located in the downtown.
In
Out
22:53
I know a response that we received a few years ago was like, yeah, it's in the planning.
In
Out
22:59
Yeah, because I know everywhere else in, you know, this area, especially in Bristol County, have gotten new courthouses in the past.
In
Out
23:07
Yeah, it's something that I think the city has advocated for, but it's The state has not committed to it.
In
Out
23:14
Thank you for answering my question.
In
Out
23:15
If I have any more, I know how to get in touch with you.
In
Out
23:18
So thank you.
In
Out
23:18
Hi, you.
In
Out
23:19
Thank you.
In
Out
23:21
Anyone else on there first?
In
Out
23:24
Anyone on there second?
In
Out
23:32
No?
In
Out
23:32
Okay.
In
Out
23:34
Uh, anything else from the planning side?
In
Out
23:36
All right, this is a public hearing.
In
Out
23:39
Uh, anyone here from the general public wish to speak in favor?
In
Out
23:44
Speak— wish to speak in favor?
In
Out
23:47
Mr. Pereira.
In
Out
23:50
Good evening, everybody.
In
Out
23:51
Um, Armando Pereira, Comprehensive Design Build Services, with an office on 227 Union Street.
In
Out
23:58
As I look at this, and I was part of the, the online meeting that we had.
In
Out
24:04
This makes all the sense in the world.
In
Out
24:06
And I can tell you right now, just real quick, I have a lot that I'm working with that's an MUB, but the width of lot, if we take and we follow the zoning regulations that— the ones that just passed when we got 8 and 8, my building was a sliver.
In
Out
24:25
So when we start looking at what form base can do as far as allowing the, the maximum allowable space per district.
In
Out
24:36
Obviously, if you're an MU-4 or an MU-3, and if you work with it, it does make a lot of sense.
In
Out
24:42
We have lots throughout the city that— this particular lot that I'm working on, my client that bought the building next to it was looking at it and he was thinking he could do a parking area.
In
Out
24:53
Well, To do a parking area, you need at least, uh, 44 feet plus clearances plus, you know, I mean, your setbacks.
In
Out
25:01
So you'd be looking at a 50-foot lot.
In
Out
25:03
This lot's not even 50 feet.
In
Out
25:05
So what you end up doing is you end up creating— you can't create pocket parks, which obviously pocket parks, we end up creating an issue where now you can have to police because people can go in there, they can, you know, just hang out and could create problems.
In
Out
25:21
Um, one of the, the area that I'm working on happens to be in the pilot area.
In
Out
25:26
It's on Acushnet Avenue.
In
Out
25:28
And when we start looking at with what the city's put out, it makes sense.
In
Out
25:32
It gives us a menu that we can work with.
In
Out
25:35
If you follow what's there, I feel that, you know, getting permits will be expedited.
In
Out
25:41
And this is what we need.
In
Out
25:42
We need— we listen what we've gone down with the dimensional, uh, zoning changes that make sense.
In
Out
25:48
It helps out with the lots.
In
Out
25:50
But when you take it and you, you get into areas like this and you look at it, and how can we take lots that would not be able to be buildable and how do you bring them back in?
In
Out
26:01
It's a win-win.
In
Out
26:03
You clean out the city by not creating these pocket parks where people can hang out and cause trouble when you're allowed to build in these areas.
In
Out
26:12
We can definitely, because of the, the use, you can definitely create, you know, residential in there, which is something that we're looking at.
In
Out
26:18
And then the third part, which is a very big one, and I speak with this because I own property in the city of New Bedford, and that's your tax base.
In
Out
26:27
I mean, we've got to do what we got to do so we can keep the tax base where it's at and not go up, which it's inevitable you're going to have to no matter what.
In
Out
26:36
But I applaud the planning department for this, and I think it's just something that moving forward, uh, after we get beyond this, uh, pilot stage— and matter of fact, I'm working in another area that I think the form-based code will be good, but it's on an overlay district as well, and it's just another avenue to really help improve the city.
In
Out
27:01
Listen, I've been in the city since 1970, and I've seen it go where it was nice and steady.
In
Out
27:06
I've seen it go down, and what we need to do is keep this city moving and going in the right direction.
In
Out
27:13
And I really feel that this is a right direction.
In
Out
27:16
So I think it's— it makes sense for the, uh, ordinance committee to approve it, move it forward, and let's get it done.
In
Out
27:23
And let's keep the city moving forward.
In
Out
27:27
Thank you.
In
Out
27:29
Anyone else wish to speak in favor?
In
Out
27:36
Gary Gagne, Divine Contractors.
In
Out
27:39
I agree with Mr. Pereira.
In
Out
27:41
I was also on the meeting with the planning department, and they put in a ton of work, as I'm sure you guys have seen since it's already been presented.
In
Out
27:51
And it's really thoughtful what they've put together, and specifically in the areas as Ms. Laurel was just explaining of staying out of the residential areas.
In
Out
28:01
And I know the lot that Mr.
In
Out
28:04
Brewer is talking about.
In
Out
28:05
It's actually across the street from my office.
In
Out
28:08
And we see all these 3 families or 4 families that have burnt down or suffered loss.
In
Out
28:15
And I drive by there every day and there's drug addicts hanging out in there every single day, right?
In
Out
28:21
It just gives them a spot to hide.
In
Out
28:23
You know, and the, the day or the next tax year, right, you get the land reassessed and the land's worth $100,000.
In
Out
28:34
It was a $700,000 building.
In
Out
28:36
This has been handcuffing developers in the city.
In
Out
28:41
I mean, even the last case, guys in here talking about $10 for a DBA license.
In
Out
28:47
I mean, how, how, how are we not focused on hundreds of thousands of dollars in assessed value you know, which could lead to millions with the height restrictions.
In
Out
28:57
Right.
In
Out
28:58
Mainly, I'm speaking about the— what the lack of setbacks required, the lack of side setbacks required.
In
Out
29:07
It's going to change the city.
In
Out
29:09
It's going to revitalize it, bring housing down.
In
Out
29:12
This is a supply and demand issue that we've been fighting, or we say we've been fighting, but the planning board is actually fighting.
In
Out
29:20
This is what we need, because if we don't continue to add supply and the demand keeps coming, the prices keep going up.
In
Out
29:30
So the only way we can combat it is by getting creative, trying to add housing, trying to make lots that were established with the original infrastructure of the city of New Bedford— were these what we call undersized lots now?
In
Out
29:45
But, you know, Mr. Pereira owns property.
In
Out
29:48
I know A few of you guys own property.
In
Out
29:51
I own property.
In
Out
29:51
It's all on the same, same size lots.
In
Out
29:55
Now we can actually rebuild it instead of— I mean, I'm sure you guys drive around your city and you see vacant lot, vacant lot, vacant lot.
In
Out
30:04
That shouldn't be the case.
In
Out
30:05
This is a great pilot to really combat the housing crisis.
In
Out
30:11
And you guys have already been doing a great job with the the reduction of parking.
In
Out
30:18
And, you know, you guys are making the great effort to move forward.
In
Out
30:21
And I think this is the next step to really tie in the zoning changes all together to be able to make it all make sense for everybody involved, mainly, obviously, the constituents who— I mean, I have an apartment for rent right now.
In
Out
30:39
I had 17 applications.
In
Out
30:44
I can only pick one.
In
Out
30:45
That means there's 16 people looking for housing.
In
Out
30:48
If this passes and let's say somebody puts up an 8-unit building, I'm not getting 17 applications, which could inadvertently hurt me as a landlord, but it's going to really help the city and lower the cost.
In
Out
31:03
That's the only way.
In
Out
31:04
This is the only way to lower cost and of apartments and housing for people to be able to afford buildings.
In
Out
31:14
Thank you.
In
Out
31:16
Thank you.
In
Out
31:17
Anyone else wish to speak in favor?
In
Out
31:20
Speak in favor.
In
Out
31:22
Be recorded in favor.
In
Out
31:23
Be recorded in favor.
In
Out
31:27
Anyone wish to speak in opposition?
In
Out
31:30
Speak in opposition.
In
Out
31:33
Be recorded in opposition.
In
Out
31:35
Be recorded in opposition.
In
Out
31:39
All right, seeing none, motion to close the public hearing.
In
Out
31:41
Motion to close the public hearing made by Councilor Perera, seconded by Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
31:46
Anyone on the question of closing the public hearing?
In
Out
31:49
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
31:51
Aye.
In
Out
31:52
Any opposed?
In
Out
31:53
The ayes have it.
In
Out
31:54
Mr. President— Mr. Chairman, I make a— I know you like that, Mr. Chairman, uh, I make a motion to, uh, instruct the, uh, Planning Department and Anne Lauro to provide the proposed changes as presented here tonight to the— to this body, um, at, at an— at her earliest convenience.
In
Out
32:18
Motion made by Councilor Pereira for the proposed changes, seconded by Councilor Gomes.
In
Out
32:25
Um, I don't know why it was like, um, on the question, Councilor Pereira.
In
Out
32:30
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
32:31
Mr. Chairman, I have spoken with, uh, legal counsel Attorney Garatowski, and basically the council, this body, is able to end the public hearing.
In
Out
32:41
We discussed the height changes as the recommendation from the planning department, uh, reducing that.
In
Out
32:47
Ian indicated that it would take a few days for her to come up with that.
In
Out
32:51
We can refer this whole package out to the full council.
In
Out
32:53
She can provide the council with those changes, and we can make a substitution amendment at that next meeting in July.
In
Out
33:01
Grant, I imagine she said a few days, so July would be no issue to have that.
In
Out
33:05
Okay, she indicated no.
In
Out
33:06
Okay, so as long as this motion passes, it's basically instructions for her to make those changes and provide it to the council.
In
Out
33:35
David, she could just provide it to the chair.
In
Out
33:41
Okay.
In
Out
33:42
You got that?
In
Out
33:43
Yeah, provide to chair.
In
Out
33:44
Yeah, okay, very good.
In
Out
33:46
Thank you.
In
Out
33:47
All right, so the motion has been made by Councilor Parr, seconded by Councilor Gomes.
In
Out
33:53
Anyone else on the question?
In
Out
33:55
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
33:57
Aye.
In
Out
33:58
Any opposed?
In
Out
33:59
The ayes have it.
In
Out
34:02
Motion to refer the item out to the full city council.
In
Out
34:05
Motion to refer to the full city council.
In
Out
34:08
Made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Gomes.
In
Out
34:11
Anyone on the question?
In
Out
34:13
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
34:15
Aye.
In
Out
34:16
Any opposed?
In
Out
34:17
The ayes have it.
In
Out
34:18
We are now at item 3.
In
Out
34:21
Number 3 is communication.
In
Out
34:23
Mayor Mixon to the City Council submitting an ordinance amending Chapter 19, Personnel, Section 19-7 of the City Code to create the position of the Assistant Superintendent contendant of green space at a pay grade of M11, the position fully paid out by the water enterprise.
In
Out
34:41
It was referred here on May 28, 2026.
In
Out
34:43
3A is the ordinance referred here on May 28, 2026.
In
Out
34:46
Number 3 and 3A are now before you.
In
Out
34:47
Motion to refer out to the full City Council for no further action.
In
Out
34:51
I— well, okay, I do see that Bob Ekstrom is here.
In
Out
34:56
Did you want to speak on this at all or no?
In
Out
34:59
Okay, I just wanted to give that as an option.
In
Out
35:01
I know that Commissioner Ponce did send communication that he was not able to make it.
In
Out
35:05
I just wanted to make note that he did send communication to us that he was unable to make it tonight.
In
Out
35:11
So a motion has been made by Councilor Pereira to refer for no further action, seconded by— I was gonna say Councilor Baptiste, but thank you so much for that clarification.
In
Out
35:25
Um, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
35:29
Aye.
In
Out
35:30
Any opposed?
In
Out
35:31
The ayes have it.
In
Out
35:32
We are on item 4.
In
Out
35:35
Yes, number 4 is a written motion.
In
Out
35:48
Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
35:50
And Council President Pereira requesting that the city solicitor, in conjunction with the administration, draft a home rule petition for submission to the Massachusetts General Court authorizing the city of New Bedford to establish an early retirement incentive, incentive program for eligible municipal employees.
In
Out
36:08
Said petition shall provide that employees who have attained the age of 50 years or older and who have completed 25 years or more of credible service with the city may be eligible to retire with a retirement allowance calculated at up to 75% of the eligible retirement benefits, subject to approval of the Massachusetts Legislature and the governor.
In
Out
36:32
That was referred here on May 28th, 2026.
In
Out
36:35
And item number 4 is now before you.
In
Out
36:37
Motion to receive in place on file, made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
36:43
Uh, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
36:45
Aye.
In
Out
36:46
Any opposed?
In
Out
36:46
The ayes have it.
In
Out
36:47
Councilor Pereira.
In
Out
36:48
Mr. President, when— when— if you can— Mr. Chairman, I keep saying that.
In
Out
36:52
I'm sorry.
In
Out
36:54
Mr. Chairman, if you recall, Mr. Chairman, at the full city council meeting when this was discussed, I came down from the podium and spoke from this desk, very similar to comments made by Councilor Lopes, but I had requested that the solicitor notify this body if this is something the Mitchell administration would like to entertain.
In
Out
37:16
Now, I have heard through the grapevines that there is no appetite to entertain this, that it actually might not make sense to entertain this, which is fine.
In
Out
37:24
But we did not receive an email communication if that's not something the administration wants to pursue, because it would be a home rule petition, which we can't override a veto.
In
Out
37:32
The mayor needs to sign it.
In
Out
37:34
Why waste this committee's time?
In
Out
37:35
Why waste these department heads' time if there's no appetite to do that?
In
Out
37:39
We received no email communication from the solicitor.
In
Out
37:43
Maybe I'm misspeaking, but I checked with my colleague.
In
Out
37:46
We have received none.
In
Out
37:48
So it is my understanding the Mitchell administration does not want to pursue this.
In
Out
37:52
So Director Cohen, CFO Ekstrom, Solicitor Jakes all wasted their time sitting here for 40 minutes in this meeting.
In
Out
38:00
That we didn't even really need to have on this item because the Mitchell administration doesn't want to do it.
In
Out
38:05
Um, I'll yield if my colleague who co-sponsored this wishes to add anything, but I still want communication if the administration wants to do this.
In
Out
38:14
So I'd make a motion to table at the time, but I'll yield to my colleague from Ward 5.
In
Out
38:17
So I've talked to the co-maker of the motion on this, and the idea is to look at reasonable solutions to provide the city with an avenue to save money without laying off people.
In
Out
38:30
You know, in the budget, the administration had an amount for unemployment benefits.
In
Out
38:35
But if we're allowing people to retire early, then you don't need to exhaust unemployment benefits.
In
Out
38:41
Now, I appreciate, you know, everyone being here behind me.
In
Out
38:44
And as the good council— as the good council president stated, if we were able to get some direction in regards to the direction the administration would take, we could have saved everybody behind us some time if there is no aptitude— appetite.
In
Out
39:00
But when you listen to the radio and the Mitchell administration says the council doesn't want to work with him, the tables are now justly turned.
In
Out
39:09
We're looking to work with the administration to provide an avenue to allow the city to reduce its workforce.
In
Out
39:17
Not through layoffs, but through attrition, and bring on a younger staff that actually comes in at a lower salary and a higher retirement contribution than some of the people that would have 25 or 27 years of service.
In
Out
39:33
So collectively, we're providing an avenue for the administration to work with all the unions and all the departments, but we're not receiving that same communication back.
In
Out
39:43
So as the council president said, at this time I think it's appropriate that we table this until we're able to get some communication from the administration.
In
Out
39:51
Thank you, Chairman.
In
Out
39:58
Anyone else on there first?
In
Out
40:01
I do see the solicitor is here.
In
Out
40:04
I don't know if there's anything that you— Motion to table.
In
Out
40:06
Second.
In
Out
40:06
Well, I just want to give him the opportunity because I know that in the past the administration administration, I believe you have mentioned, the actual council president, Mr. President, that the administration has chastised us before by not giving his staff the opportunity to speak.
In
Out
40:23
So I just want to showcase that we are giving his administration the opportunity to speak, and if they want to.
In
Out
40:31
So I don't want to give the appearance that we're silencing them.
In
Out
40:35
So if there is something that you want to share, Solicitor Jakes, if there's any information that there is to give, this is your opportunity.
In
Out
40:42
If you have nothing to add, you don't have to get up to the microphone.
In
Out
40:45
If you're just going to get up there to say there's nothing at this time, then you don't need to get up.
In
Out
40:50
But I just— I don't want you to feel as though we're silencing you at this moment.
In
Out
40:55
Point of order.
In
Out
40:56
We have a valid motion to table and a second.
In
Out
40:59
I'm sorry.
In
Out
40:59
We have a motion to table pending.
In
Out
41:02
And a second.
In
Out
41:03
And I'm not recognizing— I'm recognizing Solicitor Jakes.
In
Out
41:06
Solicitor Jakes, if you'd like to come up to the microphone.
In
Out
41:11
I made them up.
In
Out
41:13
Yes, and he already has.
In
Out
41:17
Solicitor Jakes, if you'd like to come up to the microphone.
In
Out
41:20
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
41:25
I just— before Solicitor Jakes, I don't want to discuss the merit of the item if he has— and we're not— and we're not— what I'm— all I'm asking is if he has information from the administration.
In
Out
41:35
You're saying that we haven't heard anything from the administration.
In
Out
41:38
He is here as the representative from the administration, and I believe you have told me in the past that the administration has criticized us that we have not given him the opportunity.
In
Out
41:48
And so I'm asking right now if he has any information to share regarding this.
In
Out
41:53
That is all.
In
Out
41:54
And he is going to answer now.
In
Out
41:56
We can't say that the administration is not communicating with us if we are right now in this moment effectively saying we don't want to hear from them when they're here.
In
Out
42:05
That is all.
In
Out
42:06
He sat here for 40— how long has it been?
In
Out
42:08
42 minutes.
In
Out
42:09
We can at least give them the respect to have him answer if he does have any information for us.
In
Out
42:14
That's all.
In
Out
42:15
We don't have to do a back and forth.
In
Out
42:17
He can answer whether or not there is any communication from the mayor's office.
In
Out
42:20
That's all.
In
Out
42:21
Solicitor Jakes.
In
Out
42:22
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
In
Out
42:23
I appreciate the opportunity to speak.
In
Out
42:26
I have had a discussion with the administration, and I am informed that the administration has considered a number of ways of reducing the expenses in the city, which include potential ideas such as an early retirement.
In
Out
42:41
At this time, it is the focus of the administration concentrate on health insurance reform and pension reform and not proceed with this proposal at this time.
In
Out
42:54
Okay, so he's not in favor of it and that he will not proceed with it at this time?
In
Out
42:59
That is correct.
In
Out
43:00
Okay, so there's our answer.
In
Out
43:01
So we didn't have to wait for it.
In
Out
43:03
He came down with the answer.
In
Out
43:05
Thank you.
In
Out
43:06
Does anyone have any questions for him?
In
Out
43:08
The, the makers of the motion, do you have any questions of Solicitor Jake since he does have knowledge from the mayor.
In
Out
43:16
Councilor Lopes.
In
Out
43:17
I would say, Solicitor Jake, I made a typographical error when I submitted it.
In
Out
43:21
It wouldn't be 50, it'd be 55.
In
Out
43:24
I don't know if that changes the appetite of the administration, but at 55 it's more in line with what the state has already adopted for early retirees at the state level.
In
Out
43:34
I can understand 50 being extremely young I made an error and I will own that.
In
Out
43:39
It should have been 55, not 50, when I submitted the application, the, uh, the motion.
In
Out
43:43
Do you think it was an age issue or it was other factors?
In
Out
43:49
And I'm not asking you to speak for him, but you did have a conversation.
In
Out
43:51
So my belief is the difference between age 50 and age 55 would not change the administration's position at this time.
In
Out
44:01
And that's all I needed.
In
Out
44:02
Thank you, uh, Solicitor Jake.
In
Out
44:04
Thank you, Chairman.
In
Out
44:06
Councilor Pereira, any questions?
In
Out
44:08
Anyone else?
In
Out
44:10
Thank you, Solicitor Jakes.
In
Out
44:11
Make a motion.
In
Out
44:14
Motion made by Councilor Pereira, seconded by Councilor Lopes for no further action.
In
Out
44:19
All those in favor say aye.
In
Out
44:21
Any opposed?
In
Out
44:22
The ayes have it.
In
Out
44:24
Motion to adjourn.
In
Out
44:25
Motion to adjourn made by Councilor Roy, seconded by Councilor Choquette.
In
Out
44:30
Anyone on the question of adjournment?
In
Out
44:32
Seeing none, all those in favor say aye.
In
Out
44:35
Any opposed?
In
Out
44:36
The ayes have it.
In
Out
44:37
We are adjourned at 7:44 PM.
In
Out