City Council — 2025-12-01

City Council Meeting

This meeting starts at 10:19 in a recording that covers several meetings.

Attendance

Cal Finocchiaro present · Ward 6; Mark Garipay present · Ward 4; Ward Hamilton present · At-Large; Maya Jamaleddine present, Left at 8:08 PM · At-Large; Manjula Karamcheti present · Ward 1; Leila Migliorelli present · At-Large; John Obremski absent · Ward 2; Devin Romanul present · Ward 7; Robb Stewart present · Ward 3; Kimberly Vandiver present · Ward 5; Ryan Williams present · At-Large

Agenda

Minutes

City Council Regular Meeting Monday, December 1, 2025, 7:45 PM City Council Chamber, 1st Floor 562 Main Street, Melrose, MA 02176 MINUTES I. CALL TO ORDER Cal Finocchiaro Mark Garipay Ward Hamilton Maya Jamaleddine Manjula Karamcheti John Obremski Devin Romanul Robb Stewart Kimberly Vandiver Ryan Williams Leila Migliorelli, President Meeting was called to order by President Migliorelli at 7:48 PM Councilor Jamaleddine was present at the beginning and left the meeting at 8:08 PM, so she did not vote on legislative items. Attendee Name Title Status Arrived Cal Finocchiaro Ward 6 Present Mark Garipay Ward 4 Present Ward Hamilton At-Large Present Maya Jamaleddine At-Large Present Left at 8:08 PM Manjula Karamcheti Ward 1 Present John Obremski Ward 2 Absent Devin Romanul Ward 7 Present Robb Stewart Ward 3 Present Kimberly Vandiver Ward 5 Present Ryan Williams At-Large Present Leila Migliorelli At-Large Present 1 II. MINUTES APPROVAL A. City Council Special Meeting November 24, 2025 7:00 PM Motion to Approve the minutes by unanimous consent without reading made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ACCEPTED [UNANIMOUS] AYES: Cal Finocchiaro, Mark Garipay, Ward Hamilton, Maya Jamaleddine, Manjula Karamcheti, Devin Romanul, Robb Stewart, Kim Vandiver, Leila Migliorelli, Ryan Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: John Obremski III. PUBLIC COMMENT When: Dec 1, 2025 07:45 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada) Topic: City Council Meeting, Property Tax Classification Public Hearing for FY2026 at 8:00 PM Join from PC, Mac, iPad, or Android: https://cityofmelrose-org.zoom.us/j/94132302691?pwd=f0H9GUcBb4kUbPjhjXQ6Pn0IsPlbLQ.1 Passcode:167362 Webinar ID: 941 3230 2691 Motion to Open public comment made by President Migliorelli at 7:50 PM Comments on the floor: -Jim Bennett of 45 Wentworth Road does not believe that this ordinance is being done in great haste. The city of Melrose has been considering this for over 20 years and with the work that Lori Massa has done with the city of Somerville, it's now getting attention. He thinks that there are many homes built after 1899 with historic significance that currently are not included in the ordinance. He said it's very important to pass the demo review in its current state immediately and then update it as needed in the future. -Ms Thorpe of 52 Maple Street urged council to pass the demo review ordinance. She has lived in Melrose all of her life and thinks developments are happening too fast. -Michael Abdow of 253 Main Street is an abutter to 244 Main Street. He is concerned about development at this site, losing that beautiful home, and the potential disturbance to his property and family. He urged the council to consider the value of these beautiful homes and to pass the demo review ordinance. -Paul Brodeur of 125 Trenton Street commented about the prior developments at Oak Grove and Essex Street and how they related to demo delay. He thinks that demo delay in general and the 1899 date are good ideas. He commented about other communities that have demo delay also have Community Preservation Acts and that Melrose should consider that in the future to get better results. Motion to Recess to start the Public Hearing made by President Migliorelli at 8:03 PM Meeting was Reopened by President Migliorelli at 8:34 PM IV. COMMUNICATIONS FROM THE HONORABLE MAYOR & OTHER CITY OFFICIALS V. NEW BUSINESS A. Filings by the Honorable Mayor 2 i. Appropriations

1. (ID # 2025-779): Appropriation from the Peg Access Fund in the amount of $282,640.36 to MMTV and Melrose Public Schools. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULTS: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight ii. Grants

1. (ID # 2025-749): FY26 Earmark for Playing Fields Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

2. (ID # 2025-766): Field Demonstration Grant- Senior Center Modernization for the amount of $9500 to replace aging toilets at the Milano Center with chair height models for accessibility. Replace worn countertops in 2 restrooms. Installation of grab bars in restrooms. Purchase and installation of a digital media board on the Milano Center lobby used to advertise programming, schedule changes and as a means of wayfinding within the building. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

3. (ID # 2025-767): Field Demonstration Grant - Memory Cafe for the amount of $4860. Funds will be used to provide a monthly Memory Cafe which would provide respite programming for those living with dementia and their caregivers. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

4. (ID # 2025-768): Title III B FY26 Grant for $5000. The funds will be used for funding Milano Center social programming. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appopriations & Oversight

5. (ID # 2025-769): State 911 EMD Grant - MPD has been awarded $18,000.00 to defray the cost of 1 year of emergency service from the Armstrong Ambulance Services. 3 Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

6. (ID # 2025-770): State 911 Support & Incentive Grant - MPD has been awarded $90,505.00 to defray the cost of the dispatch specific equipment (new and existing) and the straight-time cost of dispatch personnel. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

7. (ID # 2025-771): State 911 Training Grant - MPD has been awarded $82,903.80 for 16 hours of dispatch specific continuing education as well as the training class fees for all certified dispatch personnel. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

8. (ID # 2025-772): FFY26 Municipal Road Safety Program - MPD has been awarded $19,290.00 to enable additional traffic enforcement and equipment. This includes extra officers for motor vehicle and pedestrian crosswalk enforcement. Equipment includes portable hand-held radars or traffic data recorders. Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

9. (ID # 2025-784): Acceptance of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection RDP Grant plus Additional Award for Organics Collection Carts Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

10. (ID # 2025-775): Police_State Earmark 25K Equipment Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight

11. (ID # 2025-776): Police_State Earmark 50K Police Cruiser Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE 4 TO: Appropriations & Oversight

12. (ID # 2025-778): Acceptance of FEMA/MEMA Grant for Lebanon/Sylvan Drainage Design Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight iii. Order

1. (ID # 2025-746): Intermunicipal Agreement for Regional Emergency Planning Services with the Mystic Regional Emergency Planning Committee Motion to Refer to Appropriations & Oversight made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITTEE TO: Appropriations & Oversight B. Filings by the Honorable City Council i. Ordinances

1. (ID # 2025-613): Revise the existing Animal Leash Law to REMOVE this language : The Animal Control Officer may, at his/her discretion, waive the provisions of Subsection A if a determination is made that the owner or keeper has a valid reason to have the dog unleashed or untethered for training, exhibition or show purposes. [Amended 8-21-2017 by Ord. No. 2018-4] Motion to Refer to Legal & Legislative made by President Migliorelli RESULT: ASSIGN TO COMMITEE TO: Legal & Legislative VI. PUBLIC HEARING

A. (ID # 2025-408): FY2026 Property Tax Classification Public Hearing Motion to Open Public Hearing made by President Migliorelli at 8:04 PM Comments during the meeting: The councilors shared differing opinions on how to shift the tax levy between residential and commercial classes. Debate occurred over overburdening residents versus businesses with the increased levy due to the override passing at the maximum amount. Discussion occurred over tax relief assistance that is offered to seniors (including the Senior Circuit Breaker Exemption) and information is provided on the city website. Motion to adopt a Shift of 1.73 and Residential Factor of .9617 made by Councilor Garipay Seconded by Councilor Stewart Most were in favor and motion passed RESULT: PASSED 5 AYES: Cal Finocchiaro, Mark Garipay, Ward Hamilton, Manjula Karamcheti, Devin Romanul, Robb Stewart, Leila Migliorelli, Ryan Williams NAYS: Kim Vandiver ABSENT: John Obremski There were no comments on the floor or via Zoom made during Public Comment Motion to Close the Public Hearing made by President Migliorelli at 8:34 PM Public Hearing was closed VII. UNFINISHED BUSINESS A. Appropriations

i. (ID # 2025-249): Acceptance of vote language for Appropriation of Feasibility Study for MSBA Accelerated Repair projects Motion for Passage made by Councilor Garipay Seconded by Councilor Stewart All were in favor and motion passed RESULT: PASSED [UNANIMOUS] AYES: Cal Finocchiaro, Mark Garipay, Ward Hamilton, Manjula Karamcheti, Devin Romanul, Robb Stewart, Kim Vandiver, Leila Migliorelli, Ryan Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: John Obremski B. Ordinances

i. (ID # 2025-571): That the City Council adopt a Demolition Review Ordinance as set forth herein, to preserve and protect buildings of historical significance in the City of Melrose. Motion for Passage as Amended in L&L Committee meeting made by Councilor Romanul Seconded by Councilor Hamilton Motion to Amend Section 10D for first sentence to read:"This section shall take effect upon final vote of council approving a new regulatory authority of a Historical Commission as submitted" made by Councilor Finocchiaro Seconded by Councilor Hamilton All were in favor and motion passed as amended Comments during the meeting: Councilor Williams shared that Lori Massa suggested that a demolition status (of preserved or not) should transfer to the new property owner if sold and this can be amended in the future. Councilor Karmacheti commented that it's worthy of considering a future change of the 1899 date to the 100 year old date. President Migliorelli thanked all for having discussions and for answering her questions after the committee meeting and before this final vote. Councilor Garipay encouraged consideration of the year 1925 as the date for a future amendment. Motion for Passage as Amended and final vote was called by President Migliorelli All were in favor and motion passed as amended. RESULT: PASSED AS AMENDED [UNANIMOUS] 6 AYES: Cal Finocchiaro, Mark Garipay, Ward Hamilton, Manjula Karamcheti, Devin Romanul, Robb Stewart, Kim Vandiver, Leila Migliorelli, Ryan Williams NAYS: None ABSENT: John Obremski VIII. REPORTS FROM COMMITTEES IX. EXPIRIES X. RULE 36 REPORTS XI. ADJOURNMENT Motion to Adjourn by unanimous consent made by President Migliorelli at 8:51 PM Meeting was adjourned 7 City of Melrose Parks Department 100 Slayton Rd. Melrose, MA 02176 MEMORANDUM To: Mayor Jen Grigoraitis & Melrose City Council From: Rob Carrillo – Superintendent of Parks and Open Spaces Date: 11/24/25 Subject: Request for Approval of State Earmark for Playing Fields Purpose The purpose of this memorandum is to request City Council approval to accept and expend a state earmark in the amount of $75,000 dedicated to improving athletic field infrastructure throughout the City of Melrose. Background The City of Melrose maintains a network of athletic fields that support school programs, youth sports, adult recreation leagues, and community events. Over time, increased usage, aging infrastructure, and weather impacts have created a significant need for upgrades to ensure safe, reliable, and high-quality playing surfaces. This earmark provides an opportunity to address critical maintenance and improvement needs across multiple field locations, with a primary focus on irrigation upgrades and the purchase of materials and equipment required for ongoing field upkeep. Scope of Work The earmark funds will be used to support improvements to the overall surface conditions, durability, safety, and playability of athletic fields across the city. Specific uses include but are not limited to: 1. Irrigation Improvements – East and West Knoll Fields • Installation or upgrade of irrigation systems • Site preparation, trenching, and plumbing work • Controller and sensor upgrades • Estimated cost: $75,000 These irrigation improvements are essential for maintaining turf quality and reducing long-term maintenance costs, especially during periods of drought or heavy athletic use. 2. Citywide Field Improvements Funds may also be used for the purchase of materials, tools, and equipment necessary to maintain and improve playing conditions at: • Melrose High School (MHS) Athletic Complex • Common Park • Conant Park • Lewis-Monk Field Eligible expenditures include: • Soil, seed, sod, and turf repair materials • Infield mix and grading supplies • Turf maintenance equipment (drag mats, aerators, line stripers, etc.) • Drainage repair components • Safety and accessibility enhancements • Playing field equipment (nets, padded mats, fence repairs, etc.) Justification and Community Impact Improved field conditions will support a wide range of community benefits, including: • Enhanced safety for student athletes and youth programs • Higher-quality playing surfaces, reducing cancellations and field closures • Extended field lifespan through proactive care and irrigation efficiency • Improved accessibility for all residents who utilize recreational facilities • Support for recreation programming growth, including school and city athletics This investment aligns with the City’s commitment to maintaining high-quality public facilities and expanding recreational opportunities for residents of all ages. Action Requested The City Council is respectfully requested to: 1. Approve acceptance and expenditure of the $75,000 state earmark, and 2. Authorize the Department of Public Works / Parks Department to proceed with the planned improvements described above. Thank you, Rob Carrillo Superintendent of Parks and Open Spaces Commonwealth of Massachusetts CONTRACTOR AUTHORIZED SIGNATORY LISTING This form is jointly issued and published by the Office of the Comptroller (CTR) and the Operational Services Division (OSD) as the default form for all Commonwealth Departments when another form is not prescribed by regulation or policy. Signature for Corporation (C or S), Partnership, Trust/Estate, Limited Liability Company (must match Form W-9 tax classification) Contractor Legal Name Contractor Vendor/Customer Code (if available, not the Taxpayer Identification Number or Social Security Number) INSTRUCTIONS: Any Contractor (other than a sole-proprietor or an individual contractor) must provide a listing of individuals who are authorized as legal representatives of the Contractor who can sign contracts and other legally binding documents related to the contract on the Contractor’s behalf. In addition to this listing, any state department may require additional proof of authority to sign contracts on behalf of the Contractor, or proof of authenticity of signature (a notarized signature that the Department can use to verify that the signature and date that appear on the Contract or other legal document was actually made by the Contractor’s authorized signatory, and not by a representative, designee or other individual.) For privacy purposes DO NOT ATTACH any documentation containing personal information, such as bank account numbers, social security numbers, driver’s licenses, home addresses, social security cards or any other personally identifiable information that you do not want released as part of a public record. The Commonwealth reserves the right to publish the names and titles of authorized signatories of contractors. There are three types of electronic signatures that will be accepted on this form: 1) Traditional “wet signature” (ink on paper); 2) Electronic signature that is either: a. hand drawn using a mouse or finger if working from a touch screen device; or b. An upload picture of the signatory’s hand drawn signature; 3) Electronic signature affixed using a digital tool such as Adobe Sign or DocuSign. Typed text of a name not generated by a digital tool, computer generated cursive, or an electronic symbol are not acceptable forms of electronic signature. Authorized Signature (Signature Title Phone Email Address Signatory Name as it will appear on contract Number or other documents) Acceptance of any payment under a Contract or Grant shall operate as a waiver of any defense by the Contractor challenging the existence of a valid Contract due to an alleged lack of actual authority to execute the document by the signatory. I certify that I am a responsible authorized officer of the Contractor and as an authorized officer of the Contractor I certify that the names of the individuals identified on this listing are current as of the date of execution and that these individuals are authorized to sign contracts and other legally binding documents related to contracts with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts on behalf of the Contractor. I understand and agree that the Contractor has a duty to ensure that this listing is immediately updated and communicated to any state department with which the Contractor does business whenever the authorized signatories above retire, are otherwise terminated from the Contractor’s employ, have their responsibilities changed resulting in their no longer being authorized to sign contracts with the Commonwealth or whenever new signatories are designated. Please note you cannot self-certify your own signature as a single signer listed above. Signature Date Print Name Phone Number Title Email Address A copy of this listing must be attached to the “record copy” of a contract filed with the department. Page 1 of 1 COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS | STANDARD CONTRACT FORM This form is jointly issued and published by the Office of the Comptroller, the Executive Office for Administration and Finance, and the Operational Services Division as the default contract for all Commonwealth Departments when another form is not prescribed by regulation or policy. The Commonwealth deems void any changes made on or by attachment (in the form of addendum, engagement letters, contract forms or invoice terms) to the terms in this published form or to the Standard Contract Form Instructions and Contractor Certifications, the Commonwealth Terms and Conditions, the Commonwealth Terms and Conditions for Human and Social Services, or the Commonwealth IT Terms and Conditions which are incorporated by reference herein. Additional non-conflicting terms may be added by Attachment. Contractors are required to access forms at macomptroller.org/forms or mass.gov/lists/osd-forms. CONTRACTOR INFORMATION COMMONWEALTH INFORMATION Contractor Legal Name Department MMARS Code d/b/a Contract Manager Name Legal Address Business Mailing Address As entered on Form W-9 or Form W-4 Contract Manager Name Billing Address If Different Phone Fax Phone Fax Email Email Vendor Code MMARS Doc ID(s) VC Vendor Code Address ID RFR/Procurement or Other ID Number e.g. “AD001”. AD Note: The Address ID must be set up for Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) payments. NEW CONTRACT CONTRACT AMENDMENT Procurement or Exception Type (Check one option only) Current Contract End Date Amendment Amount PRIOR to Amendment Or Enter “No Change” Statewide Contract (OSD or an OSD-designated department.) Amendment Type Collective Purchase Check one option only. Attach details of amendment changes. (Attach OSD approval, scope, and budget.) Amendment to Date, Scope, or Budget Department Procurement - Includes all Grants 815 CMR 2.00. (Attach updated scope and budget.) (Attach Solicitation Notice or RFR, and Response or other procurement supporting documentation.) Interim Contract with Current Contractor (Attach justification for Interim Contract and updated scope/budget.) Emergency Contract (Attach justification for emergency, scope, and budget.) Contract Employee (Attach any updates to scope or budget.) Contract Employee (Attach Employee Status Form, scope, and budget.) Other Procurement Exception (Attach authorizing language/justification and updated scope/budget.) Interim Contract with new Contractor (Attach justification for Interim Contract and updated scope/budget.) Other Procurement Exception (Attach authorizing language, legislation with specific exemption or earmark, and exception justification, scope, and budget.) TERMS AND CONDITIONS The Standard Contract Form Instructions and Contractor Certifications and the following document are incorporated by reference into this Contract and are legally binding. Check ONE option: Commonwealth Terms and Conditions Commonwealth Terms and Conditions for Human and Social Services Commonwealth IT Terms and Conditions COMPENSATION Check ONE option. The Department certifies that payments for authorized performance accepted in accordance with the terms of this Contract will be supported in the state accounting system by sufficient appropriations or other non-appropriated funds, subject to intercept for Commonwealth owed debts under 815 CMR 9.00. Rate Contract (No Maximum Obligation). (Attach details of all rates, units, calculations, conditions or terms and any changes if rates or terms are being amended.) Maximum Obligation Contract. Total maximum obligation for total duration of this contract (or new total if contract is being amended): Page 1 of 2 Updated 07/01/2025 MMARS Doc ID(s) PROMPT PAYMENT DISCOUNTS (PPD) Commonwealth payments are issued through Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) 45 days from invoice receipt. See Prompt Pay Discounts Policy. Contractors requesting accelerated payments must identify a PPD as follows: Payment issued within: 10 days % PPD. 15 days % PPD. 20 days % PPD. 30 days % PPD. If PPD percentages are left blank, identify reason: Statutory/legal Ready Payments (M.G.L. c. 29, § 23A) Agree to standard 45-day cycle Only initial payment BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF CONTRACT PERFORMANCE or REASON FOR AMENDMENT Enter the Contract title, purpose, fiscal year(s) and a detailed description of the scope of performance or what is being amended for a Contract Amendment. Attach all supporting documentation and justifications. SUPPLIER DIVERSITY PROGRAM (SDP) PLAN Does the Supplier Diversity Program apply? YES If YES, the Contractor’s annual SDP commitment for this Contract is NO If NO, and the department is an Executive Department, enter the appropriate exemption: ANTICIPATED START DATE (Complete ONE option only.) The Department and Contractor certify for this Contract, or Contract Amendment, that Contract obligations: 1. may be incurred as of the Effective Date (latest signature date below) and no obligations have been incurred prior to the Effective Date. 2. may be incurred as of , 20 , a date LATER than the Effective Date below and no obligations have been incurred prior to the Effective Date. 3. were incurred as of , 20 , a date PRIOR to the Effective Date below, and the parties agree that payments for any obligations incurred prior to the Effective Date are authorized to be made either as settlement payments or as authorized reimbursement payments, and that the details and circumstances of all obligations under this Contract are attached and incorporated into this Contract. Acceptance of payments forever releases the Commonwealth from further claims related to these obligations. CONTRACT END DATE Contract performance shall terminate as of , 20 , with no new obligations being incurred after this date unless the Contract is properly amended, provided that the terms of this Contract and performance expectations and obligations shall survive its termination for the purpose of resolving any claim or dispute, for completing any negotiated terms and warranties, to allow any close out or transition performance, reporting, invoicing or final payments, or during any lapse between amendments. CERTIFICATIONS Notwithstanding verbal or other representations by the parties, the “Effective Date” of this Contract or Amendment shall be the latest date that this Contract or Amendment has been executed by an authorized signatory of the Contractor, the Department, or a later Contract or Amendment Start Date specified above, subject to any required approvals. The Contractor certifies that they have accessed and reviewed all documents incorporated by reference as electronically published and the Contractor makes all certifications required under the Standard Contract Form Instructions and Contractor Certifications under the pains and penalties of perjury, and further agrees to provide any required documentation upon request to support compliance, and agrees that all terms governing performance of this Contract and doing business in Massachusetts are attached or incorporated by reference herein according to the following hierarchy of document precedence, the applicable Commonwealth Terms and Conditions, this Standard Contract Form, the Standard Contract Form Instructions and Contractor Certificatio ns, the Request for Response (RFR) or other solicitation, the Contractor’s Response (excluding any language stricken by a Department as unacceptable), and additional negotiated terms, provided that additional negotiated terms will take precedence over the relevant terms in the RFR and the Contractor’s Response only if made using the process outlined in 801 CMR 21.07, incorporated herein, provided that any amended RFR or Response terms result in best value, lower costs, or a more cost effective Contract. AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE FOR THE CONTRACTOR AUTHORIZING SIGNATURE FOR THE DEPARTMENT Signature and date must be captured at time of signature. Signature and date must be captured at time of signature. Signature Date Signature Date Print Name Print Title Print Name Print Title Page 2 of 2 Updated 07/01/2025 CITY OF MELROSE City Hall, 562 Main Street Melrose, Massachusetts 02176 Sarah MacLellan Chief Assessor Telephone - (781) 979-4104 assessor@cityofmelrose.org To: The Honorable City Council of Melrose Date: November 7, 2025 From: Sarah MacLellan, MAA Chief Assessor Chair, Board of Assessors Re: Annual Property Tax Classification Public Hearing for Fiscal Year 2026 In accordance with the requirements of Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 40, Section 56, relating to the classification of property, the Board of Assessors requests that a public hearing be scheduled for Monday, December 1, 2025. The Board of Assessors will provide the City Council with information necessary to make a decision on the adoption of a residential factor and thereby determine the percentages of local tax levy to be borne by each class of real and personal property for the Fiscal Year 2026. CITY OF MELROSE FISCAL YEAR 2026 CLASSIFICATION OF PROPERTY TAX CLASSIFICATION HEARING – DECEMBER 1,2025 PRESENTED BY THE MELROSE BOARD OF ASSESSORS: SARAH MACLELLAN CATHY GULINO LEE PHALENPURPOSE OF THE CLASSIFICATION HEARING To adopt the City’s Tax Policy by allocating the tax levy among the 5 property types: Commercial Residential (RO) (CIP) Industrial Open Space Personal Property* *Personal property includes all tangible items that are not firmly attached to land or buildings and are not considered part of the real estate. ACTION REQUIRED BY THE CITY COUNCIL • VOTE: Adopt a Residential Factor (Tax Shift) This factor governs the percentage of the tax levy to be paid by the Residential Class, with the balance to be shifted to the Commercial, Industrial and Personal Property Classes. SENIOR CIRCUIT BREAKER EXEMPTION • Allows the Board of Assessors to qualify Senior applicants for tax relief by a State Income Tax Credit referred to as the “Circuit Breaker Credit”. • Qualified applicants receive a property tax exemption equal to 100% of their State Circuit Breaker Income Tax Credit. • The total amount of exempted value is to be allocated within the tax levy (or shifted) to the Residential taxpayers. • FY 2026 Circuit Breaker Exemption Program:  88 Applications, 85 parcels granted exemption by Board of Assessors  4th year of Circuit Breaker Exemption in Melrose  $157,239 in Tax Dollars exempted, to be shifted ONLY within the Residential Class  Adds $.02 to the Residential Tax rate ($0.02/$1,000 of Residential Property Value) RESIDENTIAL FACTOR / THE TAX SHIFT NOTE: THE TOTAL AMOUNT THAT CAN BE RAISED IN TAXES (MAX. LEVY) REMAINS THE SAME, WHETHER THERE IS A SINGLE OR SPLIT TAX RATE (TAX SHIFT). THE SHIFT DOES NOT RAISE MORE REVENUE, IT SIMPLY CHANGES THE ALLOCATION OF THE TAX BURDEN AMONG THE CLASSES OF TAXPAYERS. For FY26, adopting a Factor of 1 would result in a residential tax rate of $11.93 per $1,000 of property value* • Adopting a factor less than “1”, to as low as the Minimum Residential Factor (MRF) , results in an increasingly greater tax burden shift from the Residential class to the Commercial, Industrial and Personal Property (CIP) classes. The Minimum Residential Factor is determined annually by the DOR and this year again allows for a full shift of 175% *Note: Final Tax Rates may change slightly when finalized with the Dept. Of Revenue. FISCAL YEAR 2026 VALUE BY CLASS VALUE % OF LEVY INDUSTRIAL (before shift) PERSONAL COMMERCIAL 0.4% PROPERTY 2.5% RESIDENTIAL $ 7,643,650,879 95.0% 2.1% COMMERCIAL $ 204,431,461 2.5% INDUSTRIAL $ 30,229,400 0.4% PERSONAL PROPERTY $ 165,911,460 2.1% RESIDENTIAL TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE $ 8,044,223,200 100.0% 95% NUMBER OF PARCELS BY PROPERTY TYPE RESIDENTIAL 8,853 OPEN SPACE 0 COMMERCIAL 185 INDUSTRIAL 29 PERSONAL PROPERTY 298 TOTAL TAXABLE VALUE ALL PROPERTY MIXED-USE 64 $8.0 Billion EXEMPT 423 NEW GROWTH FY 2026 Real Estate Personal Property New Growth includes increases in assessed value over the prior year resulting When a new business opens in Melrose, the business’ assets are from new construction or physical improvements to real property. considered new growth. Also, when existing businesses add new Subdivisions and condo conversions are also considered new growth the first assets, those assets are considered new growth. time they are taxed as separate parcels. New growth also includes parcels that were previously exempt from property taxation but have been added to the Top Residential Projects: tax roll. • 12-16 Essex Street Mixed-Use Building project • 453 Franklin Street Mixed-Use Building project RESIDENTIAL AND CIP NEW GROWTH $ APPLIED TO THE LEVY • 19 New Condo Units LIMIT $1,082,547 • Several New Single-Family Homes built Top Commercial Projects: $770,138 $780,859 $632,911 $772,733 • About $150,000 in Growth $ from top 4 Utilities/Telecom 600,000 400,000 FY26 GROWTH: 200,000 $780,859 0 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 FY2025 GROWTH: Residential Growth CIP Growth $770,138CALCULATING THE TAX RATE FY 2025 LEVY LIMIT 77,315,376 ADD AMENDED FY 2025 GROWTH 18,370 ADD PROP. 2.5 % 1,933,344 ADD FY 2026 NEW GROWTH 780,859 ADD FY 2026 OVERRIDE 13,500,000 SUBTOTAL : FY 2026 LEVY LIMIT 93,547,949 FY 2026 DEBT EXCLUSION(S) 2,241,676 FY 2026 MAX. ALLOWABLE LEVY 95,789,625 $11.93 RESIDENTIAL TAX RATE PER $1,000 OF ASSESSED VALUE IF A FACTOR OF 1 IS SELECTED (NO CIP SHIFT), $11.91 CIP RATE Note: Final Tax Rates may change slightly when finalized with the Dept. Of Revenue. AVERAGE SINGLE-FAMILY VALUE $853,264 $817,630 2025 2026 *Note: Final Average SF Value may change when the tax rate is finalized and the Exempted Value from the Senior Circuit Breaker exemption is factored into the average FY26 VALUE CHANGE BY PROPERTY TYPE FY26 TOTAL VALUE Single Family $5,464,894,400 +4.2% Condominium $604,075,100 +5.2% 2-Family $664,321,100 +3.1% Three-Family $63,146,400 +1.2% Apartments $605,328,800 +3.5% Commercial $160,127,200 +2.3% Industrial $30,217,000 +5.8% *The percent change is inclusive of new growth in each property type ASSESSED VALUES BY CLASS FY 2021 – 2026 10,000,000,000 250,000,000 204,431,461 200,000,000 Pers. Prop. 8,000,000,000 7.3B 7.6B 7.1B 6.5B 6.2B 5.8B 150,000,000 6,000,000,000 165,911,460 Value 100,000,000 Comm. 4,000,000,000 30,229,400 50,000,000 Ind. 2,000,000,000 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 0 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 Commercial Industrial Personal Property RESIDENTIAL CIP FY2025 SINGLE FAMILY VALUES / TAX RATES Municipality Single Family Parcels Average Single Family Value Avg Single Family Tax Bill 2025 Res. Tax Rate Melrose 6,385 817,630 $8,095 $9.90 Malden* 5,679 437,415 $4,952 $11.32 Lynnfield 3,891 1,045,013 $11,035 $10.56 Reading 6,593 890,915 $10,148 $11.39 Saugus 7,241 641,074 $6,847 $10.68 Stoneham 5,129 765,770 $7,834 $10.23 Wakefield 6,264 776,158 $8,809 $11.35 Winchester 5,684 1,595,586 $17,695 $11.09 FY25 RESIDENTIAL TAX RATES FY25 AVG SINGLE FAMILY TAX BILL $11.50 $18,000 $16,000 $11.00 $14,000 $12,000 $10.50 $10,000 $8,000 $10.00 $6,000 $4,000 $9.50 $2,000 $9.00 $- *Avg Single Family Value and Tax Bill are impacted by the Residential Exemption in this community Source: DLS Data Analytics and Resources Bureau FY25 PEER COMMMUNITY RES. TO CIP VALUES Municipality R/O% of Total CIP% of Total Total Value RESIDENTIAL TO CIP VALUES Lynnfield 88.9 11.1 4,945,281,462 100.0 90.0 Malden 89.1 10.9 11,219,660,408 80.0 70.0 Melrose 95.0 5.0 7,729,420,330 60.0 50.0 Reading 93.7 6.3 7,832,363,065 40.0 30.0 11.1 10.9 5.0 6.3 16.6 9.4 11.0 4.3 Saugus 83.4 16.6 7,170,611,202 20.0 10.0 Stoneham 90.6 9.4 6,112,056,859 0.0 Wakefield 89.0 11.0 7,645,488,694 Winchester 95.7 4.3 11,368,910,570 CIP% of Total RO% of Total Source: DLS Data Analytics and Resources Bureau HISTORICAL LEVY PERCENTAGE BY CLASS (AFTER SHIFT) FISCAL YEAR RESIDENTIAL % OF LEVY CIP % OF LEVY RES TO CIP % OF LEVY – FY 2016 TO FY 2025 2016 91.79 8.21 100 2017 91.97 8.03 98 2018 91.7 8.3 96 2019 91.9 8.1 94 2020 92.35 7.65 92 2021 91.81 8.19 90 2022 91.93 8.07 88 2023 91.61 8.39 86 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2024 91.34 8.66 RESIDENTIAL % OF LEVY CIP % OF LEVY 2025 91.37 8.63 HISTORICAL RESIDENTIAL FACTOR & SHIFT Fiscal Lowest Res. Max CIP Res. Factor CIP Avg. Single FY % Chg FY $ Chg Year Factor Allowed Shift Allowed Selected Shift Family Tax Bill 2016 0.955969 1.50 0.971820 1.48 $5,746 3.6% $197 2017 0.958322 1.75 0.970826 1.52 $5,909 2.8% $163 2018 0.960291 1.75 0.965587 1.65 $6,096 3.2% $187 2019 0.961998 1.75 0.965545 1.68 $6,273 2.9% $177 2020 0.963075 1.75 0.969000 1.63 $7,015 11.8% $742 2021 0.960822 1.75 0.966100 1.65 $7,195 2.6% $180 2022 0.961407 1.75 0.966600 1.65 $7,435 3.3% $240 2023 0.960486 1.75 0.964174 1.68 $7,643 2.8% $208 2024 0.960113 1.75 0.961700 1.72 $7,857 2.8% $214 2025 0.960472 1.75 0.961500 1.73 $8,095 3.0% $238 TAX RATE SHIFT VARIANCE RES FACTOR OF 1 FY26 AVERAGE SINGLE 1.75 MAX SHIFT RES. RATE $11.93 FAMILY VALUE RES. RATE $11.46 $ CHG: $2,084 $ CHG $1,683 % CHANGE: 25.8 % $853,264 % CHANGE: 20.8 % Average Single Family Tax Bill 1.00 Tax Shift 1.75 Average Commercial Tax Bill RES FACTOR OF 1 1.75 MAX SHIFT CIP RATE: $11.91 FY26 Average CIP RATE $20.84 $ CHG: -$4,614 COMMERCIAL VALUE $ CHG: $2,718 % CHANGE: -32.1 % $821,010 % CHANGE: 18.9% EXCESS LEVY CAPACITY FY 2020 – 2025 EXCESS LEVY CAPACITY AS A PERCENT OF MAX LEVY Excess levy capacity is the difference between the maximum levy and the amount of property 0.08 taxes actually levied in a given year 0.06 0.065% 0.04 0.035% 0.05% 0.003% 0.02 0.001% 0.031% 0 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Levy Data 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 Excess Levy Capacity 1,912 765 25,134 48,151 38,578 24,529 Levy Limit w/o Exclusions 64,738,724 66,981,117 69,288,556 72,103,317 74,678,383 77,315,376 Levy Ceiling 146,069,870 151,924,481 162,714,131 171,420,756 185,895,955 193,235,508 Maximum Levy 66,629,218 68,878,709 71,196,790 74,011,551 76,595,060 79,298,968 Total Tax Levy 66,627,306 68,877,944 71,171,656 73,963,400 76,556,482 79,274,439 SELECT FY26 SHIFT OPTIONS AVG SINGLE FAMILY VALUE = $853,264 AVG COMM VALUE = $821,010 ESTIMATED EXCESS SHIFT RES FACTOR RES RATE AVG SF TAX BILL SF $ CHG SF % CHG CIP RATE AVG COM TAX BILL COM $ CHG COM % CHG LEVY CAPACITY 1.60 0.9686 $11.55 $9,855 $1,760 21.74% $19.05 $15,640 $1,248 8.67% $31,047 1.61 0.9680 $11.55 $9,855 $1,760 21.74% $19.17 $15,739 $1,347 9.36% $55,277 1.62 0.9675 $11.54 $9,847 $1,752 21.64% $19.29 $15,837 $1,445 10.04% $7,208 1.63 0.9670 $11.53 $9,838 $1,743 21.53% $19.41 $15,936 $1,544 10.73% $39,449 1.64 0.9665 $11.53 $9,838 $1,743 21.53% $19.53 $16,034 $1,642 11.41% $71,691 1.65 0.9659 $11.52 $9,830 $1,735 21.43% $19.65 $16,133 $1,741 12.10% $10,000 1.66 0.9654 $11.52 $9,830 $1,735 21.43% $19.77 $16,231 $1,839 12.78% $47,852 1.67 0.9649 $11.51 $9,821 $1,726 21.32% $19.89 $16,330 $1,938 13.47% $80,094 1.68 0.9644 $11.50 $9,813 $1,718 21.22% $20.01 $16,428 $2,036 14.15% $32,025 1.69 0.9638 $11.50 $9,813 $1,718 21.22% $20.12 $16,519 $2,127 14.78% $56,255 1.70 0.9633 $11.49 $9,804 $1,709 21.11% $20.24 $16,617 $2,225 15.46% $4,181 1.71 0.9628 $11.48 $9,795 $1,700 21.01% $20.36 $16,716 $2,324 16.15% $40,428 1.72 0.9623 $11.48 $9,795 $1,700 21.01% $20.48 $16,814 $2,422 16.83% $72,670 1.73 0.9617 $11.47 $9,787 $1,692 20.90% $20.60 $16,913 $2,521 17.52% $12,584 1.74 0.9612 $11.47 $9,787 $1,692 20.90% $20.72 $17,011 $2,619 18.20% $48,831 1.75 0.9607 $11.46 $9,778 $1,683 20.80% $20.84 $17,110 $2,718 18.88% $81,073 Note: Final Tax Rates may change slightly when finalized with the Dept. Of Revenue. Excess Levy Capacity may change due to rounding. ALL FY26 SHIFT OPTIONS AVG SINGLE FAMILY VALUE = $853,264 AVG COMM VALUE = $821,010 AVG SINGLE FAMILY VALUE = $853,264 AVG COMM VALUE = $821,010 RES RES AVG SF AVG SF AVG SF CIP AVG COM AVG COM AVG COM RES RES AVG SF AVG SF AVG SF CIP AVG COM AVG COM AVG COM SHIFT FACTOR RATE TAX BILL $ CHG % CHG RATE TAX BILL $ CHG % CHG SHIFT FACTOR RATE TAX BILL $ CHG % CHG RATE TAX BILL $ CHG % CHG 1.0000 1.0000 11.93 $ 10,179 $ 2,084 25.75% 11.91 $ 9,778 $ (4,614) -32.06% 1.3800 0.9801 11.69 $ 9,975 $ 1,880 23.22% 16.43 $ 13,489 $ (903) -6.27% 1.0100 0.9995 11.92 $ 10,171 $ 2,076 25.64% 12.03 $ 9,877 $ (4,515) -31.37% 1.3900 0.9796 11.68 $ 9,966 $ 1,871 23.11% 16.55 $ 13,588 $ (804) -5.59% 1.0200 0.9990 11.92 $ 10,171 $ 2,076 25.64% 12.15 $ 9,975 $ (4,417) -30.69% 1.4000 0.9790 11.68 $ 9,966 $ 1,871 23.11% 16.67 $ 13,686 $ (706) -4.90% 1.0300 0.9984 11.91 $ 10,162 $ 2,067 25.54% 12.27 $ 10,074 $ (4,318) -30.00% 1.4100 0.9785 11.67 $ 9,958 $ 1,863 23.01% 16.79 $ 13,785 $ (607) -4.22% 1.0400 0.9979 11.90 $ 10,154 $ 2,059 25.43% 12.38 $ 10,164 $ (4,228) -29.38% 1.4200 0.9780 11.67 $ 9,958 $ 1,863 23.01% 16.91 $ 13,883 $ (509) -3.53% 1.0500 0.9974 11.90 $ 10,154 $ 2,059 25.43% 12.50 $ 10,263 $ (4,129) -28.69% 1.4300 0.9775 11.66 $ 9,949 $ 1,854 22.90% 17.03 $ 13,982 $ (410) -2.85% 1.0600 0.9969 11.89 $ 10,145 $ 2,050 25.33% 12.62 $ 10,361 $ (4,031) -28.01% 1.4400 0.9769 11.65 $ 9,941 $ 1,846 22.80% 17.15 $ 14,080 $ (312) -2.17% 1.0700 0.9963 11.88 $ 10,137 $ 2,042 25.22% 12.74 $ 10,460 $ (3,932) -27.32% 1.4500 0.9764 11.65 $ 9,941 $ 1,846 22.80% 17.27 $ 14,179 $ (213) -1.48% 1.0800 0.9958 11.88 $ 10,137 $ 2,042 25.22% 12.86 $ 10,558 $ (3,834) -26.64% 1.4600 0.9759 11.64 $ 9,932 $ 1,837 22.69% 17.39 $ 14,277 $ (115) -0.80% 1.0900 0.9953 11.87 $ 10,128 $ 2,033 25.12% 12.98 $ 10,657 $ (3,735) -25.95% 1.4700 0.9754 11.63 $ 9,923 $ 1,828 22.59% 17.50 $ 14,368 $ (24) -0.17% 1.1000 0.9948 11.87 $ 10,128 $ 2,033 25.12% 13.10 $ 10,755 $ (3,637) -25.27% 1.4800 0.9748 11.63 $ 9,923 $ 1,828 22.59% 17.62 $ 14,466 $ 74 0.52% 1.1100 0.9942 11.86 $ 10,120 $ 2,025 25.01% 13.22 $ 10,854 $ (3,538) -24.58% 1.4900 0.9743 11.62 $ 9,915 $ 1,820 22.48% 17.74 $ 14,565 $ 173 1.20% 1.1200 0.9937 11.85 $ 10,111 $ 2,016 24.91% 13.34 $ 10,952 $ (3,440) -23.90% 1.5000 0.9738 11.62 $ 9,915 $ 1,820 22.48% 17.86 $ 14,663 $ 271 1.88% 1.1300 0.9932 11.85 $ 10,111 $ 2,016 24.91% 13.46 $ 11,051 $ (3,341) -23.22% 1.5100 0.9733 11.61 $ 9,906 $ 1,811 22.38% 17.98 $ 14,762 $ 370 2.57% 1.1400 0.9927 11.84 $ 10,103 $ 2,008 24.80% 13.57 $ 11,141 $ (3,251) -22.59% 1.5200 0.9727 11.60 $ 9,898 $ 1,803 22.27% 18.10 $ 14,860 $ 468 3.25% 1.1500 0.9921 11.83 $ 10,094 $ 1,999 24.70% 13.69 $ 11,240 $ (3,152) -21.90% 1.5300 0.9722 11.60 $ 9,898 $ 1,803 22.27% 18.22 $ 14,959 $ 567 3.94% 1.1600 0.9916 11.83 $ 10,094 $ 1,999 24.70% 13.81 $ 11,338 $ (3,054) -21.22% 1.5400 0.9717 11.59 $ 9,889 $ 1,794 22.17% 18.34 $ 15,057 $ 665 4.62% 1.1700 0.9911 11.82 $ 10,086 $ 1,991 24.59% 13.93 $ 11,437 $ (2,955) -20.53% 1.5500 0.9712 11.58 $ 9,881 $ 1,786 22.06% 18.46 $ 15,156 $ 764 5.31% 1.1800 0.9906 11.82 $ 10,086 $ 1,991 24.59% 14.05 $ 11,535 $ (2,857) -19.85% 1.5600 0.9707 11.58 $ 9,881 $ 1,786 22.06% 18.58 $ 15,254 $ 862 5.99% 1.1900 0.9900 11.81 $ 10,077 $ 1,982 24.48% 14.17 $ 11,634 $ (2,758) -19.17% 1.5700 0.9701 11.57 $ 9,872 $ 1,777 21.96% 18.70 $ 15,353 $ 961 6.68% 1.2000 0.9895 11.80 $ 10,069 $ 1,974 24.38% 14.29 $ 11,732 $ (2,660) -18.48% 1.5800 0.9696 11.57 $ 9,872 $ 1,777 21.96% 18.81 $ 15,443 $ 1,051 7.30% 1.2100 0.9890 11.80 $ 10,069 $ 1,974 24.38% 14.41 $ 11,831 $ (2,561) -17.80% 1.5900 0.9691 11.56 $ 9,864 $ 1,769 21.85% 18.93 $ 15,542 $ 1,150 7.99% 1.2200 0.9885 11.79 $ 10,060 $ 1,965 24.27% 14.53 $ 11,929 $ (2,463) -17.11% 1.6000 0.9686 11.55 $ 9,855 $ 1,760 21.74% 19.05 $ 15,640 $ 1,248 8.67% 1.2300 0.9879 11.78 $ 10,051 $ 1,956 24.17% 14.65 $ 12,028 $ (2,364) -16.43% 1.6100 0.9680 11.55 $ 9,855 $ 1,760 21.74% 19.17 $ 15,739 $ 1,347 9.36% 1.2400 0.9874 11.78 $ 10,051 $ 1,956 24.17% 14.77 $ 12,126 $ (2,266) -15.74% 1.6200 0.9675 11.54 $ 9,847 $ 1,752 21.64% 19.29 $ 15,837 $ 1,445 10.04% 1.2500 0.9869 11.77 $ 10,043 $ 1,948 24.06% 14.88 $ 12,217 $ (2,175) -15.12% 1.6300 0.9670 11.53 $ 9,838 $ 1,743 21.53% 19.41 $ 15,936 $ 1,544 10.73% 1.2600 0.9864 11.77 $ 10,043 $ 1,948 24.06% 15.00 $ 12,315 $ (2,077) -14.43% 1.6400 0.9665 11.53 $ 9,838 $ 1,743 21.53% 19.53 $ 16,034 $ 1,642 11.41% 1.2700 0.9859 11.76 $ 10,034 $ 1,939 23.96% 15.12 $ 12,414 $ (1,978) -13.75% 1.6500 0.9659 11.52 $ 9,830 $ 1,735 21.43% 19.65 $ 16,133 $ 1,741 12.10% 1.2800 0.9853 11.75 $ 10,026 $ 1,931 23.85% 15.24 $ 12,512 $ (1,880) -13.06% 1.6600 0.9654 11.52 $ 9,830 $ 1,735 21.43% 19.77 $ 16,231 $ 1,839 12.78% 1.2900 0.9848 11.75 $ 10,026 $ 1,931 23.85% 15.36 $ 12,611 $ (1,781) -12.38% 1.6700 0.9649 11.51 $ 9,821 $ 1,726 21.32% 19.89 $ 16,330 $ 1,938 13.47% 1.3000 0.9843 11.74 $ 10,017 $ 1,922 23.75% 15.48 $ 12,709 $ (1,683) -11.69% 1.6800 0.9644 11.50 $ 9,813 $ 1,718 21.22% 20.01 $ 16,428 $ 2,036 14.15% 1.3100 0.9838 11.73 $ 10,009 $ 1,914 23.64% 15.60 $ 12,808 $ (1,584) -11.01% 1.6900 0.9638 11.50 $ 9,813 $ 1,718 21.22% 20.12 $ 16,519 $ 2,127 14.78% 1.3200 0.9832 11.73 $ 10,009 $ 1,914 23.64% 15.72 $ 12,906 $ (1,486) -10.32% 1.7000 0.9633 11.49 $ 9,804 $ 1,709 21.11% 20.24 $ 16,617 $ 2,225 15.46% 1.3300 0.9827 11.72 $ 10,000 $ 1,905 23.54% 15.84 $ 13,005 $ (1,387) -9.64% 1.7100 0.9628 11.48 $ 9,795 $ 1,700 21.01% 20.36 $ 16,716 $ 2,324 16.15% 1.3400 0.9822 11.72 $ 10,000 $ 1,905 23.54% 15.96 $ 13,103 $ (1,289) -8.95% 1.7200 0.9623 11.48 $ 9,795 $ 1,700 21.01% 20.48 $ 16,814 $ 2,422 16.83% 1.3500 0.9817 11.71 $ 9,992 $ 1,897 23.43% 16.08 $ 13,202 $ (1,190) -8.27% 1.7300 0.9617 11.47 $ 9,787 $ 1,692 20.90% 20.60 $ 16,913 $ 2,521 17.52% 1.3600 0.9811 11.70 $ 9,983 $ 1,888 23.33% 16.19 $ 13,292 $ (1,100) -7.64% 1.7400 0.9612 11.47 $ 9,787 $ 1,692 20.90% 20.72 $ 17,011 $ 2,619 18.20% 1.3700 0.9806 11.70 $ 9,983 $ 1,888 23.33% 16.31 $ 13,391 $ (1,001) -6.96% 1.7500 0.9607 11.46 $ 9,778 $ 1,683 20.80% 20.84 $ 17,110 $ 2,718 18.88% Note: Final Tax Rates may change slightly when finalized with the Dept. Of Revenue. Excess Levy Capacity may change due to rounding. CLASSIFICATION HEARING TERMS CIP - Commercial, Industrial, and Personal Property Classes Levy - the revenue a community can raise through real and personal property taxes. Levy Limit - The maximum amount a community can levy in a given year; equal to last year’s levy plus 2.5% plus new growth plus debt exclusion / override if applicable. Levy Ceiling - Equal to 2.5% of the total full and fair cash value of all taxable real and personal property in the community. New Growth - Increase in the tax base due to new construction, parcel subdivisions, condo conversions and property renovations, but not due to revaluation. It is calculated by dividing the resulting increased assessed value by $1,000 and multiplying by the prior year’s tax rate for the property class. Override - A permanent increase to a community’s levy limit. Override Capacity - The difference between the levy ceiling and the levy limit. It is the maximum amount by which a community may override its levy limit. Debt Exclusion - A temporary increase to the levy limit for the payment of a specific debt service item over a specified period of time. Capital Outlay Expenditure - A temporary exclusion for the purpose of raising funds for capital projects. Excess Levy Capacity - The difference between the actual levy and the levy limit. Deborah B. Goldberg James A. MacDonald Mary L. Pichetti Chair, State Treasurer Chief Executive Officer Executive Director / Deputy CEO October 29, 2025 The Honorable Jennifer Grigoraitis, Mayor City of Melrose Melrose City Hall Office of the Mayor 562 Main Street, Second Floor Melrose, MA 02176 Re: City of Melrose, Early Childhood Center, Melrose High School Dear Mayor Grigoraitis: I am pleased to report that on October 29, 2025, the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of the Massachusetts School Building Authority (the “MSBA”) voted to invite the City of Melrose (the “District”) into the Calendar Year 2025 Accelerated Repair Program (the “ARP”) to partner with the MSBA in conducting a Schematic Design Study at the Early Childhood Center for a potential partial roof and partial windows/doors replacement project and at the Melrose High School for a potential partial roof replacement project. The invitation for the potential partial roof and partial windows/doors replacement project at the Early Childhood Center is limited to Roof Sections A- D and Window Section A, as described by the District in its Statement of Interest for the Early Childhood Center. The invitation for the potential partial roof replacement project at the Melrose High School is limited to Roof Sections A and B, as described by the District in its Statement of Interest for the Melrose High School. The ARP will focus on the preservation of existing assets by performing energy-efficient and cost-saving upgrades, which will result in direct operational savings for districts. I do want to emphasize that this invitation to partner on a Schematic Design Study is not approval of a project but is strictly an invitation to the District to work with the MSBA to explore potential solutions to the building needs that have been identified. Moving forward in the MSBA’s ARP process requires a partnership with the MSBA, and communities that “get ahead” of the MSBA without MSBA approval will not be eligible for grant funding. To qualify for any funding from the MSBA, local communities must follow the MSBA’s statute, regulations, and policies, including the ARP requirements, as outlined in this letter, which require MSBA partnership and approval at each step of the process. Districts that are invited into the ARP will be required to use Owner’s Project Managers and Designers who are pre-selected and randomly assigned by the MSBA. Districts must also adhere 10 Post Office Square, Suite S400 ● Boston, MA 02109 ● Phone: 617-720-4466 ● www.MassSchoolBuildings.org Page 2 October 29, 2025 City of Melrose Invitation to ARP Board Action Letter to other requirements that are unique to this Program, such as implementing an accelerated project schedule. The District’s commencement date for Early Childhood Center and the Melrose High School is November 3, 2025, and several prerequisites must be completed in accordance with the schedule on page four of this letter. The District must secure funding for the Schematic Design portion of this potential project within 90 calendar days of the commencement date. Submission of the properly certified documentation that the District has secured its funding must be submitted to the MSBA within 120 days of the commencement date. Districts will be expected to complete a Schematic Design Study and receive authorization to execute a Project Funding Agreement by the MSBA Board of Directors no later than 14 months from the District’s commencement date. Future funding for the total project budget will be required within 90 days after the date of the MSBA’s approval to execute a Project Funding Agreement and no later than 16 months from the District’s commencement date. Districts seeking reimbursement under the ARP will be allowed to submit requests for reimbursement monthly, but only if the total value of the invoices submitted equals more than $50,000. During the Schematic Design Study phase, the MSBA will partner with the District and its assigned Owner’s Project Manager and Designer to find the most fiscally responsible, educationally appropriate and sustainable solution to the building needs identified above. If during the Schematic Design Study phase, the District determines that the potential project does not meet the qualifying criteria of the Board’s invitation, the District will be required to remove its Statement of Interest and will not be authorized for a Project Funding Agreement for the project. For the Calendar Year 2025 ARP, the qualifying criteria included roofs of 20 years or more as of Calendar Year 2026 (installed in or before 2006) and window and door systems of 30 years or more as of Calendar Year 2026 (installed in or before 1996). For the Calendar Year 2025 ARP, the qualifying criteria for heat pump conversions included windows of less than 30 years (installed in or after 1997), the school was opened or fully renovated, including replacement of the HVAC system before 2011, and the mechanical heating distribution is not supported by steam distribution piping. As detailed above, once the District has completed the prerequisites in accordance with the schedule on page four of this letter and to the MSBA’s standards, the MSBA will assign an Owner’s Project Manager and Designer using the MSBA’s list of pre-selected and randomly assigned consultants for the ARP. In the meantime, I wanted to share with you the Board’s decision and provide a brief overview of what this means for the City of Melrose. I look forward to continuing to work with you as part of the MSBA’s Accelerated Repair Program. As always, feel free to contact me or my staff at (617) 720-4466 should you have any questions. 10 Post Office Square, Suite S400 ● Boston, MA 02109 ● Phone: 617-720-4466 ● www.MassSchoolBuildings.org Page 3 October 29, 2025 City of Melrose Invitation to ARP Board Action Letter Sincerely, Mary L. Pichetti Executive Director Cc: Legislative Delegation Leila Migliorelli, President, Melrose City Council Dorie Withey, Chair, Melrose School Committee Jen McAndrew, Vice-Chair, Melrose School Committee Cari Berman, Interim Superintendent, Melrose Public Schools File: 10.2 Letters 10 Post Office Square, Suite S400 ● Boston, MA 02109 ● Phone: 617-720-4466 ● www.MassSchoolBuildings.org Page 4 October 29, 2025 City of Melrose Invitation to ARP Board Action Letter Accelerated Repair Program Prerequisite Documents Schedule of Deliverables City of Melrose MSBA Board of Director Meeting – October 29, 2025 Early Childhood Center, Melrose High School Accelerated Repair Program Commences – November 3, 2025 Deliverable Days Due Date and Status February 2, 2026 Initial Compliance Certification 90 Required February 2, 2026 Maintenance and Capital Planning Information 90 Required Local Authorization for Schematic Design February 2, 2026 90 Funds Required Certified Copy of Local Vote Authorization of March 3, 2026 120 Schematic Design Funds Required 10 Post Office Square, Suite S400 ● Boston, MA 02109 ● Phone: 617-720-4466 ● www.MassSchoolBuildings.org City of Melrose City Ordinances, Article II. General Legislation Chapter 132 Demolition review. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to preserve and protect significant buildings within the City of Melrose (“city”) which constitute or reflect distinctive aspects of the architectural, cultural, political, economic, or social history of the city, and which are outside of designated local historic districts; to encourage owners of such buildings and the Melrose Historical Commission (“commission”) to develop strategies to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore such buildings, rather than demolish them; or, in the alternative, to seek out persons willing to purchase and to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore such buildings, rather than demolish them; and to promote the public welfare by making the city a more attractive place in which to live. To achieve these purposes, the issuance of demolition permits for significant buildings is regulated as provided in this ordinance. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings set forth below: Abutter means an abutter as defined in M.G.L. c. 40A. Applicant means any person filing an application for a city permit. Application means a written application for a permit for the demolition of a building, a building permit, or zoning relief/compliance. Board of survey means the board ordered to respond, by M.G.L. c. 143 § 8, when an owner of a building does not respond to a notice that the building is unsafe. Building means any combination of materials forming a shelter for persons, animals or property, as well as any constructed, erected, or placed material or combination of materials in or upon the ground, excluding fences, walls, side & rear decks, sidewalks, stairs and paving on streets, driveways and patios. Building official means the Building Commissioner, or his/her designee. Calendar day means any day of the week, including a Saturday or a Sunday or a holiday. City clerk means the person holding the office of city clerk in the city. Demolition means the act of pulling down, destroying, removing, moving, or razing a building. Demolition includes commencing the work of the destruction of 50 percent or more of the exterior surface area (including walls and roof) of a building. For the purposes of this section, the term "demolition" shall not include routine maintenance as long as the maintenance undertaken does not fit the definitions of demolition contained in this section. For the purposes of this section, "demolition" does not include: (1) Removal, replacement, or installation of siding, roof shingles or windows; (2) Routine maintenance as long as the maintenance undertaken does not fit the definitions, of demolition contained in this section; (3) Interior renovations (except where the renovation is conducted for the purpose of compromising the integrity of the building); (4) Exploratory demolition, to the extent that it does not compromise the structure of the building; (5) Interior demolition, to the extent that it does not compromise the structure of the building; or (6) Minor projects as defined below. Demolition by neglect is a situation in which a property owner intentionally allows a property to suffer severe deterioration, until it is beyond the point of repair. A deliberate process of ongoing damage to the fabric, viability and/or functionability of a building leading towards and/or causing its eventual demolition due to decay and/or structural failure and/or severe degradation over a period of time as a 1 result of a general lack of maintenance, and/or failure to secure the building from pests or vandals, and/or failure to take reasonable measures to prevent the ingress of water, snow, ice, and wind through the roof, walls, or apertures. Demolition review period means a period of time whereby a window of opportunity is enacted in order to enable the owners of a property, working with the commission or its designees, to determine ways of preserving and/or rehabilitating and/or restoring the property as an alternative to demolition. Exempt areas means the following: (1) The local historic districts as identified in Chapter 131 of the Code of Ordinances; and, (2) Buildings owned by the city. Exploratory demolition is the act of removing or uncovering (non-structural) building materials located on the interior of a building prior to renovation, rehabilitation, restoration, or remodeling in order to verify the existing conditions present in otherwise unexposed areas. Final determination means a determination that a building is preferably preserved, made by the commission in accordance with subsection (f) of this section. Illegal demolition means a demolition undertaken by any person without an application having been reviewed and approved by the commission and/or without building or demolition permits from the inspectional services department. Initial determination means a determination that a building is significant, in accordance with subsection (5) of this section. Interior demolition is the act of removing non-structural interior building materials for the purpose of renovating, rehabilitating, restoring, or remodeling the interior space. Minor project is the removal of a portion of a single-, two-, or three-unit structure for the purpose of only accomplishing one or more of the following: adding a dormer, dormer window, entry canopy, bay, or gable; adding an addition to the side or rear of the structure; adding or altering a portico, porch or deck; or, changing the shape, style or structure of a roof. Owner means the entity with legal title to a building. Permit means a written permit issued by the Building official that allows for the demolition (as defined herein) of a building pursuant to an application. Person means an individual, corporation, partnership, association, trust, society, or similar entity. Preferably preserved (building) means a significant building, which, as the commission determines, as provided in subsection (f) of this section, that it is in the public interest to be preserved or rehabilitated or restored rather than to be demolished. Premises means the parcel of land upon which the building proposed for demolition is located and all adjoining parcels of land under common ownership or control that are identified in the permit application. Reasonable economic return means the cost to rehabilitate or restore the building to the point at which a reasonable use or a reasonable profit can be realized from the property. This may mean bringing a building up to code to the point at which it can be occupied, not necessarily to its “highest and best use,” preferred use or a restoration project. Significant (building) means any building within the city which is listed on, or is within an area listed on, the National Register of Historic Places, or which is the subject of a pending application for listing on the National Register, or is at least 100 years old and has been determined by the commission in their initial determination to be a significant building, per subsection (e) of this section. Voluntary means any act(s) done by design or intention, which is proposed, intended, or not accidental. An act of God is not considered voluntary, but rather is regarded as an act done without the will or 2 choice of the applicant (or owner, if different from applicant). For the purposes of this section, the destruction of a significant building for failure to properly secure or maintain it shall be considered voluntary. 3. Review of demolitions. No building in the city may undergo demolition, as defined in subsection (b) of this section, except through the provisions of this section. Demolition may only be permitted if one of the following apply: A. The building does not meet the prima facie definition of a significant building (i.e. it is less than 100 years old, and is not currently on, or proposed to be placed on, the National Register); B. The building is located within an exempt area; C. The building is determined by the commission or its designee to not be significant, through the procedure of subsection (5) of this section; D. The building is determined by the commission to not be preferably preserved through the procedure of subsection (6) of this section, and has met any condition of such determination per subsection (f)(5)c of this section; E. The commission lifts or shortens a demolition review period per subsection (7) of this section; or F. The demolition review period, per subsection (7) of this section, is exhausted. 4. Notification. When the building official or planning director receives an application for a demolition permit, a building permit or a permit for zoning relief (including but not limited to special permit, site plan review or variance), for work that will constitute demolition, as defined in this section, and is on a building that is or could be determined significant, as defined in this section, and is not within an exempt area, then the building official or planning director shall, within ten calendar days, notify: A. the commission or its designees in writing that a relevant application has been received. This notification shall include a copy of the application, and shall be delivered to the commission or its designees by interoffice mail, email, other electronic means, or by in-hand delivery; and, B. the Applicant to complete and submit an application to the commission. 5. Initial determination (determination of significance). A. Determinations by the commission. The commission shall move to determine if a building is significant, as follows: i. If a building is listed on, or is within an area listed on, the National Register of Historic Places, or the subject of a pending application for listing on the National Register, it shall be automatically determined significant, and shall be scheduled for final determination of this section. ii. Otherwise, for buildings over 100 years old the applicant must submit an application to the commission, using the forms developed per subsection (10)(D) of this section. Upon receipt of an application, the commission or its designee shall make a written determination whether the building, which is the subject of the relevant permit application, is a significant building. B. Criteria for determination of significance. To determine if a building over 100 years old is significant, the commission must make a finding by majority vote that the building is: i. Associated with one or more important historic persons or events, or with the broad architectural, cultural, political, economic or social history of the city or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; or, ii. Historically or architecturally significant (in terms of period, style, method of building construction, or association with a reputed architect or builder) either by itself or in the context of a group of buildings; and therefore it is in the public interest for the premises to be explored further through the final determination process. The commission shall consider: a. Setting - the character of the location and how the building is situated in relationship to other features, such as the streetscape and neighboring buildings. 3 b. Materials - the elements that were originally combined to construct the building, sometimes referred to as historic building fabric. c. Design - reflects the historic building style. d. Location - the place where the building was originally placed. e. Workmanship - evidence of the builder’s craft skills and technology. f. Feeling - the expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular time period. g. Association - the direct link between an important event or person and the building. C. Procedure for public meeting, notice and hearing. i. The determination of significance of certain classes or types of buildings including concrete block garages, outbuildings, sheds and similar accessory buildings shall be made at a public meeting. The public meeting shall occur within 21 days of the application submission to the commission. If the commission determines such a building does not meet the criteria of this section, and is therefore not significant, this determination shall be transmitted to the building official. Otherwise, the applicant shall proceed with the request for a final determination in a public hearing per subsection (6) of this section. ii. A determination of significance shall be made in a duly noticed public hearing by the commission, except as exempted in subsection (C)(i) or waived per subsection (5)(E) of this section. The public hearing shall be held within 65 calendar days of the commission or its designees receiving a copy of the application, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. The commission shall give the public notice of the hearing by publishing the time, place, and purpose of the hearing in a local newspaper, at least 14 days prior to the hearing. The commission shall also mail, in a form designated by the city, a notice to the applicant, the owner of the building and abutters to the subject property, postmarked at least ten days prior to the hearing. The Applicant shall pay the cost of the newspaper notice and postage of mailed notices. The commission shall complete the public hearing within 35 days of opening the public hearing, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. D. Notice of decision. i. If the commission determines that the building is not a significant building, this determination shall be transmitted to the building official, the applicant, the owner of the building and to the city clerk within 14 calendar days from the date of determination. The applicant shall not be required to take any further steps toward preservation of the building and the demolition may proceed, subject to all other building permit and zoning requirements. ii. If the commission determines that the building is significant, it shall notify the building official, the applicant, and the city clerk, of its determination within 14 calendar days from the date of determination. The owner or applicant, or their representatives, shall then be required to attend a subsequent final determination public hearing with the commission during which the commission will determine if the building is to be preferably preserved. iii. If the commission fails to act in accordance with this process within the prescribed timeframe, the building official may grant the demolition permit, provided that the applicant has met all other requirements under the filed applications, and shall notify the commission in writing that the permit has been granted. E. Waiver of initial determination. An applicant, when submitting the required documents for an initial determination, may voluntarily select to waive initial determination. If the initial determination is waived, the building shall immediately be determined to be a significant building, without further action from the commission, and shall be scheduled for a final determination per subsection (6) of this section. F. Expiration. An initial determination is valid for three years. If an applicant does not proceed to apply for final determination within three years, the review process must start over from the beginning, prior to 4 a building being demolished. If an application does not demolish a building within three years of a determination that the building is not a significant building, the review process must start over from the beginning, prior to a building being demolished. 6. Final determination (determination of preferably preserved). A. Additional application and plan review materials. Applicants who did not submit an application for an Initial determination must submit an application to the Commission for a final determination. Applicants that submitted an application for an initial determination may need to provide additional information, in addition to the information requested, in the process of a final determination, as follows. In the event that the applicant and/or owner seek to take a position that the building is of deficient structural integrity, the applicant shall submit an independent licensed structural engineer’s report, from a qualified and experienced structural engineer with proven expertise in historic building techniques. In the event that the applicant and/or owner seek to take a position that a financial hardship applies to a property, the commission may request any or all of the following. It will be incumbent upon the applicant to provide such information in order for the demolition review process to continue: i. The appraised value of the property by a licensed appraiser for the following conditions: in the property’s current condition; after completion of the proposed demolition; and after rehabilitation of the existing property for continued use. ii. An estimate from an architect, developer, contractor, or appraiser experienced in rehabilitation as to the cost to rehabilitate the building to the point of which a reasonable use or a reasonable profit can be realized from the property. Such considerations may include, but not be limited to, bringing a building up to code so it can be occupied. iii. The amount paid for the property, the date of purchase, and the person from whom the property was purchased, a description of the relationship, if any, between the owner of record, the applicant and the person from whom the property was purchased or is being purchased, and the terms of the purchase or proposed purchase, including financing. iv. Operation and maintenance expenses, depreciation deduction and annual cash flow before and after debt service, if any. v. The name of all mortgagees and the balance of all mortgages or other financing secured by the property and annual debt service. vi. All appraisals obtained within the previous two years by the owner or applicant in connection with the purchase, financing and ownership of the property. vii. Any listing of the property for sale or rent, the price asked and offers received for sale or rent, if any, within the previous five years. viii. The assessed value of the property for the previous two assessment years. ix. The form of ownership or operation of the property, whether sole proprietorship, for profit or not- for-profit corporation, limited partnership, joint venture or other. x. Any other information considered necessary by the commission to determine whether the property yields or may yield a reasonable economic return to the property owner(s). xi. Proof of the applicant’s efforts to obtain financing, tax incentives, preservation grants and other incentives to allow the applicant to earn a reasonable economic return from the property. xii. Documents, including copies of invoices, detailing the applicant’s efforts in ongoing maintenance and repair. B. Procedure for public notice and meetings. The commission shall conduct a public hearing on the application within 45 calendar days of the initial determination of significance, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. The commission shall give the public notice of the hearing by publishing the time, place, and purpose of the hearing in a local 5 newspaper, at least 14 calendar days prior to the hearing. The commission shall also mail, in a form designated by the city, a notice to the applicant, the owner of the building and abutters, postmarked at least ten calendar days prior to the hearing. The Applicant shall pay the cost of the newspaper notice and postage of mailed notices. C. Public hearing. The commission shall complete the public hearing within 35 days of opening the public hearing regarding the determination of “preferably preserved”, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. The applicant or their agent must present their demolition request in person to the commission and be prepared to answer questions asked by the commission. If the property applicant, their agent, or property owner is unable to address questions regarding the demolition request or the supporting documentation, the experts/professionals who prepared the information must be present. If the applicant, owner or their agent cannot attend the meeting or adequately address questions, the demolition request will be continued to a later meeting and the commission’s determination will be delayed. D. Peer review. The commission may call for a peer review of any professional report, should the commission deem it necessary to make a final determination, subject to the availability of funds. E. Final determination. Upon completion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if a significant building shall be preferably preserved by majority vote of the commission, as follows: i. The commission may, at their discretion, determine that a building is a preferably preserved building, as follows: by determining that the demolition of the building would be detrimental to the architectural, cultural, political, economic, or social heritage of the city. ii. The commission may, at their discretion, determine that a building is not a preferably preserved building, as follows: by determining that demolition of the building does not merit a finding under subsection (6)(E) above; or, by making a finding that the negative impact on the heritage of the city would be exceeded by the benefit to the city of the development that would occur if the demolition were permitted to go forward. iii. The commission may, at their discretion, place conditions on a determination that a building is not preferably preserved, which may require an applicant to provide one or more of the following to the planning department prior to demolition: 1. photographic documentation of the building to be demolished; 2. architectural renderings of the building to be demolished; 3. identification of materials for salvage of material; and/or, 4. a plan for installation of historic or interpretive signage at or near the site. F. Filing of decision. Within 14 calendar days following the date of the public hearing, the commission or its designees shall file a final determination, in writing, with the city clerk, and shall inform the building official, the applicant and the owner of the building. G. Expiration. A final determination that a building is not a preferably preserved building is valid for three years. If an applicant does not demolish a building within three years of a determination that the building is not a preferably preserved building, the process must start over from the beginning prior to a building being demolished. 7. Process for preferably preserved buildings. A. Demolition review period. Upon the commission’s final determination that said building is preferably preserved the building official shall not issue a demolition permit for building during the demolition review period. The demolition review period shall be as follows: The demolition review period shall be a maximum of 12 months. The demolition review period shall begin on the date following the day upon which the commission made the final determination that building is preferably preserved. B. Alternatives to demolition. During the demolition review period, the applicant, their agent, and/or the owner (if different from applicant), and the commission or its designees are encouraged to actively pursue alternatives to demolition of the preferably preserved building, including but not limited to, finding a buyer for the building that is willing to rehabilitate the property, rather than demolish it. The 6 applicant, their agent, and/or the owner is encouraged to actively pursue alternatives to demolition by meeting with the commission at a minimum of once per month during the demolition review period. C. Shortening/ending the demolition review period. The commission may shorten or end the demolition period, at its discretion, upon determination that one of the following conditions applies: i. The commission determines that there is no reasonable likelihood that either the owner or some other person or group is willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore such building. ii. The commission and the applicant come to a mutually agreeable plan for a more limited demolition that adequately preserves the property and permits the applicant to meet the findings of subsection (6)(E) of this section. iii. The commission and the applicant come to a mutually agreeable set of strategies for addressing the heritage on the site, including but not limited to: 1. photographic documentation of the building to be demolished; 2. architectural renderings of the building to be demolished; 3. identification of materials for salvage of material; 4. a plan for installation of historic or interpretive signage at or near the site; and/or, 5. the establishment of design standards for a replacement building, provided that the standards are limited to the reflection of elements in the building to be demolished or are intended to complement the character of adjacent buildings of historical significance. Upon making a determination to shorten or end the demolition review period, the commission shall file a decision and inform the applicant and the building official. D. Withdrawal. If the applicant chooses not to proceed with demolition, the applicant may, at any time, inform the commission and withdraw their application without prejudice. E. Expiration. Upon expiration of a demolition review period, or upon a determination by the commission to shorten or end a demolition review period, an applicant shall have three years to demolish the building. If an application does not demolish a building within three years of the expiration of the review period or the determination to shorten or end the review period, the process must start over from the beginning prior to a building being demolished. 8. Enforcement. A. Authority. The Inspectional Services Department is the enforcing authority for this section. The Building official is authorized to institute any and all actions and proceedings, in law or in equity, as they deem necessary and appropriate to obtain compliance with the requirements of this section. This may include, but is not limited to, the complete reconstruction and restoration of the demolished building. B. Fines. The provisions of this section may be enforced by a noncriminal disposition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40, § 21D. Each violation shall be deemed a separate offense. Each day a violation occurs shall be deemed a separate offense. Unless otherwise provided, any person, firm, corporation, association or other entity violating any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of $300.00 per day, per violation, in accordance with section 235-3.4 of the Code of Ordinances. Unpaid fines shall result in a municipal lien against the subject property. C. Building permit delay. No building permit shall be issued for a new building on any premises where a significant building is demolished in violation of this section, for the period specified therein. 9. City-owned buildings. 7 A. Exemption. As noted in the definition of “exempt area,” buildings owned by the city are not subject to the demolition review process. B. Historical commission review. Prior to the demolition of any building owned by the city, the city administration shall submit information about the demolition to the commission for a non-binding review and comment. C. Comment meeting. The commission shall schedule, at their next available public meeting, for the city administration to present the building to be demolished and the purpose and need for the demolition. D. Commission role. After the presentation by the city administration, the commission may, within 35 days, issue comments on the demolition. Comments will be provided to the city administration and the city council. Those comments may include, but not be limited to: suggestions for photographic documentation or renderings of the building to be demolished, identification of materials for salvage and/or suggestions for installation of historic or interpretive signage at or near the site. E. City council action on demolition. The city council may not approve any order, including appropriation of funds, that will permit the demolition of a building owned by the city, until the building has been submitted for review by the commission and either a) the commission has provided comments to the city council or; b) 35 days have elapsed after the date of the presentation to the commission, with no comments submitted by the commission to the city council. 10. Other provisions. A. Secure building. Upon a determination by the commission that a building is a significant and/or preferably preserved building, the owner shall be responsible for properly securing the building in order to protect it from the weather and trespass/vandalism. B. Emergency demolition. Nothing in this section shall derogate from the authority of the building official and/or a board of survey to act under M.G.L. c. 143 and the State Building Code. C. Historic Districts Act. If any provision of this section conflicts with the “Historic Districts Act,” M.G.L. c. 40(C), the Act shall prevail. D. Rules and regulations. The commission may establish rules and regulations of procedure for the implementation of this section, including but not limited to establishment of application fees. The planning staff shall develop application forms to accept and process submittals under this section. E. Transferability. Where the owner sells or transfers ownership of a property that is in the middle of the demolition review process, that new owner may continue the review process but may be required to submit updated documentation as required by the commission. F. Effect. This section shall take effect upon approval. The Ordinance and amendments thereto do not apply to applications for demolition submitted prior to the approval date. G. Severability and reinstatement. In case any section, paragraph or part of this section for any reason shall be declared invalid by any court, every other section, paragraph and part shall continue in full force and effect. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this section is held invalid, the relevant section, sentence, clause or phrase in effect prior to the effective date of the section shall be reinstated in full force and effect, without further action from the city council. 8 Version November 25, 2025 City of Melrose City Ordinances, Article II. General Legislation Chapter 132 Demolition review. 1. Purpose. The purpose of this ordinance is to preserve and protect significant buildings within the City of Melrose (“city”) which constitute or reflect distinctive aspects of the architectural, cultural, political, economic, or social history of the city, and which are outside of designated local historic districts; to encourage owners of such buildings and the Melrose Historical Commission (“commission”) to develop strategies to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore such buildings, rather than demolish them; or, in the alternative, to seek out persons willing to purchase and to preserve, rehabilitate, or restore such buildings, rather than demolish them; and to promote the public welfare by making the city a more attractive place in which to live. To achieve these purposes, the issuance of demolition permits for significant buildings is regulated as provided in this ordinance. 2. Definitions. For the purposes of this section, the following words and phrases shall have the meanings set forth below: Abutter means owners of land directly abutting and opposite on any public or private street or way, and abutters to the abutters within three hundred feet of the property line of the subject property as they appear on the most recent applicable tax list notwithstanding that the land of any such owner is located in another city or town. Application means a written application for a permit for the demolition of a building, a building permit, or zoning relief/compliance. Board of survey means the board ordered to respond, by M.G.L. c. 143 § 8, when an owner of a building does not respond to a notice that the building is unsafe. Building means any combination of materials forming a shelter for persons, animals or property, as well as any constructed, erected, or placed material or combination of materials in or upon the ground, excluding fences, walls, side & rear decks, sidewalks, stairs and paving on streets, driveways and patios. Building official means the Building Commissioner, or his/her designee. Calendar day means any day of the week, including a Saturday or a Sunday or a holiday. City clerk means the person holding the office of city clerk in the city. Demolition means the act of pulling down, destroying, removing, moving, or razing a building. Demolition includes commencing the work of the destruction of 50 percent or more of the exterior surface area (including walls and roof) of a building. For the purposes of this section, the term "demolition" shall not include routine maintenance as long as the maintenance undertaken does not fit the definitions of demolition contained in this section. For the purposes of this section, "demolition" does not include: (1) Removal, replacement, or installation of siding, roof shingles or windows; (2) Routine maintenance as long as the maintenance undertaken does not fit the definitions, of demolition contained in this section; (3) Interior renovations (except where the renovation is conducted for the purpose of compromising the integrity of the building); (4) Exploratory demolition, to the extent that it does not compromise the structure of the building; (5) Interior demolition, to the extent that it does not compromise the structure of the building; or (6) Minor projects as defined below. Demolition review period means a period of time whereby a window of opportunity is enacted in order to enable the owners of a property, working with the commission or its designees, to determine ways of preserving and/or rehabilitating and/or restoring the property as an alternative to demolition. 1 Exempt areas means the following: (1) The local historic districts as identified in Chapter 131 of the Code of Ordinances; and, (2) Buildings owned by the city. Exploratory demolition is the act of removing or uncovering (non-structural) building materials located on the interior of a building prior to renovation, rehabilitation, restoration, or remodeling in order to verify the existing conditions present in otherwise unexposed areas. Final determination means a determination that a building is preferably preserved, made by the commission in accordance with subsection (6) of this section. Initial determination means a determination that a building is significant, in accordance with subsection (5) of this section. Minor project is the removal of a portion of a structure for the purpose of only accomplishing one or more of the following: adding a dormer, dormer window, entry canopy, bay, or gable; adding an addition to the side or rear of the structure; adding or altering a portico, porch or deck; or, changing the shape, style or structure of a roof. Owner means the entity with legal title to a building. Permit means a written permit issued by the Building official that allows for the demolition (as defined herein) of a building pursuant to an application. Person means an individual, corporation, partnership, association, trust, society, or similar entity. Preferably preserved (building) means a significant building, which, as the commission determines, as provided in this section, is in the public interest to be preserved or rehabilitated or restored rather than to be demolished. Premises means the parcel of land upon which the building proposed for demolition is located. Reasonable economic return means the cost to rehabilitate or restore the building to the point at which a reasonable use or a reasonable profit can be realized from the property. This may mean bringing a building up to code to the point at which it can be occupied, not necessarily to its “highest and best use,” preferred use or a restoration project. Significant (building) means any building within the city which is listed on, or is within an area listed on, the National Register of Historic Places, or which is the subject of a pending application for listing on the National Register, or is built on or before the year 1899 and has been determined by the commission in their initial determination to be a significant building, per subsection (5) of this section. Voluntary means any act(s) done by design or intention, which is proposed, intended, or not accidental. An act of God is not considered voluntary, but rather is regarded as an act done without the will or choice of the applicant (or owner, if different from applicant). 3. Review of demolitions. No building in the city may undergo demolition except through the provisions of this section. Demolition may only be permitted if one of the following apply: A. The building does not meet the prima facie definition of a significant building (i.e. built after 1899, and is not currently on, or proposed to be placed on, the National Register); B. The building is located within an exempt area; C. The building is determined by the commission or its designee to not be significant; D. The building is determined by the commission or its designee to be significant, and has met any condition of such determination; E. The building is determined by the commission to not be preferably preserved, and has met any condition of such determination; F. The commission lifts or shortens a demolition review period; or G. The demolition review period is exhausted. 2 4. Application and Notification. A. An applicant can complete a demolition review application, using the forms developed per subsection (10)(B) for the Historical Commission’s review at any time for a building that requires this review. B. When the building official or planning director receives an application for a demolition permit, a building permit or a permit for zoning relief (including but not limited to special permit, site plan review or variance), for work that will constitute demolition, and is on a building that is or could be determined significant, and is not within an exempt area, and for which a demolition review application has not been submitted, then the building official or planning director shall, within ten calendar days, notify: i. the commission or its designees in writing that a relevant application has been received. This notification shall include a copy of the application, and shall be delivered to the commission or its designees by interoffice mail, email, other electronic means, or by in-hand delivery; and, ii. the applicant to complete and submit a demolition review application to the commission. 5. Initial determination (determination of significance). A. Determinations by the commission. The commission shall move to determine if a building is significant, as follows: i. If a building is listed on, or is within an area listed on, the National Register of Historic Places, or the subject of a pending application for listing on the National Register, it shall be automatically determined significant, and shall be scheduled for final determination of this section. ii. Otherwise, for buildings built on or before 1899 the, upon receipt of an application, the commission shall make a written determination whether the building, which is the subject of the relevant permit application, is a significant building. B. Criteria for determination of significance. To determine if a building built on or before 1899 is significant, the commission must make a finding by majority vote that the building is: i. Associated with one or more important historic persons or events, or with the broad architectural, cultural, political, economic or social history of the city or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts; or, ii. Historically or architecturally significant (in terms of period, style, method of building construction, or association with a reputed architect or builder) either by itself or in the context of a group of buildings; and therefore it is in the public interest for the premises to be explored further through the final determination process. The commission in making a determination that a building is significant under this section shall consider the following criteria: a. Setting - the character of the location and how the building is situated in relationship to other features, such as the streetscape and neighboring buildings. b. Materials - the elements that were originally combined to construct the building, sometimes referred to as historic building fabric. c. Design - reflects the historic building style. d. Location - the place where the building was originally placed. e. Workmanship - evidence of the builder’s craft skills and technology. f. Expression - the expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular time period. g. Association - the direct link between an important event or person and the building. The commission shall adopt standards that detail the process for the evaluation of the foregoing criteria to allow for reasoned and predictable decision-making. These standards shall include minimum requirements for evidence needed to support findings of significance and they shall outline the method by which the commission will weigh the criteria presented. C. Procedure for public meeting, notice and hearing. i. The determination of significance of detached garages, outbuildings, sheds and similar accessory 3 buildings shall be made at a public meeting. The public meeting shall occur within 21 days of the application submission to the commission. If the commission determines such a building does not meet the criteria of this section, and is therefore not significant, this determination shall be transmitted to the building official. Otherwise, the applicant shall proceed with the request for a final determination in a public hearing per subsection (6). ii. A determination of significance shall be made in a duly noticed public hearing by the commission, except as specified in subsection (C)(i) above. The public hearing shall be held within 65 calendar days of the commission or its designees receiving a copy of the application, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. The commission shall give the public notice of the hearing by publishing the time, place, and purpose of the hearing in a local newspaper, at least 14 days prior to the hearing. The commission shall also mail, in a form designated by the city, a notice to the applicant, the owner of the building and abutters to the subject property, postmarked at least ten days prior to the hearing. The Applicant shall pay the cost of the newspaper notice and postage of mailed notices. The commission shall complete the public hearing within 35 days of opening the public hearing, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. iii. At the public hearing for the initial determination the commission may elect to waive the notification of a second public hearing for the final determination if it determines that the building is significant and it finds that the conditions specified in subsection (6)(E)(3) can be applied without the need for a more extensive time to prepare for and review the application for the final determination. D. Notice of decision. i. If the commission determines that the building is not a significant building, this determination shall be transmitted to the building official, the applicant, the owner of the building and to the city clerk within 14 calendar days from the date of determination. The applicant shall not be required to take any further steps toward preservation of the building and the demolition may proceed, subject to all other building permit and zoning requirements. ii. If the commission determines that the building is significant, it shall notify the building official, the applicant, and the city clerk, of its determination within 14 calendar days from the date of determination. The owner or applicant, or their representatives, shall then be required to attend a subsequent final determination public hearing with the commission during which the commission will determine if the building is to be preferably preserved, unless the commission proceeds with conditions as specified in subsection (5)(C)(iii). iii. If the commission fails to act in accordance with this process within the prescribed timeframe, the building official may grant the demolition permit, provided that the applicant has met all other requirements under the filed applications, and shall notify the commission in writing that the permit has been granted. E. Waiver of initial determination. An applicant, when submitting the required documents for an initial determination, may voluntarily select to waive the initial determination. If the initial determination is waived, the building shall immediately be determined to be a significant building, without further action from the commission, and shall be scheduled for a final determination per subsection (6). F. Expiration. An initial determination is valid for three years. If an applicant does not proceed to apply for final determination within three years, the review process must start over from the beginning, prior to a building being demolished. If an application does not demolish a building within three years of a determination that the building is not a significant building, the review process must start over from the beginning, prior to a building being demolished. 6. Final determination (determination of preferably preserved). A. Additional application materials. Applicants who did not submit an application for an initial determination must submit an application to the commission for a final determination. Applicants that submitted an application for an initial determination may need to provide additional information, in the process of a final determination, as follows. 4 In the event that the applicant and/or owner seek to take a position that the building is of deficient structural integrity, the applicant shall submit an independent licensed structural engineer’s report, from a qualified and experienced structural engineer with proven expertise in historic building techniques. In the event that the applicant and/or owner seek to take a position that a financial hardship applies to a property, the commission may request any or all of the following. It will be incumbent upon the applicant to provide such information in order for the demolition review process to continue: i. The appraised value of the property by a licensed appraiser for the following conditions: in the property’s current condition; after completion of the proposed demolition; and after rehabilitation of the existing property for continued use. ii. An estimate from an architect, developer, contractor, or appraiser experienced in rehabilitation as to the cost to rehabilitate the building to the point of which a reasonable use or a reasonable profit can be realized from the property. Such considerations may include, but not be limited to, bringing a building up to code so it can be occupied. iii. The amount paid for the property, the date of purchase, and the person from whom the property was purchased, a description of the relationship, if any, between the owner of record, the applicant and the person from whom the property was purchased or is being purchased, and the terms of the purchase or proposed purchase, including financing. iv. Any listing of the property for sale or rent, the price asked and offers received for sale or rent, if any, within the previous five years. v. The assessed value of the property for the previous two assessment years. vi. Any other information considered necessary by the commission to determine whether the property yields or may yield a reasonable economic return to the property owner(s). vii. Documents, including copies of invoices, detailing the applicant’s efforts in ongoing maintenance and repair. B. Procedure for public notice and meetings. The commission shall conduct a public hearing on the application within 45 calendar days of the initial determination of significance or of receiving an application if one had not been submitted for an initial determination, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. The commission shall give the public notice of the hearing by publishing the time, place, and purpose of the hearing in a local newspaper, at least 14 calendar days prior to the hearing. The commission shall also mail, in a form designated by the city, a notice to the applicant, the owner of the building and abutters, postmarked at least ten calendar days prior to the hearing. The Applicant shall pay the cost of the newspaper notice and postage of mailed notices. C. Public hearing. The commission shall complete the public hearing within 35 days of opening the public hearing regarding the determination of “preferably preserved”, unless an extension of time is permitted by mutual agreement of the applicant and the commission. The applicant or their agent must present their demolition request in person to the commission and be prepared to answer questions asked by the commission. If the applicant, their agent, or property owner is unable to address questions regarding the demolition request or the supporting documentation, the experts/professionals who prepared the information must be present. If the applicant, owner or their agent cannot attend the meeting or adequately address questions, the application will be continued to a later meeting and the commission’s determination will be delayed. D. Peer review. The commission may call for a peer review of any professional report, should the commission deem it necessary to make a final determination, subject to the availability of funds. E. Final determination. Upon completion of the public hearing, the commission shall determine if a significant building shall be preferably preserved by majority vote of the commission, as follows: i. The commission may, at their discretion, determine that a building is a preferably preserved building, as follows: by determining that the demolition of the building would be detrimental to the 5 architectural, cultural, political, economic, or social heritage of the city. ii. The commission may, at their discretion, determine that a building is not a preferably preserved building, as follows: by determining that demolition of the building would not be detrimental to the architectural, cultural, political, economic, or social heritage of the city; or, by making a finding that the negative impact on the heritage of the city would be exceeded by the practical considerations of the conditions of the building and premises. iii. The commission may, at their discretion, place conditions on a determination that a building is not preferably preserved, which may require an applicant to provide one or more of the following to the planning department prior to demolition: 1. photographic documentation of the building to be demolished; 2. architectural renderings of the building to be demolished; 3. identification of materials for salvage of material; and/or, 4. a plan for installation of historic or interpretive signage at or near the site. F. Filing of decision. Within 14 calendar days following the date of the public hearing, the commission or its designees shall file a final determination, in writing, with the city clerk, and shall inform the building official, the applicant and the owner of the building. G. Expiration. A final determination that a building is not a preferably preserved building is valid for three years. If an applicant does not demolish a building within three years of a determination that the building is not a preferably preserved building, the process must start over from the beginning prior to a building being demolished. 7. Process for preferably preserved buildings. A. Demolition review period. Upon the commission’s final determination that said building is preferably preserved the building official shall not issue a demolition permit for building during the demolition review period. The demolition review period shall be as follows: The demolition review period shall be a maximum of 12 months. The demolition review period shall begin on the date following the day upon which the commission made the final determination that building is preferably preserved. B. Alternatives to demolition. During the demolition review period, the applicant, their agent, and/or the owner (if different from applicant), and the commission or its designees are encouraged to actively pursue alternatives to demolition of the preferably preserved building, including but not limited to, finding a buyer for the building that is willing to rehabilitate the property, rather than demolish it. The applicant, their agent, and/or the owner is encouraged to actively pursue alternatives to demolition by meeting with the commission at a minimum of once per month during the demolition review period. C. Shortening/ending the demolition review period. The commission may shorten or end the demolition period, at its discretion, upon determination that one of the following conditions applies: i. The commission determines that there is no reasonable likelihood that either the owner or some other person or group is willing to purchase, preserve, rehabilitate or restore such building. ii. The commission and the applicant come to a mutually agreeable plan for a more limited demolition that adequately preserves the property to address the commission’s considerations in determining that the building is ‘preferably preserved’. iii. The commission and the applicant come to a mutually agreeable set of strategies for addressing the heritage on the site, including but not limited to: 1. photographic documentation of the building to be demolished; 2. architectural renderings of the building to be demolished; 3. identification of materials for salvage of material; 4. a plan for installation of historic or interpretive signage at or near the site; and/or, 5. the establishment of design standards for a replacement building, provided that the standards are limited to the reflection of elements in the building to be demolished or are intended to complement the character of adjacent buildings of historical significance. 6 Upon making a determination to shorten or end the demolition review period, the commission shall file a decision and inform the applicant and the building official. D. Withdrawal. If the applicant chooses not to proceed with demolition, the applicant may, at any time, inform the commission and withdraw their application without prejudice. E. Expiration. Upon expiration of a demolition review period, or upon a determination by the commission to shorten or end a demolition review period, an applicant shall have three years to demolish the building. If an application does not demolish a building within three years of the expiration of the review period or the determination to shorten or end the review period, the process must start over from the beginning prior to a building being demolished. 8. Enforcement. A. Authority. The Inspectional Services Department is the enforcing authority for this section. The Building official is authorized to institute any and all actions and proceedings, in law or in equity, as they deem necessary and appropriate to obtain compliance with the requirements of this section. This may include, but is not limited to, the complete reconstruction and restoration of the demolished building. B. Fines. The provisions of this section may be enforced by a noncriminal disposition pursuant to M.G.L. c. 40, § 21D. Each violation shall be deemed a separate offense. Each day a violation occurs shall be deemed a separate offense. Unless otherwise provided, any person, firm, corporation, association or other entity violating any provision of this section shall be punished by a fine of $300.00 per day, per violation. Unpaid fines shall result in a municipal lien against the subject property. C. Building permit delay. No building permit shall be issued for a new building on any premises where a significant building is demolished in violation of this section for 18 months from the demolition of the building. 9. City-owned buildings. A. Exemption. As noted in the definition of “exempt area,” buildings owned by the city are not subject to the demolition review process. B. Historical commission review. Prior to the demolition of any building owned by the city that was built on or before the year 1899, the city administration shall submit information about the demolition to the commission for a non-binding review and comment. C. Comment meeting. The commission shall schedule, at their next available public meeting, for the city administration to present the building to be demolished and the purpose and need for the demolition. D. Commission role. After the presentation by the city administration, the commission may, within 35 days, issue comments on the demolition. Comments will be provided to the city administration and the city council. Those comments may include, but not be limited to: suggestions for photographic documentation or renderings of the building to be demolished, identification of materials for salvage and/or suggestions for installation of historic or interpretive signage at or near the site. 10. Other provisions. A. Secure building. Upon a determination by the commission that a building is a significant and/or a preferably preserved building, the owner shall be responsible for properly securing the building in order to protect it from the weather and trespass/vandalism. The destruction of a significant building for failure to properly secure or maintain it shall be considered voluntary and is a violation of this section. B. Rules and regulations. The commission may establish rules and regulations of procedure for the implementation of this section, including but not limited to establishment of application fees. The planning staff shall develop application forms to accept and process submittals under this section. C. Transferability. Where the owner sells or transfers ownership of a property that is in the middle of the demolition review process, that new owner may continue the review process but may be required to submit updated documentation as required by the commission. D. Effect. This section shall take effect upon approval. The Ordinance and amendments thereto do not apply to applications for demolition submitted prior to the approval date. 7 E. Severability and reinstatement. In case any section, paragraph or part of this section for any reason shall be declared invalid by any court, every other section, paragraph and part shall continue in full force and effect. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this section is held invalid, the relevant section, sentence, clause or phrase in effect prior to the effective date of the section shall be reinstated in full force and effect, without further action from the city council. 8

Transcript

▶ 10:35 In accordance with Massachusetts Open Meeting Law, this meeting is being broadcast and recorded by Melrose Cable Access TV and will be available for viewing in its entirety on MMTV and through the city website link. Madame Clerk, will you please call the roll? (clears throat) Councilor Finocchiaro. Here. Councilor Garipay. Here. Councilor Hamilton. Here. Councilor Jamaleddine. Here. Councilor Karamcheti. Here. Councilor Abramski. Councilor Romanul. Here. Councilor Stewart. Here. Councilor Vandiver. Here. Councilor Williams. Here. President Migliorelli. Here. That makes for a quorum. Okay. At this time, please rise if you are able to join in the Pledge of Allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of

▶ 11:27 Leila Migliorelli: America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Um, at this time, I will motion by unanimous consent without reading the, um, read, uh, approve the minutes, um, from City Council special meeting on November 24th, 2025. Seeing no objection, those minutes are now approved.Moving on to public comment. I will motion by unanimous consent to open the floor for public comment. Seeing no objections, we are now open for public comment. Per Rule thir- 33A of the Melrose City Council Rules, this is a portion of the meeting where the public may speak on any item on tonight's agenda. Comments expressing any viewpoint on other matters are also welcome.

▶ 12:23 Leila Migliorelli: Just a reminder that the public comment period is an opportunity for the public to share comments. Councilors will not respond. The public has up to five minutes for public comment. Um, is there anyone in the public wishing to speak tonight? You can just approach the table right there and state your name. Uh, good evening. Jim Bennett, 45 Wentworth Road. Hello, President Migliorelli and councilors. Sorry if I'm a little less coherent tonight, I'm recovering from a cold. I didn't prepare any comments, but I did feel moved to come down here tonight. And I'm here to speak about the draft demolition review, uh, resolution which you have before you. I just want to respond to a couple of, um, opposition sentiments on that, and then to talk just about the,

▶ 13:10 um, proposed, um, time period for what structures would be considered under it. So first of all, and a couple of objections. Um, first of all, I know you received a, a letter to this effect, that this is something that is being done in great haste. And in fairness, I think bre- it was Councilor Hamilton who last time said, "Oh, this is a bit hasty." From my point of view, there's nothing hasty about this. As I mentioned at the last meeting, 10 years ago, I was working on this. And the Historical Commission, we had all of these old files with all the work that other commissioners had done before us. There were people who put a draft resolution on demo r-review together in 2003, if I recall correctly. So this is 20 years of

▶ 13:48 wisdom, along with the wisdom coming from the City of Somerville, thanks to, uh, Laurie Massa, coming into this document. And yes, it is being done in response to the potential demolition of a particular house, and I'm glad the public's attention has been brought to this on account of that potential demolition, but that's typically how these things work. Some emergency comes to the fore and suddenly this thing that has been worked upon for so many years can now finally get the attention it deserves. So, I don't think it's an emergency thing, and it's not really about that house, because this will affect hundreds, if not thousands of structures. It's not targeting anyone in particular in any way, and there are no possible

▶ 14:25 legal repercussions to come from that. Uh, that's my point number one. Point number two is, there was comment made about, "Well, we've heard from some members of the planning board, but what about the zoning board? What about the building inspector?" I would just remind you of this, this, uh, ordinance would set up a set of powers for a particular organization with a particular competency, which is on historic preservation. It doesn't overlap with the planning board. It doesn't overlap with the zoning board. Now, the planning board, as you know, does a very complex job. I couldn't imagine even being on it. They have so much they have to think about. And for them, historic preservation has been something way down

▶ 15:03 the list of things they have to consider. But it's not their competency. And what this does is, it creates another board working in a different competency that they now don't have to worry about whatsoever. So there are parallel processes that go on and they don't actually intersect. So the idea that as a courtesy you could ask the planning board, "What do you think of that?" That's fine, but the idea that they should have some sort of veto on this or that ultimately their opinion matters somehow more than say any other group of Melrosians doesn't quite make sense to me. It's kind of like asking the Historical Commission what they think of what the Conservation Commission is doing. Sure, they have an opinion, it may be informed, but they are very different

▶ 15:41 things. I just wanted to address those two objections, potential objections to this. And then secondly, I just want to mention about the window of time under which structures would be treated, which I did write in extensive comments to this board. Uh, I submitted that last night. Uh, there seemed to be two objections to the 100-year window. The first one was, "Well, let's just concentrate on the buildings that are older." But the thing is, older buildings are not necessarily more significant buildings. And the example I gave was the old Moynihan Plaza building. The bones of that ugly eyesore building went back to the 1870s. That was actually an old building, but it wasn't worth saving just because it was old. There are other buildings like that.

▶ 16:20 There are plenty of buildings that are, um, just gable end houses. We have dozens and dozens of examples of this built between 1825 and 1875. If one of them went down, it wouldn't be the biggest tragedy in the world. But, there are some utterly gorgeous houses, shingle style houses, Queen Anne style houses built between 1900 and 1925, early colonial revival styles. This is the place where Royal Barry Wills, the great colonial revival architect, started his practice. And those would not be covered under a demo delay that ended in 1899. The other part of that is there seemed to be an argument that, well, if we cover up to 50% of buildings, that's too many buildings. But my feeling's quite the opposite.

▶ 17:05 I think to myself, I want more buildings covered under this. And if you go with that larger number, uh, Director Massa told us last time that really only covers about nine buildings over a three-year period, according to her estimates. So really, you'd be looking at a rate of maybe three, maybe four buildings a year. If you bring it down to 1899, maybe the Historical Commission only has one building a year, so they really, at that point, are twiddling their thumbs. They don't have much to do. And bear in mind, just because it's covered under that window, it doesn't mean it's significant. So, so many houses that are pretty mediocre that I think Councilor Camaretti, Camaretti, you mentioned your cute house that, you know, isn't, isn't

▶ 17:45 that significant maybe? Well, they would take one look at that and say, "It's a very cute house. It's not historically significant, so thank you, you're done here." And then they would not wait a year. It would just be over. So I'd just like you to think about these things in these terms. Last thing I will say, it is so important to me that a demo review just gets passed. So if you want to stick with the 1899 year, uh...You know, if I were in your position, I would say vote for it 'cause we get it on the books. We can adjust it a bit later. But if you have time tonight, and I know you have a pretty full schedule, I think a little bit of discussion about do we really want to move away from that

▶ 18:18 100-year standard that your director, uh, of, uh, p- of, uh, the Office of Planning and Community, uh, uh... Sorry, brain not functioning right now- (laughs) ... Laurie Massa, a lovely person, told you, um, it's worth having that discussion. Breath. That's all I have to say. It was off the top of my head. Sorry if it was a bit incoherent. And I'm done. Thank you. (laughs) Thank you. Um, I just want to point out for the public, at 8:00 we have a public hearing on the property tax classification. That leaves us with four minutes. If there is someone in public wanting to speak, they think they can keep it under four minutes, I'm happy to have you, uh, participate and share your comments now. Otherwise, we'll wait until after the public com- other...

▶ 18:54 after the public hearing. Hi. Thank you. Um, Pat O'Leary Thorpe, 52 Maple Street. Um, I just want to, uh, urge you all, I called some of you and, uh, I just wa- I contacted some of you and I just want to urge you all to pass this demo review, um, ordinance. Melrose, having lived here all my life, is- is just moving too fast and we're seeing, um, things come up after the fact. And so giving it... this would give the citizens more time to plan and look forward to as well as the different boards that exist. So please pass this review. Thank you. Thank you. Is there anyone else wanting to speak in public comment? I'm serious about 24 Main Street. I'm serious. (laughs) Michael Abdow, 253 Main Street. I am here today to talk

▶ 19:47 about, um, the ordinance that we're- we were just discussing. Uh, I'm an abutter to 244 Main Street, the Benjamin Lind home. Uh, it is a beautiful gem of a home. It's a beautiful piece of property. I'm very, very fortunate to have that as, um, a neighbor. Um, I'm very, very concerned about the development. Uh, I'm very concerned about losing that home. Um, and more than anything, um, I'm really concerned about the, uh, disturbance that this development is gonna have, uh, for my family, uh, for our property. And, um, I have a lot of questions, so I'll be reaching out to some folks. Uh, I'm in Ward 5 and, um, I- I urge you all to, um, please go ahead and pass that ordinance so we can, um, at least get ourselves some time and,

▶ 20:40 Paul Brodeur: uh, give attention to the value of the history of Melrose. And this home is a prime example of that vi- value. Thank you so much. Thank you. Anyone else willing to... Two minutes. (laughs) Former mayor. (laughs) Terrified to be here. It's good to see you all again. Um, Paul Broder, private citizen, 125, uh, Trenton Street. When I first heard about demo delay, it was in the context of, um, what we called at the time Oak Grove Village. There were some folks, um, that took their interest from that. At that time, that was a concern to block a particular development that, you know, from one person's perspective was a bunch of dilapidated factories, uh, weren't- weren't worthy of preservation, of course. A more informed body could probably

▶ 21:37 Paul Brodeur: do that better. Um, fast-forward to my time as mayor when we were considering development of Essex Street across the street, and that's a little bit of a different thing is that is a, uh, a demo prohibition based on its presence in historic district. Little bit of a different animal. Um, those buildings from a layperson's point of view, old, dilapidated, basically failing, not doing much for the tax rolls, to be sure. Uh, and it took that building through original permitting being demo being blocked, 40B sale of the property, potential for calling out of 40B and then- and then back into 40B with some evidence along the way that quite frankly was a little bit suspect around some of the finishing and the sconces.

▶ 22:29 Paul Brodeur: Um, so that- that certainly concerned me and again, that- that- that kept the property off the tax rolls for a significant amount of time. Demo delay in and of itself isn't a bad idea, right? It's all how it happens and how it's executed and what- and what body does it. Um, on- on a kind of a... I'm- I'm- I think the 1899 date is a good one for the reasons that Ms. Massa explained, uh, along the way. Um, but I'm thinking about the administrative piece because, well, the historic commission, while we're not recruited with the idea of administering this change, certainly has a skill set around evaluating historic properties. But as I understand the ordinance, the- the- the proposal, the latest version says it will take effect immediately and I get

▶ 23:27 Paul Brodeur: why. That's because of the concern about that awesome property on Main Street. But the ordinance also says that that body is going to have to create applications and processes by which this will be administered. So I'm not sure, given the- the desire to be expedited, how, uh, how is that gonna work until that body has the opportunity to flesh out, you know, the draft regs, draft procedures to make that happen. Uh, and finally, since I know folks have talked a lot about with good reason how many communities do demo delay. And that's- it's absolutely true. Um, but in this area-A lot of communities around us, not only do demo delay, but they've done the Community Preservation Act. I suspect no one really is too excited about

▶ 24:25 Paul Brodeur: talking about the potential of another tax increase- (laughs) ... going before the vo- going before the voters probably in the next 10 years. That, (laughs) that having been said, without resources to put into community preservation, um, real dollars, that's, that's where the power is. If you really want to protect a property- (clears throat) ... permanently, you need to intervene more aggressively kind of thing. You need to buy it, right? You ne- you, it, it's, it's almost too easy to say to a private property owner, "I got bad news for you. We have d- you, you've owned this for X amount of time. We are gonna limit your ability, potentially, to profit off this." Now, bigger developers will get through it because they have the financial resources to kind of

▶ 25:16 Paul Brodeur: ride out the process, which is a year plus the bureaucratic steps that it takes you to get to a year, so I suspect it's closer to maybe a year and a half if someone's really, really gonna fight it. Um, but to do, you know, to put our money where our mouths are and put dollars behind community preservation and not just put it on the property owners, I do think takes a, a mechanism like CPA in the long run. I know we're not there yet, but I thought that was an important thing to share. Thank you. You bet. Okay. Um, we will recess from public comment and open it back up after the public hearing. So, since we were running seven minutes late, um, I will motion by unanimous consent to open the public hearing for the

▶ 26:05 Leila Migliorelli: FY26 Property Tax Classification, um, discussion. We have with us tonight, um, the, uh, Head of the Assessing Office, um, Sarah McLellan, I believe. Yes. Um, and she will be presenting, she will present the information. Councilors will have opportunities to ask questions. And if there are, if there's any public comment on this, um, we can do that after, um, the questions. So, uh, with no further delay, um, Ms. McLellan? Good evening, President Cicoreale, um, City Councilors, and members of the public. I'm Sarah McLellan. I'm the Chief Assessor and Chair of the Board of Assessors. And joining me this evening are my fellow board members, Cathy Collino and Lee Fallon. And we are presenting information for the Property Tax Classification Hearing for the fiscal year

▶ 27:27 2026. This presentation is posted with the meeting agenda packet this evening, and it's also ac- accessible on the Assessor's page of the city's website. (clears throat) Each year, the Assessor's Department is responsible for developing values of all real and personal property in the city. For fiscal year 2026, Melrose has a total of 9,490 real estate parcels and 298 taxable personal property accounts. The purpose of this hearing and subsequent vote by the City Council is to adopt the city's tax policy by allocating the tax levy among, among the five classes of property. Those are residential, open space, commercial, industrial, and personal property. After the hearing, the City Council, with the approval of the mayor,

▶ 28:20 must select a residential factor or tax shift. This factor governs the percentage of the tax levy to be paid by residential properties in the city. The difference is then shifted to the commercial, industrial, and per- personal property classes. Before discussing the tax shift, I'd like to review the Senior Means Tested Exemption program. This is a home rule petition that began in Melrose in fiscal year 2023. (coughs) Governor Healey signed a bill into law this past September which renewed the program and allows the Melrose Board of Assessors to grant this exemption to elevl se- eligible seniors in fiscal years 26, 27, and 28. The legislation allows the Board of Assessors to qualify senior applicants for tax relief by

▶ 29:07 a state income tax credit referred to as the Circuit Breaker Credit. Qualified applicants receive a property tax exemption equal to 100% of their State Circuit Breaker Income Tax Credit. The total amount of the exempted value is to be allocated within the tax levy or shifted to the residential taxpayers. This year, the Board of Assessors received 88 applications for this program. Of those, 85 exemptions were granted by the board. The total cost of the program this year is $157,239, which is borne only by the residential class. This adds two cents to the residential tax rate, which is two cents per thousand dollars of assessed value, or about $17 on the average single family tax bill. So, the total amount that can be raised in taxes remains the same whether or

▶ 30:03 not there is a tax shift. The shift does not raise more revenue, it simply changes the allocation of the tax burden among the classes of taxpayers. For fiscal year 2026, adopting a factor of one would result in a residential tax rate of $11.93 per thousand dollars of property value.Adopting a factor of less than one to as low as the minimum residential factor results in an increasingly greater tax burden shift from the residential class to the commercial, industrial- (gavel bangs) ... and personal property classes. The minimum residential factor is determined annually by the Department of Revenue, and this year again allows for a full shift of 175%. The tax shift of 175 refers to CIP owners paying property taxes at

▶ 30:50 175% of the rate that would apply if all properties, residential and commercial, were taxed at a single rate. Hold on (whispers) can you see? I lost the... (light switch clicks) It'll come back. Oh wait, that's wrong from the... Sorry. I hope someone's got a little (both talking) . It's okay. Oh, right there. Okay. Okay (laughs) We're good. A little wonky. (laughs) . Okay. So, this slide is showing the percentage of the levy class before any shift. So 95% of the property value in Melrose- (coughs) . ... is residential. There's also a breakdown of the number of parcels by property type. The total taxable value in Melrose is now at about $8 billion. Uh, on November 13th, the Department of Revenue certified

▶ 31:38 Melrose, Melrose's fiscal year 2026 new growth of $780,859. This adds an additional 1% to the tax levy this year. This graphic shows the breakdown of new growth over the past five years. There are several, several recently developed or under construction mixed-use properties which will contribute growth in the upcoming years. About 20% of new growth this year is from four large top taxpayer utilities and telecommunication personal property accounts. For residential growth, we had 12 to 16 Essex Street and 453 Franklin Street mixed-use building projects and a number of new homes and condos. And I just want to recognize our Assistant Assessor, Tina Salerno, who played a key role in analyzing and capturing the new growth with me during

▶ 32:30 this busy year. (phone rings) So for the next one, um, this shows how we arrive at the tax rate for the fiscal year. So on the left is, um, a Department of Revenue form (laughs) uh, that shows the s- total values in Melrose by property type. It may be a bit difficult to see, but, uh, the number's in each class, but at the bottom it shows the total taxable valuation at roughly $8 billion. So we start with the tw- fiscal year 2025 levy limit. We add the amended growth from the previous year, we add 2.5% as allowed through Massachusetts Law Prop 2.5. We add the certified new growth and then we add the 13.5 million from the override vote, then add the fiscal year 2026 debt service to a- to arrive at

▶ 33:21 the max allowable levy of $95,789,625. We take that number and we divide by the fiscal year '26 total taxable value in the city to arrive at the single tax rate of $11.91 per $1,000 of assessed value. For the residential tax rate, we add the two cents to the single rate to cover the cost of the circuit breaker exemption to get $11.93 if there's no further shift. The commercial rate would remain at $11.91. So as I mentioned earlier, the assessors determine the full and fair cash value of all real and personal property in the city as of January 1st. The market values for the fiscal year 2026 are determined using arm's length sales from calendar year 2024. The average value of a single family home for this fiscal year '26 is

▶ 34:12 $853,264, a 4.4% increase from last year. I have factored in the exempted assessed value from the senior circuit breaker exemption to determine this, um, average single family value as of now, but it could change slightly once the fa- um, final tax rates have been set. So this slide just shows the, um, changes year over year and total assessed value by the property type. Um, there were- wasn't any, any significant value changes in any property type this year. Um, this is showing the assessed values by class over the last six years. So the residential class was around $5.8 billion in 2021, and for fiscal year 2026, the value is now at $7.6 billion. Um, and then this slide is a comparison of Melrose and some of its

▶ 35:14 surrounding communities' fiscal year 2025 average single family assessed values, tax bills, and residential tax rates. Um, the next slide here shows the fiscal year 2025 residential to CIP percentage of total value in Melrose versus its surrounding communities. I just want to make a note here 'cause I received a question about it. Um, Lynnfield, Malden, Saugus, Stoneham, and Wakefield typically shift to their maximum allowable shift. Um, Reading this year chose a 1.14 shift, and Winchester has historically chosen to maintain a flat rate, no shift. Um, this shows the, um, historical levy p- percentage paid by the residential and CIP classes after the shift. While the residential class has made up 95% of the property value over the last

▶ 36:19 decade and beyond, the City Council has chosen a shift so that the residential class (clears throat) has paid only 91 to 92% of the levy.So these are the shifts that have been chosen for the past 10 years, the average single family tax bill, and the average impact year over year. Last year, a shift of 1.73 was chosen, which increased the average single fam- family tax bill by 3% or $238 over the prior year. In the absence of override years, the average single family bill has increased an average of 3% per year in the last decade. And it's not shown here, uh, but the last year, last year, the average commercial bill increased $495 or 3.6% from 2024 to 2025. So this graphic demonstrates the effect of the tax

▶ 37:18 shift. So we're looking at the tax rate options applied to the average single family value and the average commercial value. I just wanna make a note here that the average commercial value is calculated only from commercial parcels and the commercial value of mixed-use parcels. Industrial and personal property accounts also pay the CIP rate, and some of the city's top s- taxpayers are in those sectors. For example, our top utility companies are valued at 54 million and 43 million. An average commercial building would be similar to the medical office buildings along Main Street. With no shift or choosing a residential factor of one, the single family tax bill would increase by about $2,084, and the commercial bill would de-

▶ 38:05 decrease 32% by S- $4,614. With the max shift of 1.75, the average single family bill would increase 1,683 at about a 20.8% change, and the commercial bill would increase 2,718 or about 18.9%. So, historically, the city has always budgeted to levy at the maximum allowable amount under Prop 2 1/2. However, because the tax rate and levy calculation involves rounding and we cannot go over the maximum allowable levy, the actual tax levy often falls slightly below the true maximum. The di- this difference between the maximum allowable levy and the amount we are able to levy at the chosen shift is referred to as our excess levy capacity. It's not a tax policy chose- choice, but simply a r- result of rounding when the

▶ 39:05 tax rate is applied to each class of property. So this brings us, uh, to the shift options. Um, this, the complete list of shift options is on the next slide, but here I included only the range that the council has conside- considered and chosen from in the past decade. On the left in green, you will see the residential rate, the corresponding average single family tax bill, the dollar increase, and the percent increase from last year. On the right in blue is the corresponding CIP rate, the average commercial bill at that rate, the dollar increase, and the percent increase. As a reminder, the t- fiscal year 2025 residential rate was 9.90 and the commercial rate was 17.75. And while we speak of the shift in discussion, when voting, the council

▶ 39:54 must select the residential factor that corresponds to the co- the chosen shift. Please note that the final tax rates and excess levy capacity may change slightly when we submit these numbers to the Department of Revenue, again, due to rounding. And then the la- the next slide is, um, the list of all the options available and the effect at each interval from 1 to 1.75. And the final slide, for reference, I included definitions of some of the terms we used during the tax classification hearing. Um, and just another reminder about the resident, selecting the residential factor, not the shift number. Uh, we can go back to that slide, um, so that you can review the options. Um, otherwise, that concludes my presentation, and I am happy to

▶ 40:43 Kimberly Vandiver: answer any questions that you have. Thank you. That presentation was very helpful. Um, I will now entertain any questions from my colleagues. Councilor Vandiver? Thank you, Pres- (clears throat) thank you, President Migliorelli. Thank you, uh, Assessor McClellan. Um, I had two primary points I wanted to, to hit on. Um, so the first is, uh, a- as you were, um, talking about on the slide showing our peer communities and, and, um, their commercial industrial property percentages, um, you mentioned what they do with their tax shifts, um, and in particular, Winchester, who, other than us, has the lowest CIP percent, has chosen the, the flat shift, the, the 100%. Um, and you mentioned as well, I believe, Reading,

▶ 41:44 Kimberly Vandiver: uh, which is the, the next lowest after us, chose a, a 1.1, so also on the lower end. Um, so, uh, it is my view that whether it's this year or in a future year, I think Melrose should move towards that policy direction of closer to the 100% than the 175%. Um, because we have such a low, um, proportion of commercial industrial property that what we're doing is we're making their tax bills much larger, 175% of what they would pay if it was flat, and we're not helping ourselves that much. There's not that many of them. There's not that many dollars there. And I don't think, uh, you know, if you look at the differences between the 100% and the 175% for residential and for commercial, it's a swing

▶ 42:31 Kimberly Vandiver: of, I think, 600...... for, per average residents and it's swim of like, what? 8,000 for the businesses or something? It's a much bigger impact and drag on the businesses than it is a boost to the residents. So I just, I, I feel like we should strongly consider moving in that direction. I, uh, I understand, you know, I think for this year, I don't know if we wanna swing all the way over, especially in a year with the override passing, um, but, uh, uh, that, that is, uh, my general, um, sense of things. Um, a- and so for that reason, I guess, I, I would be in favor of, you know, on the slide where you ha- of choosing something on the lower end that also doesn't leave a, a lot of estimated excess levy

▶ 43:23 Kimberly Vandiver: capacity. So personally, I would lean towards, for example, a .9675. Um, I, I also wanted to ask you a question about, obviously this is a year where we are looking at a tax increase because of the override passing. Mm-hmm. Um, and I was wondering if you could also, while you're here with us, give us a reminder of what people could do regardless of the rate that we choose tonight if that is a financial difficulty for them? Mm-hmm. Yeah, so we do have, um, all of our, exemptions that are available listed on our website, and we encourage, um, everyone interested to, um, contact the Assessor's Office. We did, um, do a release about it in the weekly newsletter last week, the mayor, from the Mayor's Office.

▶ 44:08 Um, but we also have a deferral program that is not widely util- utilized in Melrose, um, available to adults, uh, 60 and older. It does have, um, income limit of 60,000, um, but de- deferred taxes accumulate just with simple interest at 4.5% as a lien on the property until it's sold or the owner is deceased and that interest is not compounding. Um, but yeah, so that's just another option that's not widely used here in Melrose. Yeah. Th- thank you for that, um, reminder. Um, I guess with that, can I make a motion or? I mean, we can do questions and then... Okay. Um, Councilor Stewart? Thank you, Madam President. And Ms. McLachlan, as always, a, a very clear, concise presentation, I appreciate that.

▶ 45:05 Robb Stewart: (laughs) Thank you. Um, uh, I differ on the opinion that was expressed, uh, Madam President, and, uh, I believe that with the override and the impact that our residents are gonna have this coming year, I think we should shift to the max. Um, and I would support that, uh, completely. I think there's a tremendous burden already that the, uh, taxpayers are gonna be presented with, uh, and I think we can minimize, uh, the overall impact to the best of our ability that's sitting in this council. And that's my intention, is to recognize that there is a burden, uh, within the community that we need to recognize and have that opportunity to address to the best we can. Thank you, Madam President. Okay. Uh, next up, I have Councilor Garipay.

▶ 45:51 Mark Garipay: Thank you, Madam President. Um, I, I do agree with, um, Councilor Stewart. I, I made the motion the last few, few years. I mean, I understand businesses. We're a 95% residential community and we are all elected by the residents. So, uh, my goal is to, to make sure that I can keep their increases as l- low as possible, b- barring the override. This year, we're looking at a 20, 20%, 20, 20.9% or 20.8% increase for residential as it is with the max shift. Um, r- the businesses can go out and generate, generate more revenue. I, I appreciate everything they do, but I, this is a real burden, especially this year on the residentials. And I will not support anything that is not on the higher end of the

▶ 46:44 Ryan Williams: shift that can alleviate any, um, any benefits for the, for the residents that elect us to be here. So, thank you. Any other questions from the council? Councilor Williams? Thank you. Um, through the chair, I wanted to clarify Councilor Vandiver comment. Did- was it said the residential factor of .9675, which would, excuse me, would be the shift of 1.62? Uh, yes. Okay, thank you. Um, as I look at the sheet, this is on the, I guess, on the whole sheet, it is definitely on the higher end. For folks who may not be, um, looking at the sheet, uh, or have easy access to it, we're talking about a difference of, at 1.62, we're talking about $1,752 average change, 21.64% percent change. At the maximum shift, excuse me, at the maximum shift, we're talking about

▶ 47:45 Ryan Williams: $1,683. So that is about $80 a year of residential property taxes. And the shift to commercial at the maximum goes to from 1445 to 2,718. So it goes up about $1300 a year. I am, uh, sensitive to the argument that certain taxpayers, um, are looking for relief. I know that in some cities that have high percentages of residential properties such as Newton, they routinely do the max shift every single year. Um, I like to strike a balance where we're not asking too much of the business community, but we're getting something for residents. So I feel like we may be landing somewhere between that 1.62 and 1.75 area, but I'm- I'd like to hear from more people on the council. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Romanul.

▶ 48:47 Devin Romanul: Um, (clears throat) thank you so much for the presentation. Uh, really appreciate the materials beforehand as well as the, the subsequent explanations. So, a-answered all of my questions right out of the gate. Um, so thank you for that. Um, to my colleagues, uh, I, I just want to say, I, I, I hear what all, all of you are saying. My, um... as I was contemplating either making a motion or just trying to figure out what is the, the right balance, some sort of pain sharing if you will, uh, to make sure that we aren't, uh, overly burdening either party. I know we, we've gotten closer to the max the last couple of years. Um, as someone who owns a small business, the, the, the max number kind of makes me raise my eyebrows.

▶ 49:25 Devin Romanul: I just want to make sure we aren't doing anything that is overly deleterious to their efforts to, uh, run a business in our community. So, I, I think that's one thing I was shying away from, was that, that max number, um, to make sure that we aren't, you know, doing anything overly harmful to operating small businesses. We don't have that many in our city and that's just something I'm, I'm cognizant of, that they're, they're there to serve our populations. One of the wonderful things we have about our downtown is the vibrant, um, shops and businesses that we have there. So, um, my, my instinct had been in that, you know, 1.7, uh, factor of .9631, um, in that territory where you had roughly, you know, the difference between

▶ 50:07 Devin Romanul: that 1.7 shift and the 1.75 shift was, you know, you're, you're talking like $24 on the resident, but saves the, you know, uh, the small business owner, you know, $400 over the course of the year. That felt like a pretty good bounce to me, but I'm really eager to hear what you all have to say. Um, but I did, I did have that reflex of like, "Oh my God." (laughs) Don't want to go all the way pedal to the metal on one side, so. Uh, but, but eager to hear where, where all of you are at. Any other councilors, for the first time? Um, I have just one question. So the, when we're talking about the, the shift to commercial, we're talking about commercial property owners, because it's owning property.

▶ 50:53 Leila Migliorelli: So it's not necessarily small business owners, it's the, it's the people, um, that own the property that which small businesses operate. So you could say that they would pass on the, the burden to small business. They may or may not pass it on, but most of our small businesses are tenants within commercial properties. So it would be taxing the commercial property, the space owners, not the businesses themselves. So just that, that, just clarify that that's correct. Correct, yeah. Okay. Um, thank you. And I just have one other verifying question. Um, no, actually you answered it. I'm all set. Okay. So Councilor Paniciaro for the first time. Yes, thank you President McGillivray. Um, I just want to clarify for the general public, the new apartment buildings that

▶ 51:42 Kimberly Vandiver: are going up, the, the buildings, those are taxed at the residential rate, correct? Or- Um, so some of them have, um, commercial element too. But predominantly residential. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else for the first time? Okay. Uh, Councilor Vandiver. Thank you. Um, yeah, uh, I appreciate the discussion and, and certainly want to be sensitive to, um, how, how individuals are going to feel the tax burden this year. I think the two things just to comment along with the discussion, one is that the slide that we're looking at right now is only showing us as, to highlight, it's only showing us 1.6 to 1.75 out of a total range of 1.0 to 1.75. So as was mentioned, we're already looking at the upper-

▶ 52:36 Kimberly Vandiver: Mm-hmm. ... section of the whole chart. Um, and so I, you know, I, I personally I would like to be on the rest of the chart, not even on that other page. But you know, given that if we're working within that page, I'd like to be on the lower end. Um, and, and also to Councilor Romanul point, I, you know, I just, I think about the small business owners who are, may get these taxes passed through. And I know of small businesses that tried to be in Melrose that have left Melrose, gone to Malden because the rent is too high that, you know, they can't make it work here. And we have vacant business slots. Everybody wants business in these new residential mixed business units, but if the, the economics

▶ 53:19 Kimberly Vandiver: don't work, we won't have business. And I, I, to Councilor Romanul point, it's not just about the money for residents. It's about the variety of options downtown. It's about the things that you can access. And, and so I think we also do need to be cognizant of what we're asking of the, the local commercial property owners as well. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else with questions? If not, then Councilor Garipay? I'll make a motion to do a residential shift factor of 1.73 or residential shift factor of .9617. Second. Uh, motion made by Councilor Garipay, seconded by Councilor Stewart for a residential shift of 1.73, which is a residential factor of .9617. Correct. Okay. Councilor, on discussion?

▶ 54:18 Robb Stewart: Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I just wanted to make one observation about this. It's not the absolute number of the tax increase. It's relative to the amount of income that's coming in, to whether it's a residential or a commercial. And a commercial typically has a much greater amount of income on average than a residential. So you know, if you're looking at $80 versus $400, that's looking at an $80,000 a year person versus $400,000 business. And to me, that's... That balances out. So I just wanted to make that point, Madam President. Thank you. Anyone else on discussion? Seeing none. Madam Clerk, will you please call the role? Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Council Garopeh? Yes.

▶ 55:11 Leila Migliorelli: Council Hamilton? Yes. Council Jamaliuddin? Council Karamchandy? Yes. Counselor, Counselor Romano? Yes. Council Stewart? Yes. Council Vandiver? No. Council Williams? Yes. President Migliorelli? Yes. That motion passes. Okay. Thank you. Um, I'm realizing... So we made that motion, that passed. Are there any... If there's anyone wishing to speak in the public, uh, comment on this? This, this is a public hearing. Um, raise your hand. (laughs) If not, 'cause I'm, I'm assuming not, um, is there anyone online wishing to speak? No one online. Okay. So now that that motion passes, um, and that's a final, final vote, um, I will now motion by unanimous consent to close the public hearing, seeing no objections. The hearing is now closed.

▶ 56:11 Thank you very much for being here tonight and thank you for the presentation. Thank you for joining us. And with that, I will return, um, to the agenda. (laughs) I'll give our guests a little time to ............................ All right, so moving on to new business. Filings by the honorable mayor, appropriations. Madam Clerk. I.D. number 2025-779 appropriation from the PEG Access Fund in the amount of $282,640.36 to M-M-T-B and Melrose Public Schools. This goes to Appropriations and Oversight. Next up are grants. I.D. number 2025-749 fiscal year '26 earmarked for playing fields. This goes to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-766 Field Demonstration Grant Senior Center Modernization for the amount of 9,500 to

▶ 57:34 replace aging toilets at the Milano Center with chair-height models for accessibility, replace worn countertops in two restrooms, installation of grab bars in restrooms, purchase and installation of a digital media board on the Milano Center lobby used to advertise programming, schedule changes and as a means of wayfinding within the building. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-767 Field Demonstration Grant Memory Cafe for the amount of $4,860. Funds will be used to provide a monthly memory cafe which would provide respite programming for those living with dementia and their caregivers. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-768 Title IIIB Fiscal Year 2016 Grant for $5,000.

▶ 58:22 The funds will be used for funding Milano Center social programming. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-769 State 911 EMD Grant. MPD has been awarded $18,000 to defray the cost of a one-year of emergency service from the Armstrong A- Ambulance Services. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-770 State 911 Support and Incentive Grant. MPD has been awarded $90,505 to defray the cost of a dispatch, specific equipment, new and existing, and the street time cost of dispatch personnel. Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-771 State 911 Training Grant. MPD has been awarded $82,903.80 for 16 hours of dispatched specific continuing education as well as the training

▶ 59:16 class fees for all certified dispatch personnel. Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-772 Fiscal Year '26 Municipal Road Safety Program. MPD has been awarded $19,290 to enable additional traffic enforcement and equipment. This includes extra offices for motor vehicle and pedestrian crosswalk enforcement. Equipment includes portable handheld radars or traffic data record- recorders. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-784 Acceptance of Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection RDP Grant plus additional award for organics collection carts. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-775 Police State Earmark $25,000 for equipment.

▶ 1:00:07 This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number 2025-776 Police State Earmark $50,000 for a police cruiser. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. I.D. number w- 2025-778 Acceptance of FEMA- MEMA Grant for Lebanon/Sullivan Drainage Design. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. Um, next up, under orders. I.D. number 2025-746 Inter Municipal Agreement for Regional Emergency Planning Services with the Mystic Regional Emergency Planning Committee. This will go to Appropriations and Oversight. Next up are filings by the honorable City Council ordinances. I.D. number 2025-613 to revise the existing Animal Leash Law to remove this language.The Animal Control officer may, at his or her

▶ 1:01:01 Leila Migliorelli: discretion, waive the provisions of sub- subsection A if a determination is made that the owner or keeper has a valid reason to have the dog unleashed or untethered for training, exi- e- exhibition, or show purposes. Amended 8/21/2017 by ordinance number 2018-4. This will go to legal and legislative. Um, before moving on, I realize that I had stopped public comment earlier and did not reopen it. If there's anyone wanting to speak in public comment, (laughs) none of my councilors (laughs) also caught that. Um, if there's anyone who wants to speak in public comment about any of the items, now that we're moving on to unfinished business, um, we'll be taking votes on, um, or, uh, we'll be discussing or taking

▶ 1:01:45 Leila Migliorelli: final votes on the, uh, two items, which is a feasibility study for the MSBA accelerated repair projects- (laughs) ... and, of course, the demo delay ordinance. Is there anyone wishing to speak in public comment? Um, I motion by unanimous consent to reopen public comments if there's anyone wanting to speak in public comments. Okay. Great. Okay. So I motion by unanimous consent to close public comments. And moving along to unfinished business, appropriations. ID number 2025-249, acceptance of vote language for appropriation of feasibility study for MSBA accelerated repair projects. Madam President, this comes from appropriation and oversight with a recommendation for passage. At this time, I'll make a motion for passage.

▶ 1:02:28 Second. Motion for passage made by Councilor Garipay, seconded by Councilor Stewart. On discussion, seeing none. Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Yes. Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Council Garapay? Yes. Council Hamilton? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Councilor Karamcheti? Yes. Council Romano? Yes. Council Stewart? Yes. Council Vandiver? Yes. Council Williams? Yes. President Vignarelli? Yes. Motion passes. Okay. Onto ordinances. ID number 2025-571, that the City Council adopt a demolition review ordinance as set forth herein to preserve and protect buildings of historical significance in the city of Melrose. Madam President, this comes to us from the Legal and Legislative Committee as amended with a recommendation for passage, and at this time, I'll make a motion for

▶ 1:03:17 Cal Finocchiaro: passage. Second. Motion for passage made by Councilor Romanul, seconded by Councilor Hamilton. On discussion, Councilor Finocchiaro. Thank you. Um, I'd like to m- Do I, can I make a motion now or could I... You can. Yeah, I'd like to make a motion to, uh, amend the, um, ordinance. Um, President Vignarelli, um, sent... Oh, I did not say your name right. President Vignarelli (laughs) sent, uh, some pertinent questions to our administration. Um, City Solicitor Phillips, um, sent back, um, some, s- small sentence to be added, uh, if you go to the last page of the ordinance, if anybody's interested. Um, section 10E. Sorry, 10D. 10D. Uh, basically, um, we're adding some language in because the Historical Commission

▶ 1:04:11 Cal Finocchiaro: is not a, uh, is only an advisory committee, not regulatory, so, um, they're referenced in the ordinance, and without a change to the administrative code, which can only be done, uh, by the mayor, so we're just kind of adding some additional language in there. Um, it's gonna say, um... Is it 10D? 10- 10F. Sorry. Oh. 10F? I think it said 10D in the email, but now I'm looking at it, it's 10F. The version of the... Sorry, that we're going back and forth, but the, the version of the ordinance that I had- Well, maybe I have the wrong one up. Hold on one second. ... is, uh, the version 20- November 25th, 2025. Okay. Sorry, I had the wrong one up. It is 10D. Okay. Sorry. Yep. You're right. Um, right now it says, "This section affects

▶ 1:04:57 Cal Finocchiaro: sec- this section shall take effect upon approval." Instead, it will say, "This effect, this se- section will- shall take effect upon a final vote of council approving the new regulatory authority of the Historical Commission as submitted by the mayor." Um, so I'd like to make a motion to amend, um- With- An approval? A pro- Yeah. A- Added to the approval. I'm not sure how to say that. (laughs) Uh, let's motion to amend and then we'll do the final... Okay. Yeah. Great. Um, okay. So Councilor Finocchiaro made a motion to attend. Is there a second? Second. Seconded by Councilor Hamilton. On discussion, seeing none, um, this amendment all in favor? I... I... Any opposed? Okay. So now that ordinance

▶ 1:05:47 Ryan Williams: is before us as recommended from committee with this amendment made by council. Um, on discussion, Councilor Williams. Um, I wanted to add, since we're talking about section 10, that, um, a member of the Zoning Board of Appeals and I were speaking about this, and he was asking me about the question of transferability, so I asked Director Massa, and I thought it would be beneficial to the group as well. It is the opinion of Ms. Massa that, um, a demolition, um, what are we calling it? Uh, status, preferably preserved or not, would carry along with the property through a transaction, similar to how a zoning permit or a, a building permit waiver would carry along to new owners if they wanted to keep it.

▶ 1:06:37 Ryan Williams: In the language, it says, "When the owner sells or transfers ownership of a property that is in the middle of the demolition review process, that the new owner can continue the process." And it was her understanding that this also means that the result of that process would be transferable as well. This was an issue that came up in conversations with, uh, housing developers because it's important for them to, um-... to be able to initiate this process even before they take purchase of a property, so the homeowner can, or the, the existing property owner can pursue the, uh, demo review period. And then upon accomplishing the status that they desire, they can sell the property and take that with them.

▶ 1:07:16 Manjula Karamcheti: So, that was my understanding from talking to, um, Director Masa. I, I'm not looking to make an amendment right now because I'd like to just see this move through, but in the future, uh, if we find that there are hiccups, I'm open to making amendments to, to improve the, uh, execution of this. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Karamcheti. Um, similarly, uh, in terms of I am not making a motion at this time, but I do find some of the information that has been shared regarding, um, 100 years verse, uh, 1899 to be compelling. And so, just wanna name that this is another piece that we might, in the future, want to look to amend. Um, I think it's important given we came to consensus, and I really appreciate Councilor

▶ 1:08:10 Leila Migliorelli: Vandever's research in looking at numbers, um, and so not making a motion at this time, but I do think it is worthy of us revisiting, um, in the future. Thank you. Thank you. Anyone else on discussion? Um, I will just take a moment, uh, as the only dissenting member on the Legal and Legislative Committee, um, to explain what steps I've taken in between last meeting and this meeting. Um, following our committee meeting last week, I had emailed Director Masa, um, Mr. Talarico, Director of Inspectional Services, um, and, uh, Ms. Phillips, our City Solicitor, to ask them questions that, um, I wanted answers to that evening. Um, and, uh, partially just to also further explain that typically, um, you

▶ 1:09:04 Leila Migliorelli: know, getting, first of all, getting materials within 24 hours prior to a meeting is something that is not, um, following our Rules of Order, which is why I didn't feel comfortable voting on it at that time without having the ability to re- review it in full. Um, and now we have that final clean copy that was uploaded when the agenda was posted so that we're able to review that, um, and, um, I confirmed that the additional sections and, that were added and were all correct throughout with those, those edits made, which is important to me. Um, and that while the ZBA did not have an opportunity to weigh in, uh, Mr. Talarico did, and I, which I do think is important. I think that as we are, there are ordinances that do impact

▶ 1:09:51 Leila Migliorelli: different legislative, uh, different bodies within the city, it's important to make sure that it all makes sense. And while, yes, this, um, ordinance has been going on for a long time, it has not been going a long time in this body. And I, you know, I don't think that most of the 11 of us here were during that time, so I do appreciate when there's thoughtful discussion and conversation about, um, how, you know, when we're deliberating about an ordinance that's gonna be our laws of the city. Um, I received several other, um, answers from the City Solicitor, and, um, and then most, you know, the other question was making sure the Historical Commission was set up to make this, make this, um, perform a regulatory duty, which is not what they

▶ 1:10:35 Leila Migliorelli: have outlined in our, in our ordinances. So, I'm glad that that parsis- process is gonna be happening. So, um, with all of that, um, thank you for bearing with me as I, um, decide through these thoroughly. And while I will not be involved in, um, whatever potential changes you do make to this ordinance, that this body makes this ordinance in the future, um, I just wanted to convey the kind of way, my thought process in doing it, and hopefully that similar thorough thought process continues moving forward. Um, are there any other comments under discussion? Councilor Finocchiaro? Yeah. Thank you. I actually just wanted to say thank you for sending those emails and getting that additional information and, you know,

▶ 1:11:12 Cal Finocchiaro: checking all the checks and balances. And I just wanted to say thank you to my councilors here for the thoughtful dialogue that we've had. Um, I know last meeting, Legal Leg was a really interesting, um, you know, dialogue and I, all different ty- type of viewpoints that came out. And, um, you know, some of us are not continuing on this council, um, and so I just want to say that I appreciate all of your viewpoints and my co-sponsor, Mr. Hamilton, Councilor Hamilton, because, uh, he's been very helpful and very knowledgeable with all this. So, just wanted to say that, so thank you. Thank you. Um, Councilor Stewart? Uh, thank you, Madam President. Just to, uh, uh, reiterate what you're saying. Um, I, I'm comfortable with...

▶ 1:11:53 Mark Garipay: 'Cause my, my main point of contention is I did not want to see anyone in the administration marginalized no matter how great or small their role was, and you've done that. You were effective in, in addressing that. So, I will support this. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, Councilor Garipay? That was well done also. (laughs) (laughs) (laughs) I'm not gonna be here, uh, when this takes effect. Uh, well, uh, we probably will actually- (laughs) (laughs) ... 10 or 15 more, but, um, thanks guys right now. Next, uh, next council, uh, I know everyone's talked about the years. I, I was really looking for something around 1925, so I would encourage, uh, the councilors who are gonna be on this committee, or, um, on the committee and any of the new councilors here

▶ 1:12:34 Leila Migliorelli: to really take a look at that, uh, maybe sooner than later. And so, yeah. Thank you. (laughs) (laughs) Thanks. See you. Um, given this is an ordinance, Madam Clerk, will you please call roll? Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Councilor Garipay? Yes. Councilor Hamilton? Yes. Councilor Gemrolla then Councilor Karamcheti? Yes. Councilor Romanul? Yes. Councilor Stewart? Yes. Councilor Vandiver? Yes. Councilor Williams? Yes. President Migliorelli? Yes. Motion passes. (clapping) Um, any, um, any updates from the committees? Any, nothing under expiries? Anything under Rule 36? Okay. Any other random announcements? Yes, Councilor Garipay. Um, we had a lot come down for A and O. We will be scheduling an A and O meeting probably before the

▶ 1:13:33 Leila Migliorelli: 15th, not the night of the 15th. So, as soon as I can get my schedule, I'll let everyone else know. Thank you. All right. Um, I will motion by unanimous consent to adjourn. We are now adjourned. Thank you.

City Council — 2025-12-01

Attendance

Agenda

Minutes

Transcript

Original documents