►
Description
Docket #0222 - Message and order for your approval a home rule petition to the General Court entitled “Petition for a Special Law re: An Act Relative to Real Estate Transfer Fees and Senior Property Tax Relief"
A
City
councilor,
I'm
also
the
chair
of
the
boston
city
council
committee
on
government
operations.
I'm
joined
today
by
my
colleagues
councillor
baker
of
district
of
district.
Three
president
ed
flynn
of
district,
two
councillor
flaherty
councillor
large
counselor,
lydia,
edwards
of
district,
one
and
counselor
ruth
c
louis
jen,
another
counselor
at
large.
This
working
session
is
being
recorded.
It
is
being
live
streamed
at
bostongov.gov
city
council
tv.
A
I
am
broadcasting
xfinity
channel
8
rcn
channel
82
in
files
channel
964..
Today's
working
session
is
on
docket
number
zero.
Two
two
two
message:
in
order
for
your
approval,
a
home
rule
petition
to
the
general
court
entitled
petition
for
special
law
regarding
an
act
relative
to
real
estate,
transfer
fees
and
senior
property
tax
relief.
We're
going
to
be
joined
today
by
members
of
the
administration.
A
Commissioner
nicholas
einello
from
the
assessing
department,
chief
of
housing
for
the
city
of
boston,
sheila,
dillon,
tim
davis,
deputy
director
of
policy
for
the
mayor's
office
of
housing,
and
I
believe
I
saw
commissioner
emily
shea
from
the
aid
strong
commission.
The
council
previously
held
a
hearing
on
this
docket
of
february
on
february
10
2022,
where
public
comment
was
taken
at
the
hearing,
we
reviewed
the
proposal
with
the
emphasis
on
how
it
differs
from
the
2019
transfer
fee
proposal
passed
by
the
council
by
attended
revoked.
A
As
a
brief
recap,
this
is
a
two-prong
proposal.
The
boston,
affordable
housing
in
the
city
part
one
is
the
creation
of
a
transfer
fee
to
be
paid
on
certain
real
estate
transactions
and
part.
Two
is
an
expansion
of
the
current
senior
property
tax
relief
program.
Some
of
the
discussion
points
from
that
hearing
included
whether
the
petition
should
use
average
median
income
or
another
system
to
provide
more
flexibility
coverage
and
the
possibility
of
adding
a
sliding
scale
for
fees
on
amounts
over
2
million.
A
End
quote:
the
current
language
would
allow
the
legislation
to
make
broader
changes
to
the
petition
as
long
as
it
relates
to
the
general
objective
of
housing,
for
example
as
chair,
it's
my
hope
that
the
administration
can
explain
why
they
believe
this
language
is
important
and
how
we
can
ensure
that
any
changes
made
by
the
states
are
within
the
city
called
the
petition
and
before
going
to
my
council
colleagues,
in
order
of
arrival
for
brief
introductory
remarks,
I
received
and
will
read
in
an
absence
absence
letter
from
counselor
julie,
mejia
and
read
that
into
the
record.
A
Dear
mr
chair
and
members
of
the
committee
on
government
operations,
I'm
writing
to
inform
you
of
my
absence
from
today's
hearing
and
committee
on
government
operations
regarding
docket
number
zero.
Two
two
two:
a
working
session
regarding
a
homeworld
petition
relative
to
real
estate,
transfer
fees
and
senior
property
tax
relief.
Due
to
a
previously
scheduled
engagement,
I
am
not
able
to
attend.
I
have
previously
offered
my
full
support
during
the
hearing
on
this
matter
that
took
place
a
few
weeks
ago.
A
I
look
forward
to
following
up
on
this
conversation
that
helps
to
take
part
in
future
dialogues.
Sincerely
council,
julian
mejia
and
with
that
will
go
with
the
rest
of
my
council
colleagues
starting
the
murder
of
arrival
and
so
that
that
begins
with
councillor
frank
baker
of
district
3..
B
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
don't
have
that
much
to
say,
but
I
would
like
to
talk.
I've
heard
that
the
governor
in
in
my
concern
around
this
is
attaching
the
the
senior
property
relief
tax.
I've
heard
that
the
governor
has
filed
legislation
to
address
this
here,
so
I'm
wondering
if
we
strip
that
out
and
and
call
this
the
tax
that
it
is,
and
so
we're
voting
on
a
tax
here
and
if
we
can
get
into
that
discussion.
B
A
Thank
you,
councillor.
Baker,
council
president
ed
flynn
of
district,
two.
C
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
thank
you
for
your
leadership.
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
my
council
colleagues
as
well
for
their
leadership,
mayor
wu,
but
also
the
administration
officials
that
are
on
on
the
call
as
well
at
this
meeting
as
well.
C
I
support
this
proposal
and
the
reason
I
support
it
is,
I
want
to
make
sure
long-time
residents
of
of
the
city,
especially
our
seniors
persons
with
disability,
immigrant
families,
but
want
to
make
sure
that
they
also
have
the
opportunity
to
stay
in
boston
and
the
city
they
they
love
that
they
helped
helped
build.
C
I
know
I
had
a
I've
been
working
closely
with
sheila
dillon
on
this
issue
as
well,
but,
but
I
support
this
because
I
want
to
make
sure
that
long-time
residents
also
have
an
opportunity
to
be
assisted
to
be
helped
out
by
city
government,
especially
during
these
difficult
financial
times,
but
we
need
to
make
sure
that
there's
a
place
in
boston
for
for
our
seniors.
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
A
Thank
you,
president
flynn,
councillor
flaherty
the
floor
is
yours.
D
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
I
guess
I
just
have
a
quick
question.
Can
I
dive
it,
so
can
I
dive
into
some
suggested
changes
or
how
would
you
like
to
proceed
as
chair?
Oh.
A
D
J
I
apologize
yeah.
No,
so
I
I
have
sort
of
specific
language
suggestions,
but
I
can
dive
into.
D
So
I
didn't
hear
the
first
part
of
it,
so
so
my
apologies
for
that.
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
obviously,
look
forward
to
the
hearing
and
I
want
to
make
sure
that,
obviously,
what
we're
intending
to
do
doesn't
have
any
sort
of
adverse
or
unintended
consequences,
and,
specifically
speaking
to
that,
you
know
the
lifelong
resident,
the
person
that's
owned,
their
property
for
20,
25,
30,
35
years
and
they've
you
know
amassed
obviously
could
be
their
retirement.
It
could
be
a
nest
egg.
D
D
I
want
to
make
sure
that
that's
sort
of
that
intended
purpose
that
we
stay
sort
of
on
that
on
that
flipper
and
not
catch
up
in
that
net
people
who
have
owned
their
property
for
a
significant
period
of
time,
particularly
our
elderly,
who
are
owner
occupied
in
many
instances
over
house
but
they're
in
their
homes,
in
all
the
properties
around
them.
D
Those
values
have
skyrocketed
the
sale
prices
of
skyrocket
and
then
they
get
caught
up
in
that
in
their
property
values
and
their
taxes
go
up
so
just
trying
to
identify
ways
that
you
know
we
can
sort
of
carve
out.
I
guess,
exemptions
as
many
exemptions
as
possible
for
for
our
fixed
income,
seniors
indoor
for
folks
who
have
owned
their
homes
for
a
long
period
of
time.
Thank
mr
chair
look
forward
to
the
hearing.
Thank.
A
You,
council
clarity,
councilor
edwards,
followed
by
councillor
louis
jen,
and
I
just
want
to
also
note
that
we've
been
joined
by
council
oral
of
district
four
and
councillor
aaron
murphy
city
council
at
large,
and
that
will
be
the
order
of
counselor
edwards,
followed
by
counselor
louis
jen,
followed
by
counselor
well
followed
by
councilman
murphy.
Thank
you
floor
is
yours,
council
edwards
thank.
F
I
would
like
to
characterize
this
as
a
house
of
stabilization
home
rule
petition
and
because
we're
dealing
with
both
sides
we're
both
raising
the
revenue
that
we
need
in
order
to
pay
for
housing,
and
we
do
need
money
to
pay
for
housing
and
we're
also
making
sure
that
people
who
are
already
housed
have
a
vehicle
to
stay
more
stably
housed.
So
to
me,
it's
a
comprehensive
conversation
and
that's
why
the
two
need
to
stay
together.
This
isn't
just
a
tax
bill.
F
This
is
about
keeping
people
in
their
homes
or
generating
the
revenue
that
we
need
in
order
to
get
more
people
housed.
I'm
excited
about
this
conversation.
I
just
want
to.
You
know
remind
people.
F
Many
of
us
were
there
in
2019
when
we
had
this
conversation
before
and
it
passed
out
of
the
council
with
a
vote
of
ten
to
three
under
the
walsh
administration
I
just
sent
to
the
chair
and
to
the
committee
to
christine
o'donnell
the
report
commissioned
by
the
walsh
administration
in
2019,
discussing
the
fiscal
health
of
a
transfer
fee
and
looking
at
the
varying
stages
of
that
up
to
two
percent
and
how
much
money
that
the
city
of
boston
would
be
able
to
generate.
F
I
also
wanted
to
note
you
know
this
is
we
are
an
outlier
in
this?
38
states
have
transfer
fees
and
many
more
localities
have
a
version
of
a
transfer
fee
in
order
to
generate
funds
and
money
for
their
locality.
F
So
this
is
actually
pretty
normal
and-
and
I
think
it's
actually
a
wonderful
opportunity
for
us
to
take
the
time
and
effort
to
generate
some
funds
while
we
can
to
stably
house
our
seniors
and
provide
a
tax
break
while
we
can
and
overall
move
towards
more
housing,
stability
and
policies
that
allow
us
to
do
this,
I
you
know-
and
I
think
counselor
baker
the
just
putting
on
the
other
hat,
because
I
was
at
the
you
know,
discussion
on
the
other
side
about
the
governor's
budget
and,
yes,
you
are
correct.
F
There
are
several
tax
breaks
that
are
coming
involved
in
the
in
the
governor's
budget,
specifically
one
for
renters,
also
for
landlords
and
then
also
for
seniors.
I
don't
believe
that
this
would
be
a
conflict
of
it
if,
in
anything,
we
might
be
actually
offering
more
except
no
I'm
sorry.
There
is
the
that
the
increase
in
the
tax
exemption,
which
I
think
he's
going
to
3
000.
I
don't
know
if
we're
going
as
high,
but
I
did
want
to
answer
what
I
could
counselor
baker.
G
Good
morning,
everyone
happy
to
be
here
in
support
of
this
homework
petition
and
making
sure
that
we
are
doing
everything
we
can
to
create
more
avenues
to
fund
affordable
housing.
It's
unfortunate
that
this
hasn't
passed,
and
but
now
we
have
another
bite
at
the
apple.
I
am
excited
to
have
a
conversation
about
what
this
looks
like
and
about
what
is
the
best
process
here
to
move
forward.
G
You
know
we
live
in
a
city
that
is
increasingly
unequal
between
the
haves
and
the
have-nots,
and
this
is
just
one
way
of
us
extracting
some
of
the
wealth
that
has
been
created
from
a
speculative
market
that
has
too
often
sidelined
poor
folks,
black
and
brown
folks
in
our
city
working
class
residents
who
are
being
pushed
out
of
our
city
because
it's
too
expensive
so
getting
this
money
to
the
neighborhood,
housing,
trust
and
also
helping
you
know,
we're
all
city
councils.
G
We
get
calls
all
the
time
from
seniors
about
property
taxes
and
being
able
to
address
those
concerns
through
this
homework
petition.
I
think
is
great,
as
well
so
happy
to
be
here
and
to
be
with
the
administration
to
sort
out
the
best
way
forward.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
council
luigen
council
morale,
followed
by
council
market.
H
Thank
you
chair
and
I'm
excited
to
have
this
conversation.
You
know
when
I've
as
a
newly
elected
just
coming
off
the
campaign
trail
housing
was
one
of
the
top
things
I
heard
is:
how
do
we
create
more
affordable
housing
and
then
another
big
issue
I
heard
was
you
know,
property
taxes
for
our
seniors,
so
I'm
excited
to
have
this
conversation
and
looking
forward
to
it.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you,
council,
royale
councillor
murphy.
The
floor
is
yours.
E
Thank
you
chair
and
thank
you
for
everyone
who's
on
this
call.
No
opening
statements
now
just
happy
to
be
listening
and
being
informed.
So
when
we
move
forward
with
this,
that
I
have
the
information
I
need
to
make
the
right
decision.
So
thank
you
so
much
for
having
this
hearing.
A
Thank
you,
and
I'm
now
going
to
give
it
to
the
administration,
to
sort
of
speak
on
the
the
home
rule,
petition
and
sort
of
the
points
that
they
believe
they'd
like
to
emphasize
right
now
and
then
we'll
go
into
rather
than
going
through
the
whole
home
rule
petition,
which.
A
Should
at
this
point
have-
and
I
I'm
hoping
that
the
study
that
was
conducted
has
already
also
been
put
in
your
inboxes,
but
the
the
goal
here
is
that
the
administration
can
speak
to
the
importance
of
this.
Why
it's
crafted
the
way
it's
crafted
and
then
we
can
get
into
by
order
of
arrival.
A
Folks
can
then
give
any
changes
that
they'd
like
to
see
or
any
language
that
they
dislike,
rather
than
just
running
through
the
entire
thing
and
saying
everybody
go
with
this
paragraph,
everybody
with
this
paragraph,
we'll
just
let
folks
go
towards
whatever
they're
trying
to
suggest,
and
so
with
that
I'm
gonna
kick
it
over
to
the
administration,
in
whatever
order
you
have
determined
for
yourselves.
I
So
I
thank
you
so
much,
and
I
I
do
want
to
thank
the
city
council
and
councillor
royal
for
having
this
very
quickly.
This
has
been
moving
at
a
very
at
a
very
good
pace,
because
I
think
we
all
recognize
the
need
is
so
great
for
the
record
sheila
dillon,
chief
of
housing,
for
the
city
of
boston-
and
I
won't
you
know
we
had
a
hearing
just
a
week
ago
or
so
so
I
won't
read
those
remarks
again,
but
just
highlight
a
couple
of
things.
I
I
agree
with
counselor
edwards.
I
do
see
this
as
a
stabilization
bill.
We
this
would
potentially
double
the
amount
of
resources
we
have
to
create
new,
affordable
housing
and
preserve
affordable
housing
in
our
city,
which
is
just
it's
amazing
that
this
that
this,
that
this
legislation
that
impacts
very
few
properties,
just
just
just
over
700
transactions
last
year,
would
have
been
impacted,
can
double
our
budget
and
create
affordable
housing
throughout
the
city
and
provide
the
necessary
tax
relief.
So
seniors
can
stay
in
their
homes
more
comfortably.
I
We
have
been
very,
very
we've,
been
very
interested
in
making
sure
that
people
that
own
an
asset
that
they
want
to
pass
on,
the
the
proceeds
of
that
asset
to
their
families
are
are
not
impacted
and
that
that
is
why,
in
this
version,
we're
exempting
the
first
two
million.
So
we
think
that
really
does
address
a
lot
of
that
issue
and
still,
even
with
exempting
that
first
two
million
it
raises
so
much
so
much
income,
but
I
I
will
certainly
we're
here.
We
want
to
help
shape
this.
We
want.
I
We
want
to
listen
to
your
comments.
We
want
to
send
the
strongest
bill,
we
can
up
the
state
house
and
get
this
passed
once
and
for
all,
and
I
I'll
just
leave
you
with
this.
You
know
I
was
reading
the
the
globe
editorial
on.
I
think
last
saturday,
and
it
ends
with
this
paragraph,
which
I
loved
and
said.
Boston
does
want
to
solve
its
housing
issues.
I
J
Thank
you,
sheila
and
counselors
great
to
be
here.
Neil
doherty
chief
of
staff,
intergovernmental
relations
wanted
to
just
talk
quickly
about
why
we
we've
formula
formatted
it
the
way
we
have
so
this
home
rule
is
written
to
go
up
to
the
state
house,
amendable,
meaning
that
if
there
are
changes
at
the
state
house,
they
would
be
made
and
passed
by
those
bodies
and
then
signed
by
the
governor.
J
In
that
way,
as
many
of
you
know,
the
transfer
fee
has
been
a
topic
of
conversation
both
on
the
city
level
and
the
state
level
for
for
years
now,
and
we've
sent
one
up
in
19,
and
I
even
before
so.
What
we're
hoping
to
do
is
send
this
up
amendable,
because
there
are
several
municipalities
in
the
commonwealth
that
are
interested
in
I
mean
in
a
transfer
fee
bill
with
different.
J
You
know
possible
routes
to
doing
so,
there's
also
a
statewide
bill
that
is
up
there,
but,
as
you
all
know,
boston's
a
bit
different.
We
we
have
a
good
number
of
properties
that
could
be
that
could
be
taken.
That
would
apply
to
this
legislation
and
basically,
if,
as
things
move
forward
at
the
state,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
boston
is,
is
in
the
mix
and-
and
we
are
allowed
the
opportunity
to
be
given
the
authority
to
take
this.
This
step
to
support
our
housing
needs
here
in
the
city.
J
So
that
is
why
we
have
it
amendable,
because
things
can
change
up
there
so
quickly.
I
will
say,
though,
that
this
creates
this
gives
the
city
of
boston,
the
authority
to
impose
a
transfer
fee
on
real
estate
transactions
once
signed
by
the
governor.
It
doesn't
mean
that
there
is
one
that
goes
into
effect
the
next
day,
for
instance,
it
has
to
come
back
to
the
city.
It
has
to
come
back
to
the
boston
city
council
to
to
create
an
ordinance
that
allows
us
to
put
in
different
exemptions.
J
It
allows
us
to
set
the
you
know
the
fee
structure,
how
those
dollars
can
be
spent
at
to
some
degree,
and
that's
largely
what
we'll
have
that
is
what
will
have
to
happen.
You
know
knock
on
wood,
the
we
get
this
passed
up
at
the
state.
It
does
come
back
to
this
body
council
of
flaherty.
You
mentioned
exemptions
for
families
or
you
know
other
folks,
that's
something
that
would
happen
at
that
next
step.
J
I
think
right
now
we're
looking
for
the
authority
for
this,
for
the
city
to
have
a
vehicle
to
create
more
dollars
for
housing,
and
that's
what
this
provides
and
hopefully,
in
the
near
future,
we're
back
in
in
a
a
working
session
to
create
the
ordinance
that
that
really
sets
this
up.
So
just
to
be
clear,
that's
why
we're
we're
hoping
to
send
it
up
amendable
for
any
minor
tweaks
the
state
may
have,
but
the
real
meat
of
of
what
we're
going
to
do
is
going
to
come
through
this
body
in
the
future.
L
So
good
morning,
everybody,
my
name,
is
commissioner
nick
arnello,
I'm
the
commissioner
of
the
assessing
department
for
the
city
of
boston.
I
don't
have
an
enormous
amount
to
add
on
top
of
what
my
my
colleagues
have
already
said
and
kind
of
what
we
discussed
during
the
hearing
the
other
week.
I
I
do
have
a
couple
of
really
quick
thoughts
on
some
of
the
items
that
were
brought
up
by
by
a
couple
of
the
counselors
just
now
in
the
in
the
introductions.
L
You
know
counselor
flaherty,
I
think,
brought
up
really
interesting
point
about
you
know,
exemptions
and
long-term
home
ownership,
and
I
I
just
want
to
kind
of
draw
everyone's
attention
to
the
the
really
big
change
that
we
made
to
this
version
over
the
last
version,
which
is
that
exemption
of
two
million
dollars
and
that
that's
an
exemption
on
every
transaction
so
to
just
kind
of
run
through
a
quick
example
of
what
that
would
mean.
L
So,
let's
say
it's
it's
years
down
the
road
and
someone's
property
appreciates
to
three
million
dollars,
which
is
a
significant
amount
of
money
and
they
they
are
probably
doing
doing
pretty
well.
But
maybe
everything
has
gone
up,
and,
and
maybe
the
value
of
the
dollar
drops
dramatically
or
something
that
three
million
dollars
doesn't
mean
what
it
means
right
now,
even
so
the
if
we
implemented
the
full
two
percent
transfer
fee,
which
again
to
neil's
point,
is
something
that
we
would
have
to
implement
by
ordinance
after
it's
passed.
L
So
what
that,
in
effect,
amounts
to
is
a
twenty
thousand
dollar
fee,
which
is
the
equivalent
of
two
thirds
of
one
percent
for
that
that
property
transfer,
and
so
this
this
really
is
a
fee
that
it's
going
to
apply.
The
way
it
is
set
up
is
to
provide
the
city
with
a
revenue
source
off
of
extremely
high
value
transfers.
L
L
The
the
other
thing
that
I
wanted
to
address
was
counselors
baker's
point
about
having
the
senior
exemption
language
kind
of
tied
to
the
transfer
fee
and
kind
of
the
thinking
behind
that,
and
that
that's
really
that
we
really
want
to
draw
attention
to
the
fact
that
the
point
of
this
package
of
laws
is
to
address
tax
assistance
and
housing,
and
that's
that's
the
objective:
the
money
from
the
transfer
fees
for
housing.
L
A
Thank
you
all
with
that,
I'm
going
to
go
in
order
of
appearance
to
counselors
questions,
or
so
this
is
questions
and
or
language.
I
know
councilman
flaherty
brought
that
up
earlier,
but
if
you
have
language
changes
or
questions
that
you
have
or
both
this
is.
This
is
the
time
to
do
that
and
to
raise
those
points,
and
I
will
go
at
the
end
of
the
at
the
end
of
the
line
here,
but
starting
with
councillor
baker.
The
floor
is
yours.
B
Thank
you,
mr
chair.
So
if
this,
if
it's
amendable
and
it
conflicts
with
state
law,
would
would
would
the
the
state
strip
out
the
language
for
the
for
the
senior
tax
relief?
Does
anybody
know
someone
from
the
administration.
J
Would
by
conflicts
with
state
law
I
mean
this-
would
this
would
be
to
allow
us
to
to
change.
J
So
this
would
would
they
would
all
move
together
through
the
legislative
process,
and
then
whatever
would
come
out
at
the
end,
is
what
would
be
become.
The
law.
B
Yeah
and-
and
so
so-
I'm
hearing
a
couple
different
things
here:
we're
tying
this
in
we're
tying
this
tax
in
to
senior
tax
relief,
but
then
we're
talking
about
affordable
housing.
What
is
it
are
we
going
to?
Are
we
going
to
provide
tax
relief
or
are
we
going
to
provide
affordable
housing?
I
No
I'm
just
going
to
I
I
we're
hoping
that
this
is
passes
and
we'll
be
able
to
do
both.
We're
hoping
that
we'll
be
able
to
provide
tax
relief
to
seniors
that
need
it
and
create
a
lot
of
affordable
housing,
including
new
senior
housing,
so
that
seniors,
that
don't
own
a
home
or
can
no
longer
stay
in
their
home
will
have
an
affordable
place
to
go.
So
I
mean,
I
think
the
administration's
hope
is
that
both
things
will
be
accomplished.
B
Well,
I
had
a.
I
had
a
two
percent
alcohol
tax
a
couple
years
that
that
couple
years
ago,
that
failed
in
the
city,
council
and
counselors
got
up
and
they
said
they'd
like
to
see
it
be
more
prescriptive,
meaning
we'd
like
to
see
a
better
way.
Where
is
this
actually
going
to
be
spent
so
so
affordable
housing
coming
into
the
city
with
what
we
spend
this
year,
70
million
dollars
on
something
like
where
is
our
roi?
On
this?
B
You
know
like
how
much
money
are
we
gonna
throw
towards
affordable
housing
going
to
the
housing
trust
and
we
still
can't
get?
I
still
can't
get
people
into
any
apartments
like
no.
No
luck
at
all
people
that
I
work
with
for
years
cannot
get
them
in
apartments.
So
so
this
to
me
just
seems
like
another
bottomless
barrel.
You
know
it
and
I
think
I
think
the
tie-in
and
the
I
think
that
the
tie-in
in
the
senior
tax
relief
is
disingenuous.
B
I
think
we
we
we
hanging
around
hanging
around
senior
tax
relief
when
it's
it's
another
tax
here,
and
you
know.
I
appreciate
the
fact
that
that
now
it's
everything
above
the
two
million
dollars
and
we're
trying
to
do
you
know
some
some
exemptions,
but
I'm
still
not
sold
on
this.
You
know
you
know
it's
high
inflation
at
what
point
at
what
point?
B
Do
we
think,
as
a
group,
the
real
estate
whole
real
estate
scene
is
gonna,
say:
okay,
boston's
done
we're
not
doing
business
there
anymore,
because
the
tax
more
and
more
things
we're
going
after
idp
we're
going
to
lower
the
10
units
every
at
every
turn,
we're
hammering
the
real
estate
industry
and
are
they
making
money?
Yes,
they
are,
but
they're,
also
paying
for
everything.
That's
happening
in
the
city,
all
our
libraries,
all
our
parks
as
a
homeowner.
B
B
Also,
don't
forget,
because
when
you
sell
that
property,
if
you
bought
it
for
250
000,
you've
got
capital
gains
on
everything
over
that,
so
the
government
now
is
going
to
get
what
30
or
40
percent
of
of
your
sale
price
and
then
the
city
of
boston
comes
in
it's
all.
We
need
asha
at
what
point.
Does
it
end
in
a
time
of
inflation
in
a
time
of
raising
interest
rates
in
a
time
where
people
are
struggling
here?
So
you
know
I.
B
I
am
concerned,
like
council
flaherty,
about
about
the
small
person,
because
it's
never
the
big
guys
that
get
hurt.
It's
always
the
small
people
that
got
hurt
the
the
small,
the
small
investor
that
maybe
takes
500
less
on
it
on
on
apartments.
So
I
have
concerns
about
this
and
I
do
think
that
we
should
strip
out
the
senior
tax
relief,
because
I
think
it's
disingenuous
we're
trying
to
we're
trying
to
use
the
seniors
now
to
get
a
tax
pass
and
let's
call
it
what
it
is.
It's
a
tax.
A
Thank
you,
councillor.
Baker,
council,
president
flynn.
The
floors
are
yours.
If
you
have
any
questions
or
suggested
changes,
and
then
after
councillor
flynn
is
counselor
flaherty
and
then
councilor
edwards.
C
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
mr
chair,
and
I
I
also
want
to
thank
neil
daugherty
too.
For
that
explanation.
It
was
very
helpful
to
me
in
learning
learning
the
process
and
knowing
about
the
process.
So
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
neil
my
my
question.
I
guess
maybe
maybe
it's
to
sheila
dylan
so
sheila.
What
would
how
would
this
impact
if,
at
all
you
know
our
support
for
public
housing?
C
Bha
certainly
does
a
huge,
huge
waiting
list
in
when
when
these,
when
these
homes
are
sold,
sometimes
the
two
families
of
three
families
are
triple
deckers
in
an
elderly
person
is
displaced,
put
put
on
a
waiting
list,
maybe
at
bha,
but
would
would
there
be
any
financial
assistance
to
support
residents
in
in
boston
housing
authority
or
supporting
supporting
public
housing?
I,
I
probably
should
know
this
the
answer
to
that,
but
just
wanted
to
see
what
your
thoughts
are.
I
No
it
the
the
money
that
would
be
raised
to
the
transfer
fee,
the
vast
majority
of
it
would
go
to
the
neighborhood
housing
trust
and
the
neighborhood
housing
trust
is
set
up
in
such
a
way
that
it
can
it
can.
Support
and
and
counselor
edwards
is,
is
on
the
housing
trust.
I
So
you
know
she
can
also
probably
speak
to
this,
but
it
can
support
new
production
and
preservation,
including
public
housing,
and
we
know
I'm
really
heartened,
that
a
lot
of
our
senior
public
housing
is
getting
renovated
right
now,
and
a
lot
of
that
is
is
city
dollars,
and
I
council
president
flynn
you're
right
there's
a
lot
of,
especially
in
your
district
right
now,
I'm
seeing
a
lot
of
seniors
being
displaced
because
of
the
high
cost
of
of
housing
and
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
triple
deckers
or
changing
hands,
and
so
we
really
do
need
to
create
more
more
more
public
housing,
using
fair
cloth
and
other
means,
but
also
just
more
senior
housing
that
is
affordable
to
seniors
that
are
getting
displaced
throughout
boston.
I
So
you
know
yes,
it
can
support
the
bha
preservation
in
new
public
housing
and
it
can
support
just
new,
affordable
housing
created
by
non-profits,
etc.
So,
yes
to
both,
that's
why
it's
so
such
an
important
resource.
C
Thank
you.
Thank
you
sheila.
For
that
explanation.
It's
helpful.
I
support.
I
support
this
proposal.
I
want
to
make
sure
that
residents
of
boston,
especially
long-time
residents,
seniors
immigrants,
families,
persons
with
just
disabilities,
are
able
to
stay
in
the
city.
Certainly
I
want
to
see
more
affordable
housing
built
as
well,
but
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
you
sheila
and
your
team,
but
I
I
have
no
further
questions.
Chair
arroyo.
A
Thank
you,
president
flynn,
councillor
flaherty
the
floor
is
yours.
D
Thank
you
good
morning.
Everyone,
it's
good
to
see.
Sheila
neylin
nick
appreciate
the
work
you
guys
are
doing
and
I
look
forward
to
continuing
working
with
you
all
a
couple
things
I
want.
I
know
this
legislation
is
very
similar
to
what
we
passed
the
19,
but
the
key
difference
obviously
was
the
the
version
that
exempts
the
first
two
million,
which
obviously
I
think
that
was
an
improvement
on
that
I
have
a
suggestion
which
is
would
be,
and
I
don't
have
a
mr
chair.
D
D
A
M
A
Sentence
that
counselor
flaherty
was
reading
was,
in
section
three
section.
Three
exempted
value
specifically
the
sentence.
The
amount
of
purchase
of
the
purchase
price
exempted
from
the
transfer
fee
may
be
adjusted
by
the
city
council,
with
the
approval
of
the
mayor
every
five
years,
based
on
the
percentage
increase
in
the
median
city,
city-wide
sales
price
for
all
properties,
but
shall
not
be
reduced.
That
was
the
sentence
there.
Council,
flowers,.
D
Is
this
a
section
that
the
administration
would
be
open
to
amending
to
allow
for
a
sliding
scale,
more
regular
changes
in
the
exempted
value
that
are
more
in
line
with
boston's
real
estate
trends,
so
we're
not
especially
our
long-term
homeowners
in
our
senior
fixed
income,
homeowners
and
so,
for
example,
right
now,
it's
2
million.
So
maybe
in
a
few
years
it
should
be
2.5,
maybe
a
few
years
after
that
it
should
be
3
million.
After
that
it
should
be
3.5
because
the
values,
obviously
boston
values,
are
going
to
continue
to
grow.
D
D
I
mean
we
we're
well
positioned
coming
out
of
this
pandemic,
but
just
in
general
we're
the
envy
of
cities
across
the
country
because
of
our
natural
resources,
our
brain
power,
so
property
values
are
going
to
continue
to
increase,
and
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
that
the
sliding
exemptions
so
the
the
exemption
slide
with
those
increases
again,
so
that
we're
not
punishing
that
lifelong
resident.
D
The
person
that's
owned,
their
property,
that's
not
the
business
of
slipping
and
swapping,
particularly
our
fixed
income,
seniors,
our
veterans,
folks
that
have
worked
their
entire
lives
that
that
were
able
to
purchase
their
home,
we're
able
to
borrow
on
it
repair
it
educate
the
children
on
it,
etc,
and
it's
it's
theirs
and
instead
of
just
reaching
in
and
you
know,
putting
another
fee
or
another
tax
onto
something,
let's
be
a
little
bit
more
sort
of
judicious
on
the
on
the
sliding
exemptions
and
weaves
them
in.
K
So
this
is
this:
is
tim
davis,
deputy
director
for
policy
development
research?
I
think
that
that
was
our
intent
with
that
provision
was
to
make
sure
that
it
doesn't
stay
at
2
million
and
start
to
grab
all
kinds
of
properties
over
time
that
it
shouldn't.
I
think,
if
I
think
are
you
asking
us
to
one,
I
think
you're
asking
us
to
look
at
what
kind
of
exemptions
we
would
have
again.
That
is
something
that
we
can
work
out
in
the
ordinance
that
would
implement
this
later
on.
K
D
It
see
that
you're
on
I'm
joining
by
phone,
it's
always
good
to
talk
to
you,
but
thank
you.
That's
exactly
what
I'm
talking
about.
Maybe,
instead
of
having
five
years,
maybe
it's
a
three-year
update
and
then
we
make
these.
You
know
the
adjustment
accordingly,
if
that's
where
the
real
estate
trends
are
taking
us,
we
always
want
to
make
sure
that
you
know
the
person
that's
owned
their
home
for
an
extended
period
of
time.
Don't
get
caught
up
in
this
in
this
in
this
transfer
fee.
K
D
And
the
second
issue,
mr
chair,
was
that
this
whole
new
petition
doesn't
distinguish
between
from
what
I'm
reading,
anyways
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
between
residential
and
commercial
properties.
D
Many
of
these
businesses
are
sort
of
just
still
struggling
as
we're
sort
of
coming
through
the
pandemic,
and
then
now,
on
top
of
this,
because
there's
no
distinguish
between
residential
commercial.
I
did
not
hear
a
distinction,
so
I
would
like
just
to
get
a
sense
as
to
our
commercial
properties
involved
in
this
as
well.
A
And
there
you
go,
that's
so
just
there's
a
little
in
and
out
there,
but
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
clear
on
what
you're
asking
you're
asking
whether
or
not
this
transfer
fee
tax
applies
to
commercial
properties
as
well
as
residential
properties
or,
if
there's
an
exclusion
of
commercial
properties,
and
it's
just
residential.
Is
that
to
ask.
D
Yes,
that's
correct,
mr
chair
and
obviously
the
concern
about
a
chilling
effect
with
their
businesses
and
their
investment
in
their
partnership
with
the
city,
particularly
as
they're
coming
out
of
a
pandemic,
and
many
of
these
businesses
are
struggling
indoor
on
the
verge
of
going
out
of
business.
A
Thank
you,
council,
lady.
I'm
going
to
keep
that
over
to
the
administration
on
that,
which
is
whether
or
not
this
is
separating
commercial
and
residential,
in
other
words,
it's
commercially
exempt
from
this
and
then
the
second
aspect
of
that,
which
is
the
commercial,
is
not
exempt
from
this,
which
I
believe
it
is
not
example,
does
it
have
a
chilling
effect,
and
I
believe
that
study-
maybe
you
can
go
into
you-
can
go
into
that.
K
Correct
the
commercial
so
given
2021
sales,
we
looked
like
that.
There
was
about
700
properties
that
this
would
affect
overwhelmingly.
These
were
mostly
high-end
condos.
The
there
was
only
75
commercial
and
industrial
properties
that
were
covered
by
this
and
30
mixed-use
properties
and
it
looking
at
the
actual
data.
These
are
mostly
the
big
projects
that
are
selling
these.
Are
you
know
the
downtown
commercial
buildings?
K
D
A
Yeah
we
got
the
last
part
of
that
yeah,
so
I
got
to
you
came
in
you
were
coming
in
real
scratchy,
but
this
the
last
part,
I
think
we
got
tell
me
if
this
is
the
gist
of
everything
you're
trying
to
get
which
is.
Can
the
administration
tell
you
how
many
properties
would
have
been
impacted
by
this
based
on
if
we
had
gotten
the
2019
version
of
this
past
and
now
on
and
on
this
one?
How
many
actually
pay
the
fee
on
this,
I
believe,
is
what
you're
asking
how
many
properties
so,
yes,.
K
We
can
supply
that,
but
I
would
say
that
it's
actually
the
exactly
the
same
number
of
properties,
because
it
went
from
being
a
2
million
trigger
to
a
2
million
exemption.
So
what
the
properties
would
pay
is
less
under
our
current
proposal.
But
the
number
of
properties
affected
is
actually
exactly
the
same
as
it
would
have
been
under
the
2019.
A
D
And
thank
you,
mr
chair,
for
deciphering
that
you've
done
a
great
job
and
I'm
sorry
with
my
reception
and
just
last
week.
This
is
more
to
neil
mcneil.
My
concern
is
having
it
not
having
it
be.
Amendable.
We're
elected
in
boston
me
in
particular
represent
the
entire
city,
my
district
colleagues.
Obviously
our
mayor,
we're
elected
to
make
decisions
on
the
people
for
the
people
of
boston,
and
I
always
have
concerns
when
we're,
leaving
that
up
to
a
state
rep
from
ainsbury
or
chicopee,
falls
or
leominster
to
make
decisions
on
what's
best
for
boston.
D
We
know
our
neighborhoods,
we
know
our
city
better
than
anybody
and
why
we
send
up
an
amenable
document,
will
always
be
a
head
scratcher
for
me,
and
I
really
think
we
should
draw
the
line
in
the
sand
on
this.
This
is
our
city.
These
are
the
folks
that
we
represent,
and
this
is
what
we're
doing,
which
we
think
is
in
the
best
interest
of
our
residents
and
let
the
church
be
falls
state,
reps
and
the
senators
from
ludlow
and
leominster
and
let
them
do
what's
best
for
their
neighborhoods
and
their
constituents.
D
We
don't
get
in
the
middle
of
that,
and
that's
all
I'm
asking
when
you
send
an
amendable
document
up
to
beacon
hill
anything
can
happen
to
it.
It
can
come
it
can
it's
like
making
a
sausage.
It
can
come
out
completely
different.
So,
while
we're
on
this
hearing
very
important
hearing,
we're
discussing
to
make
some
changes
and
to
upgrade
this
and
change
that
and
move
this
over
there
once
it
goes
up
there,
it's
out
of
our
hands,
anything
can
happen,
and
that's
all
I'm
just
going
to
opine
on
that.
That
has
to
stop.
A
Thank
you,
council
clarity
and
when
it
gets
to
my
turn,
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
that
myself.
But
councillor
edwards,
followed
by
council
of
louisiana,
followed
by
council
morale,
followed
by
councilman
murphy.
F
Great,
thank
you
so
much
I
mean
I
I
think
you
know.
Council
flaherty
speaks
to
the
frustration
that
we
all
have,
or
at
least
half
of
me
has
when
it
comes
to
homo
petitions
in
terms
of
the
fact
that
we
have
consistently
when
it
comes
to
our
housing,
our
zoning
policies.
When
we
want
huge
changes,
we
we
are
unique
in
that
the
city
of
boston
has
to
go
to
the
state
house
when
we
want
to
hold
the
zba
accountable.
F
As
you
recall,
we
passed
that
home
rule
petition
and
that
needed
to
go
to
the
state
house
to
even
add
an
urban
planner
and
to
add
an
environmentalist
on
the
zba.
This
is
similar
to
our
linkage
that
we
passed
out
of
this
body
and
we
again
had
to
go
in
order
for
us
to
extract
more
money
from
commercial
development.
We
had
to
again
go
ask
the
state
of
massachusetts
for
permission,
because
boston
zoning
is
unique.
F
I
look
forward
to
maybe
a
home
repetition
coming
from
this
body,
where
we
just
basically
end
home
rule
petitions
for
our
zoning,
but
you
know
just
a
hint
or
or
suggestion
to
my
colleagues
who
will
be
here
after
I
leave.
That
is
the
conversation
overall
that
I
completely
agree
with
counselor
flaherty
on
there's
a
certain
level
of
boston
needing
be
to
be
able
to
do
it
without
having
to
seek
permission,
but
that's
not
the
system
we
have
right
now.
F
It's
going
to
be
amendable,
and
I
think
it's
important
that
it's
amendable
because
it
allows
for
the
conversation.
We
can't
deny
that
conversation,
but
I
want
to
be
very
clear
and
to
bring
back
to
what
counselors
excuse
me.
Counselor
doherty,
my
apologies
to
what
neil
doherty
said
earlier,
which
is
this
is
about
permission
and
guidelines.
That's
all
the
state
house
is
going
to
give
us
the
actual
conversation
of
if
we
choose
to
ultimately
entertain
and
have
a
transfer
fee,
what
it
looks
like
who's
exempt
from
it.
F
If
there's
going
to
be
a
step
in
process,
all
of
that
comes
back
here
to
the
boston
city
council.
That's
where
we
flex
our
muscle
and
that's
where
we
get
to
it.
That's
exactly
the
conversation
we're
having
when
it
comes
to
linkage
we
actually
put
into
the
we
actually
have
a
process
where
we
are
required
to
do
some
economic
analysis
and
we're
going
back
and
forth
with
that
right
now,
as
we
speak
to
ultimately
get
to
a
higher
linkage
process.
So
I
I
personally
think
that
this
is
a
fair.
F
You
know
I
I
you
know.
One
of
the
scriveners
of
the
original
version
had
the
full
two
million
dollars
being
applied,
but
this
exemption
again
is
one
of
those
compromises
that
you
make
in
order
to
move
legislation
forward.
F
So
I'm
wondering
if
there's
been
a
narrowing
down
of
that
income,
maybe
I'm
wrong,
but
if
you
could
just
compare
the
2019
to
the
2022
version
of
this,
that
would
be
great
on
the
income
that
we
would
be
making.
I
also
wanted
to
note
and
ask
the
administration.
Could
you
at
one
point
during
one
of
our
housing
committee,
hearings
myself
and
then
counselor
janie
asked?
How
much
would
it
take?
How
much
would
it
cost
to
house
people
in
the
city
of
boston
or
to
eliminate
levels
of
homelessness?
F
And
there
was
a
price
tag
to
that
and
I
can't
imagine
I
would
love
to
get
that
number
back
again
and
then
to
show
that
by
doubling
that
amount
on
an
annual
basis-
and
that's
this
isn't
a
one-time
transfer
fee.
This
is
annually
what
we're
expected
to
bring
in
close
to
100
million
dollars,
how
we
could
actually
be
funding
and
putting
that
money
to
good
work
immediately
to
house
people.
I
sit
on
the
housing
trust.
I
want
to
be
very
clear.
F
The
number
one
people
in
line
for
the
money
that
we
gain
through
linkage
and
through
this
through,
hopefully
this
transfer
fee,
are
developers
I'll,
repeat
myself.
The
number
one
people
who
come
in
for
the
housing
trust
money
are
developers
who
want
to
build
in
boston.
So
this
is
actually
setting
up
a
kitty
to
build
in
boston
to
build
affordably
in
boston.
F
This
money
will
be
recycled
right
immediately
into
building
affordable
housing
and
subsidizing
it
so
that
the
rents
are
lower
so
that
there's
more
home
ownership
opportunities
again,
that's
where
the
money
can
go
into
first-time
homeowners.
As
you
saw,
we
increased
the
down
payment
assistance.
The
city
has
given
all
of
these
different
things
are
going
to
help
to
fund
the
commitments
we
made.
F
I
was
there
I
think
councilor
roya
was
there
councillor
flynn,
councillor
flaherty,
we're
all
there
when
we
stood
in
front
of
maha
and
got
pie
dishes,
because
we
believe
that
we
should
create
a
thousand
new
homeowners
in
five
years.
We
agreed
to
do
that
in
the
city
of
boston,
we're
not
going
to
do
that
without
this
kind
of
money
that
we
need
from
the
transfer
fee.
I
made
that
commitment,
I'm
trying
to
stick
to
my
word.
F
I
hope
my
colleagues
are
as
well
and
I
believe
home
ownership
is
also
the
one
of
the
other
major
legs
in
the
stool
of
housing
stabilization.
I
also
want
to
be
very
clear.
The
flexibility
that
counselor
flaherty
is
talking
about
is
a
conversation
that
happens
only
after
the
transfer
fee
passes
at
the
statehouse.
It
comes
back
to
the
city
of
boston
and
the
permissions
and
guidelines
the
guideline
number,
one
being
it
caps
it
at
a
certain
percentage.
We
can't
go
above
that,
but
who
is
exempted
from
it?
F
That's
where
the
city
of
boston
and
councils
will
be
able
to
exempt
as
many
people
and
and
as
all
different
kinds
of
exemptions,
homeowners,
so
on
and
so
forth.
We
can
have
that
conversation,
we're
not
going
to
have
any
conversation
about
this
in
a
real
way
or
pass
anything
unless
we
get
this
out
of
the
city
council
now
and
out
of
the
state
house.
So
I
I'm
personally
very
excited
about
this.
F
I
look
forward
to
I
know
you
know,
I'm
not
it's
just
me,
but
I
am
not
nobody
when
it
comes
over
to
the
state
house
to
be
able
to
catch
this
homeworld
petition,
council
faraday-
and
I
I
I
stand
by
you-
know,
100
your
concern
about
the
autonomy
of
this
great
city
being
able
to
to
build
for
itself
to
be
able
to
pay
for
itself,
and
I
want
nothing
more
than
this
homeworld
petition
to
go
through
to
allow
for
us
to
do
that.
A
Thank
you,
counselor
edwards.
It
is
now
counselor
louis
jen,
followed
by
council,
well
followed
by
council
murphy,
and
this
is
any
questions
and
or
suggested
edits
or
just
food
for
thought
that
you
would
like
to
offer
for
folks.
Council
who
attend
the
floor
is
yours.
G
Thank
you.
I
want
to
say
a
lot
of
what
I
you
know
was
going
to
say
was
captured
a
lot
by
the
frustration
that
both
councillor
flaherty
and
councilor
edwards
expressed
when
it
comes
to
the
amendability
of
this
home
rule
petition.
You
know,
I
think,
I'm
not
sure
someone
from
the
administration
said
something
about
this
being
allowing
them
to
make
minor
tweaks,
but
the
language
as
written
is
broader
than
that
it's
more
than
just
minor
tweaks.
It
would
allow
them
to.
G
You
know,
may
reasonably
provide
that
the
legislator
may
reasonably
vary
the
form
and
substance
of
their
requested
legislation
within
the
scope
of
the
general
public
objectives
of
this
petition,
so
my
fear
that
there
are
tweaks
that
are
sub
that
are
substantive
that
are
deeper
cuts
into
this
homework
petition
than
we
want
to
see,
especially
because
I
feel
like
we've.
You
know
this
current
homeworld
petition
gives
a
lot
more.
You
know
having
the
the
two
prior
ones.
Failing
this
homo
petition,
you
know
reduces
the
overall
pot
of
money.
G
G
G
So
to
me
it's
like
it
sort
of
seems
like
a
it
would
be
an
either
or
either
you
know
the
way
you
advance
it
as
it
was,
and
have
it
be
completely
amendable
or
you,
you
know,
give
a
lot
of
room
and
have
it
be
just
for
actually
minor
tweaks.
So
I
mean
I
support
the
homework
petition.
I
think
that
it
we
need
money
to
for
affordable
housing.
G
You
know
the
idea
of
being
able
to
end
homelessness
of
putting
money
into
the
neighborhood
housing-
trust
for
you
know:
affordable
home
ownership,
rental
opportunities,
community
land
trust.
That's
all
really
great,
I'm
just
you
know
concerned.
Are
we
giving
more
than
we
need
to
here
under
this
homework
petition?
But
you
know
I'm
as
a
new
city
council.
I
know
that
this
has
ever
been
through
prior
iterations
and
probably
thinkings
around
strategy
and
what
makes
sense
I
just
want
to
make
sure
we're
not
we're
not
losing
more
money
than
we
need
to.
J
Counsel,
that's
a
fantastic
point
and
I
think
largely
we
have
sent
this
up
before
unamendable
and
and
the
vast
majority
of
home
rules
that
are
sent
from
the
council
up
to
the
state
are
amended
non-amendable
because
they're
largely
like
a
a
fix
that
we
need
or
something
that's
very
specific.
That
is
very
much
a.
J
You
know
largely
a
simple
thing
that
we
want
to
do
there
because
of
this
conversation
being
commonwealth-wide,
and
so
many
municipalities
being
part
of
in
the
mix
on
the
transfer
fee
piece.
It's
likely
that
the
the
state
would
do
something
that
that
touch
everyone
and-
and
we
want
to
be
be
in
that
pot
right.
J
We
want
the
city
of
boston
to
have
the
authority
to
levy
the
transfer
fee
and,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
it
does
come
back
to
the
city
council
for
us
to
create
a
an
ordinance
that
provides
the
the
leverage
that
we
want
to
see
feel
as
the
administration
that
it's
its
best
chance
of
passages
to
to
move
it
forward
amendable
and
in
the
event
that
they
send
something
back
it.
It
does
land
with
the
city,
council
and
the
administration.
J
To
put
together
the
ordinance
that
allows
us
to
to
file
something
and
support,
something
that
we
would
all
agree
with
through
the
ordinance
package.
G
A
Possible,
thank
you
councilwood,
anything
else
there
I
don't
want
to
catch
up
before
you're
done.
You
know.
That's
all.
Thank
you.
Council
louisiana.
I
just
want
to
know.
We've
been
joined
by
councillor
braden
as
well,
and
so
council
warrell,
followed
by
council
murphy,
followed
by
council
braden,
and
this
is
for
questions
comments.
Any
suggested
edits
or
changes.
Counselor
will
the
floor
is
yours.
H
Thank
you
chair.
Most
of
my
questions
have
been
asked,
but
I
do
wanna
echo
what
council
clarity.
What
was
saying
regarding
that
last
sentence
and
section
three
it
says,
may
be
adjusted.
Is
there
any
way
that
we
can
like
make
sure
that
it
is
being
adjusted?
I
don't
know
if
there's
anything
in
the
language
that
says
like
shall
be
adjusted
every
three
years.
H
Is
that
something
that
we
can
do
just
to
make
sure
that
it
is
getting
adjusted
to
to
keep
up
with
the
rising
costs
and
housing.
A
So
I
I
I
don't
think
that's
a
question
for
me.
I
think
it's
a
question
of
the
administration
I
would
just
say
from
if
from
where
I'm
at.
I
do
think
that
the
reason
that
it's
may,
instead
of,
shall
is
in
case
for
some
reason,
property
values.
Don't
do
what
we
expect
property
values
to
do,
which
is
rise.
A
We
wouldn't
necessarily
raise
it
if
property
values
went
down,
but
I
I
do
think
you
know
I
I
hope
that's
unlikely,
I
think
generally,
it
is
unlikely
with
boston
properties,
but
I'll
send
that
over
to
the
administration,
I
don't
know
if
neil
or
chief
or
go
ahead
transfer.
H
Now
my
other
question
is
just
if
real
estate
properties
don't
do
what
we
expect
them
to
do.
Is
there
anything
in
this?
That
can
point
to
you
know,
be
it
being
ingested.
So
it's
not
a
catch-all.
You
know,
that's
not
catching
all
the
properties.
J
For
the
the
first
point,
I
think
where
the
administration
is
definitely
open
to
changing
it
to
three
years,
but
to
counsel
arroyo's
point
it
in
the
event
that
it
goes
down
like
the
market
goes
down.
It
says
that
we
have
to
to
raise
it,
so
I
wouldn't
want
to
make
you
all
have
to
increase
the
fee
so,
but
it
should
be
on
whether
it's
government
operations
or
housing's.
J
I
I,
if
I
could,
I
I
think
there
could
be
language
if,
if-
and
I
I
think
this
through
a
little
bit,
but
it
could
it
would.
I
think
we
could
agree
to
a
will
be
evaluated
every
three
years
like
so
that
there's
an
actual
evaluation
taking
place
every
three
years
and
then
and
then
right.
We
don't
want
to
be
held
to
making
a
change,
but
I
think
an
evaluation,
every
three
years
is
is
good,
is
good
government
and
in
good
policy.
F
H
So
yeah,
I
agree
with
what
counselor
edward
just
said:
the
flexibility
to
possibly
go
down,
and
then
the
evaluation
at
least
happening
every
three
years.
A
And
so
that
would
be
to
that
that
last
sentence-
I
guess,
which
is
the
amount
of
the
purchase
price
exemption
from
the
transfer
fee-
may
be
adjusted.
A
I
I
guess
that
is
shall
be
evaluated
right
is
that
is
that
the
idea
by
the
city
council,
with
the
approval
mayor
every
we
changing
that
to
a
different
set
of
years.
I
think
I
heard
earlier,
but
right
now
this
is
five
years
based
on
the
percentage.
I
think
three
is
what
we've
been
talking
about
years,
based
on
the
percentage
increase
in
the
median
city-wide
sales
price
for
all
properties.
A
But-
and
this
part
is
what
council
edwards
has
presented
but
shall
not
be
reduced-
is
eliminating
that
language
and
giving
the
op
the
leaving
it
as
the
transfer
fee
may
be
evaluated
every
three
years,
meaning
it
could
go
up,
it
could
go
down
based
on
what
the
council
or
the
mayor.
Well,
basically,
the
council
and
the
mayor
determined,
makes
the
most
sense
for
the
city
is
that
something
that
is
that
the
city
would
consider.
I
Could
I
ask
a
follow-up
question
to
counselor
edwards,
so
do
you
mean
that
could
go
down,
meaning
the
threshold
could
be
reduced?
Sorry,
I
just
want
to
be
make
sure.
I
understand.
F
So
my
understanding
is,
we
are
passing
a
the
version
that
is
is
to
be
passed
is
allowing
up
to
two
percent
right,
so,
for
example,
so
within
that
we
got
from
0.5.
F
The
report
I
sent
around
to
some
folks
showed
it
could
go
as
low
as
point
zero,
zero,
zero
one
all
the
way
to
two
percent.
So
if
we
choose
one
percent
as
the
first
year
to
see
how
this
goes
and
we
decide
not
to
do
the
maximum
amount,
we
could
go
up
or
down
from
that
based
on
our
annual
assessment,
just
to
be
clear,
we're
putting
in
a
cap,
it
won't
go
more
than
two
percent
right
and
it
can't
get
less
than
you
know
zero,
but
that's
the
that's!
F
F
F
I
don't
know
that
there's
ever
a
point
where
we
may
not
want
to
assess
it
or
say
we
just
can't
afford
to
have
a
transfer
fee
this
year.
I
don't
know,
but
this
would
allow
us
to
have
that
flexibility.
I
mean
I
that's
what
I
want.
F
F
A
I
see
the
commissioner
has
his
hand
raised.
You
can
take
full
there.
L
Yeah,
so
thank
you
councillor
arroyo.
I
I
just
want
to
just
make
sure
we're
all
talking
about
the
same
section.
H
L
I
think
the
section
that
we
were
talking
about
with
the
review
for
every
three
years
was
about
the
exemption
level
and
not
the
amount
of
the
the
amount
of
the
transfer
tax,
like
the
percentage
of
the
transfer
tax.
That
part
is
in
section
two
and
I
believe,
since
that's
established
by
ordinance
of
the
city
council
after
it's
approved,
that
that
would
also
be
able
to
be
changed
by
the
city
council.
L
Basically,
at
any
point
and
wouldn't
require
a
review,
and
I
think
kind
of
the
intention
of
having
section
three
in
there
about
exemption
value
is
to
make
sure
that
the
city,
council
and
the
administration
are
kind
of
staying
on
top
of
that
part,
and
not
forgetting
about
that
part-
and
I
think
kind
of
the
implication
is
that
we
would.
L
So
I
I
agree
with
counselor
edward
that
it's
important
to
kind
of
be
able
to
have
the
flexibility,
to
review
that,
and
I
think
that
flexibility
is
is
already
in
there
and
it's
just
basically,
you
could
change
it
every
month
if
you
wanted
to
not
that
that
would
necessarily
be
necessary,
but
it
basically
at
any
point
in
time
and
it
doesn't
it's
not
set
on
a
on
a
schedule.
At
least
that's
that's
how
I
read
it.
A
So,
just
to
just
make
this
clear
for
folks
who
may
be
watching
this.
This
is
a
section
two
which
directly
refers
to
the
transfer
fee
itself
and
the
size
of
that
transfer
fee
and
then
there's
a
section
three
that
deals
with
the
accepted
value
which
deals
with
at
the
moment,
the
first
two
million
dollars
of
the
of
a
purchase
price
of
any
real
property
interest
or
the
transfer
of
controlling
interest
in
the
trust,
limited
liability,
company
or
any
other
entity.
And
so
those
are
two
separate
sections.
A
If
I'm
wrong
is
whether
or
not
we
should
be
writing
in
the
ability
to
change
that
fee,
how
much
that
fee
is
over
time
to
deal
with
changing
circumstances,
which
I
believe
the
commissioner
just
said,
would
likely
be
something
that
section
two
in
his
opinion
already
allows
us
to
do,
because
it
comes
to
the
ordinance
through
the
council
and
then
section
three
is
the
exemption
of
the
value
of
this,
which,
over
time,
if
your
property
values
go
up,
then
maybe
we're
catching
folks
in
this
net.
A
We're
not
supposed
to,
and
we
would
adjust
accordingly
currently
the
way
that
this
is
written.
It
says
that
we
would
do
that
every
five
years.
It
gives
us
the
option,
it
doesn't
say
we
shall
do
it,
so
we
may
do
it
every
five
years,
based
on
the
percentage
increase
of
the
median
city-wide
price
sales
prices
for
all
properties,
but
she'll
not
be
reduced,
meaning
that
the
exemption
will
never
go
below
the
2
million
or
whatever
it
ultimately
is,
but
could
go
higher.
I
think
the
question
is
two
questions
here.
A
Council
warrell
raised
a
question
about
whether
or
not
we
can
change
the
language
in
a
way
that
allows
us
to
evaluate
it.
I
believe
counselor
flaherty
also
raised
something
similarly,
but
in
terms
of
the
timeline,
so
it's
currently
for
five
years
could
we
do
it
for
three
and
then
the
question
specifically
about
adjusting
the
value.
A
I
think
we
came
to
the
the
idea
that
saying
evaluated
rather
than
shall
might
make
some
sense,
but
also
just
to
be
clear
for
counselor
edwards
who's
hands
up,
and
I
have
a
question
about
this:
are
you
actually
saying
perhaps
we
might
want
to
go
under
2
million
on
the
exemption
at
some
point
in
the
future?
A
Not
just
what
the
transfer
fee
is
because
section
3
does
deal
with
the
two
million
and
does
say
that
that
will
never
be
reduced,
so
counselor
edwards,
I'm
just
gonna,
give
you
the
floor
on
that
on
anything
that
you
want
as
well.
F
No,
I'm
not
interested
in
going
below
the
two
million.
I
think
that's
something
where
I'm
I'm
not
interested
in
that,
and
I
I
don't
think
our
economic
projections
don't
really
allow
for
us
to
do
that.
The
the
the
hand
is
up
specifically
as
commissioner-
and
I
thank
you
for
that
clarification,
commissioner,
aranello
about
the
adjustment
of
the
fee
itself.
F
So
for
my
clarification,
when
this
passes
that
I'm
gonna
well
it
when
it
passes
at
the
state
house-
and
it
comes
back
to
the
city
council
for
us
to
bake
in
an
analysis
about
that
fee
in
the
limited
range
that
we
are
going
to
be
given
between
zero
and
two
percent-
I'm
assuming
it
is
in
that
later
conversation
in
the
city
council
that
we're
coming
up
with
the
triggers
and
the
analysis
for
okay,
we're
going
to
start
at
one
percent
for
the
first
year,
and
we
will
look
at
x
to
determine
if
it
goes
up
the
following
year
or
the
following
month
or
following
whatever
years.
F
We
would
do
that
at
another
time.
I
know
you
mentioned
that,
based
on
it's
written
right
now
we
would
be
able
to.
We
have
the
permission
or
the
if
it
passed,
as
is
we'd,
have
the
permission
to
do
it.
So
the
question
of
permission
and
ability
not
so
much
my
concern
the
standards
and
how
and
the
analysis
is
to
go
up
to
go
down
to
implement
to
not
and
I'm
assuming,
if
your
interpretation
and
the
administration's
is
that
analysis
that
qualification
can
be
baked
in
at
the
actual
ordinance
that
we
pass
to
implement
the
fee.
A
Thank
you
and
just
to
be
clear,
council
larrell
was
it
started
off
with
your
question.
I
want
to
make
sure
we
don't
short
you
on
time
or
any
of
your
concerns.
Is
there
anything
else
you
want
to
add
to
that
or
do
you
feel
like
this
is
pretty
much
answering
your
questions.
E
A
Thank
you,
councilman
murphy,
councillor
braden.
If
you
have
anything
any
questions,
any
changes,
any
statements
period.
This
is
the
time.
Thank
you.
M
No,
I
I
I
the
one
thing
you
know
in
terms
of
the
minimum.
I
don't
think
it
should
be
zero.
I
think
we're
going
to
have
ongoing
needs
for
investment
in
our
housing
stock.
Our
existing,
affordable
housing
is,
is
in
constant
need
of
maintenance
and
repair,
and
in
the
absence
of
robust
federal
funding
for
housing,
I
think
to
set
the
transfer
fee
at
zero.
M
It's
leaving
money
on
the
table
that
we
should
be
able
to
use,
and
I
also
urge
I
really
hope
we
can
get
this
done
tomorrow,
because
our
neighborhood
especially
has
been
used
as
a
piggy
bank
for
developers
who
come
in
and
get
permitted
projects
they
they
go
through
the
process
of
getting
it
permitted,
and
then
they
flip
the
project
and
make
tens
of
millions
of
dollars
in
the
transaction
and
I'm
really
sick
of
it.
And
I
think
that
this
is
a.
M
This
is
something
that
will
help
us
capture
some
of
that
that
money
and
put
it
to
good
use
to
invest
in
affordable
housing
in
our
city.
And
it's
it's
past
due.
So
I'm
hoping
that
this
language
in
this
particular
home
rule
petition
will
will
meet
past
muster
at
the
state
house,
I'm
very
happy
that
councillor
edwards
is
up
there
to
catch
it
and
we'll
be
watching
that
catch
with
great
attention,
and
you
know-
and
we
want
to
get
this
done
as
soon
as
possible.
M
So
thank
you
everyone
and
thank
you
all
for
for
your
participation
this
morning
and
you
know
let's
get
this
done.
Thank
you.
Thank.
A
You
everyone
thank
you
counselor
braden
now
now
that
leaves
me
and
then
what
I
will
do
is
go
through
everybody
who
is
here.
That
raises
their
hand
and
would
like
to
make
any
amendments
or
or
talk
on
any
other
piece
that
has
come
up
through
other
testimony,
but
I
hope
folks
feel
that
this
is
sort
of
popcorn
style.
If
there's
something
that
comes
up
just
raise
your
hand,
we'll
kick
it
right
to
you.
A
My
major
issue
here
has
already
come
up
a
couple
of
times,
which
is
the
general
court's
ability
to
amendment
it,
and
my
thing
here
is,
you
know,
I'm
I
prefer
things
to
get
done
than
not
done
at
all
right,
and
so
I
am
very
aware
of
the
the
analysis
that
this
is
what's
required
to
get
it
done
and
perfect
shouldn't
be
the
enemy
of
the
good.
A
But
here
is
my
question
specifically
that
I
don't
know
and
then
one
that
I
do
know
if
that,
if
this
isn't
something
that
can
happen,
but
in
terms
of
the
language
to
the
position
of
the
general
court
that
currently
lets
the
entire
legislature
create
amendments
to
this
as
they
so
wish.
Is
there
a
way
to
create
language
that
restricts
it
just
to
the
members
of
the
legislature
that
represent
boston?
A
I
would
be
significantly
less
concerned
about
this
if
the
only
legislators
who
were
allowed
to
tinker
with
this,
where
folks
were
elected,
to
represent
people
of
boston
and
actually
know
boston,
so
I
saw
some
head
nodding.
No,
so
I'm
assuming
we
aren't
allowed
to
restrict
it
in
that
way,
or
do
we
not
right.
J
Yeah,
so
the
home
operation
rules
wouldn't
allow
that
they
would
have
to
go
up.
A
Answer
I
thought
that
would
be
the
answer,
but
I
figured
I'd
shoot
that
out
there.
Here's
what
I
do
think
we
could
probably
do
right
now,
the
way
it's
written
and
I'm
just
going
to
read
it.
A
I
would
like
to
delete
of
the
general
public
objectives
of
the
petition
and
replace
it
with
within
the
scope
of
the
section
one
findings
in
purpose,
which
is
what
we
have
here,
which
I'll
just
read
that
to
you.
But
it's
section
one
of
the
actual
thing.
So,
instead
of
saying
general
public
objectives,
which
to
me
sounds
like
anything
that
they
want,
it
would
instead
restrict
it
to
changes
that
are
within
the
scope
of
section
one
which
is
finding
in
purpose
and
I'll.
Read
that
in
its
entirety
now
section
one
findings
and
purpose.
A
The
general
court
finds
and
declares
that
a
serious
state
of
emergency
exists
in
the
city
of
boston
with
respect
to
housing
whereby
there
is
an
inadequate
supply
of
affordable
housing,
which
is
impacting
quality
of
life
and
public
health,
contributing
to
housing
and
rent
burden
homelessness
and
increasing
evictions.
The
that
rising
housing
costs,
rising
housing
costs
and
speculative
real
estate
practices,
disproportionately
impact
protected
classes,
including
households
of
color,
and
further
finds
that
imposition
of
a
fee
on
certain
real
estate.
A
Transfers
shall
be
applied
at
the
discretion
of
the
city
and
with
exemptions,
as
detailed
in
this
act,
in
order
to
mitigate
the
impacts
of
speculative
market
practices
through
the
production
of
affordable
and
deeply
affordable
housing
and
by
discouraging
rapid
repeat,
sales
of
property.
Additionally,
outdated
income
and
asset
restrictions
for
senior
tax
exemptions
are
restricting
exemption
relief,
resulting
in
higher
ownership
costs
and
risking
the
displacement
of
vulnerable
population.
A
To
me,
making
a
reference
to
directly
that
section
which
speaks
to
the
entire
purpose,
for
this
is
much
more
confined
than
just
saying,
general
public
objectives,
which
could
then
be
said
to
be
housing
period
or
taxes,
period
or
seniors
period,
and
that's
huge
is:
is
there
any
objection
to
just
changing
the
language
of
order
so
that,
instead
of
saying
the
scope
of
general
public
objectives
of
this
position,
it
says
the
section
one
findings
and
purposes
of
this
petition
so
within
the
scope
of
the
section
one
findings
and
purposes
of
this
petition,
instead
of
within
the
scope
of
the
general
public
objectives
of
this
petition,
is
there
any
objection
to
that
minor
change
to
me?
J
Objection
counselor.
I
I'd
have
to
check
with
legal
on
that,
I'm
not
sure
yeah.
I
think
it
might
that
might
set
us
up
for
an
issue
with
like
house
counsel
or
senate
council
up
there
so
happy
to
check
with
them
and
see
if
that's
possible,.
A
Okay,
well
I
mean,
since
I
couldn't
just
make
it,
but
you
know
boston
legislation,
the
boston
legislature,
I
mean
that's,
that's
the
closest
I
could
do
and
I
still
think
it
gives
away
a
whole
lot
and
then
a
second
question
that
I
have
about
the
senior
tax
sort
of
senior
relief
here,
yes
for
the
the
transfer
tax
when
the
governor
signs
this
and
I'm
willing
that
as
well
when
the
governor
signs
this,
the
transfer
fee
still
has
to
be
done
by
ordinance
through
us.
A
In
other
words,
if
for
some
reason,
the
legislature
wanted
to
edit
that
that
senior
exemption
in
a
way
that
actually
I
didn't
agree
with
or
the
council
didn't
agree
with
it
wouldn't
matter
because
after
we've,
given
them
the
ability
to
write
it
up,
they
could
still
pass
it
and
enact
it
without
it,
bringing
back
which
is
not
true
of
the
transfer
fee.
The
transfer
fee
still
has
to
come
through
us,
but
the
senior
part,
if
they
edit
that
and
they
pass
that
that's
fine,
correct.
A
A
For
some
reason,
they
decided
that
the
exemption
should
be
lesser
than
what
it
currently
is,
or
the
release
should
be
lesser
than
it
currently
is
it
would
just
if
it
got
signed
if
it
got
passed.
It's
final
is
that
correct,
yes,
okay,
and
so
I
hope
they
wouldn't
go
after
seniors,
but
I
just
want
to
be
clear
because
we've
talked
about
the
transfer
fee
coming
back,
which
I
think
is
important.
A
The
senior
aspect
of
it
wouldn't
it
would
just
take.
It
would
just
take
effect-
and
I
agree
with
you-
I
don't
know
why
they
would
go
after
seniors,
but
I
also
can't
say
that
they
would
it
right.
I
have
no
idea
what
they're
doing
up
there
and
so
just
that
points
of
order.
If
you
can
get
back
to
me
on
the
language
change
to
resp,
whether
or
not
we
can
make
that
small
change
and
then
I
see,
counselor
baker
has
his
hand
raised.
A
So
I
do
want
to
give
him
a
chance
to
speak
and
then
I'll
open
it
back
up
to
the
rest
of
my
council
colleagues
to
to
give
closing
statements
and
or
to
continue
to
offer
language
or
an
amendment
councilor
baker.
The
floor
is
yours.
B
B
B
I'd
like
to
see
this
I'd
like
to
see
this,
just
as
the
two
percent
transfer
separated
out,
because
we're
we're
we're
we're
we're
putting
something
in
that's
really
good
a
benefit
for
the
seniors
which
we
should
be
doing
anyway
into
something
that
in
this
time,
is
a
tax.
So
I'm
very
very
concerned
about
this.
I
think
we
should
strip
them
out.
B
I
think
we
should
bifurcate
them,
because
I
I
would,
I
would
tend
to
lean
towards
the
state-
is
going
to
vote
on
what
they
have
in
front
of
them
now
from
from
the
governor,
and
I
would
also
like
to
see
this
affordable
housing
black
hole
that
we
have.
I
would
like
to
see
this
way
more
prescriptive.
I
mean
100
million
dollars
going
towards
building
actual
units
that
the
city
of
boston
controls.
B
How
could
you
how?
Why
aren't
we
doing
that?
Like
counselor,
counselor
edwards
senator
edwards,
spoke
about
the
housing
trust
and
I
sat
on
the
housing
trust
also
and
she's?
Absolutely
right?
It's
it's
one
million
dollars
going
out
here,
one
million
dollars
going
on
out
here
to
highly
highly
connected
charged
up
developers.
You
know
that
are
in
this
in
this
game
of
of
of
building
affordable
housing.
B
I
think
we
need
to
we
if
it
were
prescriptive,
if
it
were
we're
going
to
use
40
million
dollars,
50
million
dollars
put
a
number
on
it
and
we're
gonna
we're
gonna
attach
all
of
our
assets
that
we
have
city
assets
and
we're
gonna.
We're
gonna
attach
the
money
to
the
city
assets
and
we're
going
to
build
units
of
housing
that
we
could
then
turn
over
to
places
pathways
for
places
like
maha
to
be
able
to
buy
these
units.
B
I'm
I'm
just
not
comfortable
with
the
city
piling
on
money,
piling
on
money
piling
on
money
for
affordable
housing.
When
again,
how
many
times
do
I
need
to
say
it,
and
and
and
the
new
councils
that
are
here
good
luck,
trying
to
get
someone
into
into
an
apartment?
Good
luck,
because
you
just
can't
do
it.
So
how
much
money
are
we
going
to
throw
at
this
before
someone
of
us
can
get
someone
an
apartment?
It's
not
it's!
It's
it's
money!
After
money
after
money,
you
know
what
are
we
spending
on
on
opera
money?
B
Are
we
going
to
use
any
of
that
to
build
actual
affordable
units,
or
is
he
going
to
go
into
that
icloud
for
lack
of
a
better
term
of
affordable,
affordable
housing?
Money?
Not
prescriptive
enough
for
me.
I
would
like
to
see
if
it's
amendments
I
know
I'm
in
an
another
echo
chamber
here-
that
we
won't
bifurcate
these.
I
think
that
the
the
senior
benefit
needs
to
be
cut
out
from
this.
We
should
be
pursuing
that
on
our
own,
or
we
should
see
what
happens
with
the.
B
A
You
thank
you,
counselor
baker.
Anyone
else
want
to
speak
before
we
adjourn.
A
You
can
just
raise
your
hand
if
you
would
like
to
give
a
closing
in
any
way,
shape
or
form
that
goes
through
the
administration
as
well.
If
you
have
any
closing
statements
that
you
would
like
to
make,
but
otherwise
we
are
going
to
adjourn,
I
think
everyone
here
for
their
time
and
for
their
their
thoughtful
requests.
A
I
see
that
counselor
louis
jen
raised
forehand,
so
I
will
kick
it
to
you
right
after
this,
but
I
do
just
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
administration
for
your
time
for
your
efforts.
Thank
you
to
my
colleagues
for
your
time
for
your
efforts
and
for
your
suggestions
and
thoughts
and
now
counselor
lee
jen.
If
you
have
any
questions
or
statements
or
anything
you'd
like
to
make.
G
Yeah,
I
want
to
say
thank
you
as
well.
I
just
want
to
say
that
there
have
been
several
comments
about
this
affecting
like
mom
and
pop.
You
know,
homeowners,
and
it
just
seems
to
me-
and
I
think
other
accounts
have
spoken
to
this
as
well.
G
Just
want
to
make
you
know,
there's
no
one
I'll
speak
for
myself,
because
I
can't
speak
for
everyone
that
the
support
here
is
not
trying
to
go
after
regular
homeowners.
It's
really
about,
though
you
know
a
lot
of
bad
actors
in
our
in
the
real
estate
industry
here
and
doing
our
part
to
make
sure
that
we
are
building
and
working
towards
a
city
where
our
working-class
families
have
places
where
they
can
live.
A
All
thank
you
councillor
louis
again,
and
I
think
that's
everybody.
I've
seen
no
more
hands
and
I
just
want
to
thank
everybody.
This
workings,
it
counts,
sheila,
dylan,
chief
dylan.
I.
I
Don't
know
why
I
just
want
to
say
very
quickly.
I
think
this
was
a.
It
was
a
good
hearing
and
this
was
a
very
good
working
session
and
I
I
really
appreciate
everyone
reading
this
and
really
getting
into
the
details,
and
I
I
think
it
was
really
a
helpful
discussion.
I
just
want
to
thank
the
city,
councilor
and,
and
you
for
holding
such
a
good
hearing.
A
Thank
you.
Thank
you
and
neil.
I
would
ask
that
you
get
back
to
me
as
quickly
as
you
can
from
legal
on
that
change,
because
the
the
hope
is
to
put
this
up
on
wednesday
for
our
vote,
so
the
sooner
the
better.
Thank
you
great.
Thank
you
all.