After taking April 18th off, the Lowell City Council gets back to work this coming Tuesday with an agenda political insiders and followers will no doubt find fascinating:

https://lowellma.gov/AgendaCenter/ViewFile/Agenda/_04252023-2706?html=true

In response to a motion by Councilor Dan Rourke, there’s an interesting chart/graphic breaking down the average homeowner’s tax bill with where those dollars are spent:

Then there’s the very first motion out of the gate by Councilor Erik Gitschier, requesting the City Manager have the Law Department prepare a vote to place a non-binding referendum ballot question regarding Zoning For Accessory Dwelling Units (ADU) for the upcoming election. The topic has entered the public discussion in a big way recently, and has been the subject of a special guest columns here at InsideLowell, penned by George DeLuca, a member of the Master Plan Steering Committee; https://insidelowell.com/guest-column-neighborhood-committee-stymied-by-adu-opponents/  https://insidelowell.com/is-lowell-ready-for-accessory-dwelling-units-adus/

However, the item likely to generate the most discussion from public speakers and councilors alike, is motion 11.8:

With homeless advocates pushing the Council for solutions and more resources, and others supporting the rights of individuals to live in tent cities without fear of having the city sweep them, you will likely see a number of speakers lined up to address Councilor Corey Robinson’s motion.

In explaining the thinking behind his motion, Robinson tells InsideLowell:

“With a city of 115,000 plus residents, balancing the needs of the community can be challenging. The nationwide situation dealing with the homeless is an example of an issue that is impossible to satisfy everyone. I completely agree these decisions must be made with compassion, understanding, and respect. With our small businesses attempting to climb out of the hole created by the pandemic, the constant harassment of potential customers, the human feces and urine in their doorways and on the sides of their buildings, and the random acts of vandalism that have occurred leave them looking for assistance. The fine line is at what point do we begin to disrespect our residents and small business owners while trying to be compassionate towards the homeless?”

What this observer will be watching for closely is whether downtown residents and commercial owners who have privately voiced concerns in emails to the Council take a similar tack and begin publicly speaking at council meetings against the continued presence of these issues affecting economic activity and public health. As an editorial aside, I have urged those who have reached out to privately voice frustration to me individually that it’s imperative they do so, to fight back against the notion that a few advocates speaking up represents the true wishes of the city’s 115,000 residents and businesses.

Here’s hoping they begin heeding that advice.