Everyone knows Massachusetts is blue and Methuen historically blended in. By 2024 it looked like a toss-up. Tuesday showed that the purple Methuen is on it’s way back to being blue. The numbers from the past three elections show a city that has moved a long way in a short time, and they raise the obvious question of whether it's really changing or just bouncing around.

Gov. Maura Healey beat Republican Michael Minogue in the city 9,672 to 7,191, according to unofficial results the city amended Wednesday. That's a lead of 2,481 votes, or about 14 points. Independent Andrea James picked up 484.

It's quite a turnaround from two years ago, when Kamala Harris squeaked past Donald Trump here by 390 votes, a 1.6-point margin. Healey did about 12.5 points better than that, and she even edged out Joe Biden, who won Methuen by 12.3 points in 2020.

Democrats did well up and down the ballot. Sen. Edward Markey beat John Deaton by 18.5 points. Deaton, who ran against Elizabeth Warren in 2024, lost the city to her by just 3.3. Attorney General Andrea Campbell beat Michael Walsh by 17 points, and Secretary of State William Galvin beat Anne Brensley by 30. Rep. Lori Trahan, who had no opponent in 2024, took 61 percent against two challengers. And State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, Methuen’s jewel, got 14,486 votes to Al Ozonoff's 1,638.

The shift wasn't confined to one corner of town. Healey won 15 of Methuen's 17 voting precincts. Minogue took just two, Precinct 9 by 57 votes and Precinct 11 by 80, while Trump won five in 2024. The biggest swings came in Precincts 1, 2, 4 and 15, where the Democratic margin jumped by something like 20 to 35 points.

To see how Methuen got here, it helps to go back to 2020. Biden got 14,328 votes that year. Harris got 12,220 in 2024, while Trump crept up from 11,127 to 11,830. Warren also finished about 2,500 votes behind what Markey managed in 2020. In between, Healey beat Geoff Diehl in the city in 2022 by 8.6 points, 8,698 to 7,291. So the Democratic margin went from 12.3 points to 8.6, then down to 1.6, and now up to 14.1.

So is Methuen more Democratic now?

Compared with 2024, definitely. Compared with 2020, not really. It's roughly back where it was, with Healey a bit ahead of Biden. Compared with her own race in 2022, Healey gained more than five points, picking up 974 votes while Minogue came in 100 shy of Diehl. Of course, those are different offices in different kinds of elections, so none of this is a perfect apples-to-apples comparison.

Methuen wasn't alone in the 2024 slide. Massachusetts as a whole moved about eight points toward Republicans, with Harris winning the state by 25 points after Biden's 33. Some of the biggest swings were in heavily Latino cities. About a third of Methuen is Hispanic or Latino, according to Census estimates, and next door in Lawrence, Trump's share jumped from 25 percent to 40. The Boston Globe reported that experts pointed to the economy as a big reason. Analysts at CommonWealth Beacon made a different point: 2020 was an unusually high-turnout year, so 2024 looked more like a return to normal than a lurch to the right.

What changed this time?

The numbers can't say for sure, but there are clues. Only 17,548 people voted in Methuen this week, compared with 24,703 in 2024. Minogue got 39 percent fewer votes than Trump did, while Healey got only 21 percent fewer than Harris. In Precinct 1, Trump's 468 votes turned into 156 for Minogue. That looks like a lot of Trump's 2024 voters sat this one out, but the totals can't tell us whether they stayed home or switched sides.

Healey also had some things going for her. Nearly 6 in 10 voters approved of her in an October UMass Amherst/WCVB poll, and she ran hard on tying Minogue to Trump. The Globe reported in October that Democrats were hoping worries about immigration enforcement would pull some Latino voters back, and a Lawrence Republican leader said plenty of people in the community were scared. Whether any of that mattered in Methuen isn't something the results can show.

One caution: these numbers are unofficial and could change when the city certifies them. And since statewide totals weren't available yet, there's no telling whether Methuen moved more or less than the rest of Massachusetts.

Sources

• Methuen City Clerk election results: certified 2024 results, the 2022 state primary file and the unofficial 2026 results amended Nov. 4, 2026, plus the 2020 official results

• 2022 governor, general election, by town (Massachusetts Election Statistics)

• New York Times results page for Methuen, 2026 governor's race (partial count, superseded by the clerk's amended file)

• 2024 presidential election in Massachusetts (statewide totals)

• Census QuickFacts: Methuen

• Boston Globe on Latino voters in 2024, WBUR on the 2024 results and CommonWealth Beacon

• Boston Globe, Oct. 26, 2026, UMass Amherst/WCVB poll and WGBH

With three catering trays on the table tonight, the council was ready for a long night, sort of. The Great Hall was full, the public comment list is long, and the night’s theme was clear early: nobody read their packets and they're upset about everything which includes trash.

The Solomon matter, which came up repeatedly in public comment and drew some of the sharpest remarks of the night. Plus lead pipes in the Arlington neighborhood, a finance department org chart that got awkward fast, and a big new trash contract that everyone has questions on but apparently they didn't want to ask them tonight.

Simard gets the award for best Councilor of the night. He's a man of few words but when he speaks, it's usually important. He startled the line of elected official and resident tonight beautifully.

Here’s everything, in order.

Roll Call

Everyone’s here in the room.

Acceptance of the Agenda

MacLaren asked to move TR-26-96 (the letter looking for money to address the lead pipes) up to right after consideration of appointments, because of the folks in the room. The motion to move it passes 8-1, with Drew voting no on the move. The agenda as amended passes unanimously.

Pledge of Allegiance / Invocation / Moment of Silence

The invocation was funny. It was clearly not lost on the room when Santos read the invocation about honor, dignity, and service. There was a moment of silence for Michael Homsey, a longtime Methuen resident.

Public Participation

A long list tonight.

Linda Soucy spoke about getting funding to fix the drinking water problem, where lead pipes need to be cleaned up. It’s an ongoing issue. “Safe, clean drinking water is not a luxury; it’s a necessity,” she said, and she thanked everyone for their support. She also asked about a hookah shop moratorium, saying the her neighborhood already has two. And she wants two people on trash and recycling trucks, especially in densely populated areas.

Ed Johnson reminded everyone that tomorrow is Election Day and said he wants the city to post election results online. His main issue was trash. He walked through the history of the program going back to when Methuen did pickup in-house, and argued for bringing it back in-house, since he says costs have risen 900% since the 90s.

Patricia O’Neil spoke in support of the Solomon letter. Methuen has been her home for 40-plus years, and she called the situation embarrassing and said “he (Solomon) has gotten away with too much.” She also wants Marsan to recuse himself since he was a councilor when this all happened. “Citizens of Methuen deserve to know the truth.” “Are you afraid of the truth?”

Carl Edwards, a member of a condo association that used to get recycling and had it taken away, says Beauregard’s office never made the dumpster offer to them. He accused the mayor of ghosting them and says he has documentation backing his story. His position: taxpaying residents should get the same service as those in housing.

Larry Smith, author of the Six Degrees of Corruption book, called on Marsan and Pesce to recuse themselves from the vote over personal and family ties. “All about the appearance of a conflict.”

Mike Simard. Yes, that Mike Simard, the Council. He signed himself up for public participation, got up from his chair at the table and approached the podium. A 30-year resident, he recounted his involvement in the Solomon “saga.” “Damn right it’s personal.” “If it’s not personal, you shouldn’t be here, never mind run for office.” He also took the council to task over running former Councilor Feretra out of office and the vote of no confidence on the last superintendent and the school committee. “Where’s that courage now?”

Barbara Ell called out the chair, basically calling her a liar for saying people don’t want this reopened, then proceeded to poll the room. She also took on the council’s criticism of poll workers and invited them to come work an election and see how it actually runs. Not everything needs to be a federal case, she said. It’s senior citizens running this and everoyne is doing the best they can with what they have.

Gil Rodriguez, an Emerald Pines resident and founder of a coalition of 55+ communities, is looking for “equality under taxes.” He’s not opposed to the housing authority; he just wants equality.

Jennifer Losielle is here to advocate for the people and bring them together through art. She wants the city to support local artists, arguing that art gives people a reason to visit and those visitors support other businesses too. She tied it back to the Solomon matter and funds associated with it, called for better spending of public money, and asked about the Flock cameras. She believes the city can do more.

Ann, director of the Housing Authority, gave a history and scope of services. These are low-income residents, she explained, and rent is set by law. She walked through how the budget works and how trash is managed, and noted that they don’t pay taxes but do pay a PILOT fee, which works like a tax. She believes the costs discussed by the council are inaccurate and gave a number of reasons why.

Two letters were also submitted on C-27-45, requesting that it be tabled so more people can participate, since residents are looking for services for condos and want to examine the MHA trash arrangements. They came from Joseph Browski and Gary Lewguski.

Organizational Business

Nothing recorded.

Reading and Acceptance of Minutes

October 19, 2026 Regular Meeting. Passes, Pesce voting present.

Proclamations / Correspondence

None.

Consideration of Appointments

Jeffrey Farelli, Superintendent of Building Maintenance (VIEW BACKUP).

Drew thinks he’s an excellent candidate. The mayor explained that Farelli couldn’t make it tonight but can come to a future meeting, if confirmed, to discuss the RFP. Passes unanimously.

Michael Welch, Conservation Commission (VIEW BACKUP).

Marsan acknowledged the board needs help and talked up Welch. Pesce echoed it. Passes unanimously.

Moved up on the agenda, as requested.

TR-26-96: A Joint Resolution Calling for State and Federal Funding for the Arlington Neighborhood Infrastructure Project (EPA Requested) (Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Councilor MacLaren)

MacLaren called it the “most obvious injustice in our community.” The mayor supports the effort as it’s an important safety issue. The city has already put in $13M and needs $80M-plus more, and he detailed the money expected from various members of the delegation.

Valley said she saw a video from Soucy showing the water hasn’t been tested. The mayor responded by saying the city is ahead of others on updating water infrastructure, but he never answered the question. Soucy confirmed from the audience that it has never been tested.

Drew said it’s ridiculous that this is what separates us from third-world nations.

Passes unanimously. The EPA version passes unanimously as well.

A resolution calling for funding is the easy vote, and nine for nine tells you that. The harder part is the question Valley asked and nobody answered: has the water been tested? Residents shouldn’t have to confirm that from the audience. I was able to confirm with Linda Soucy that the water has not been tested. That should be done and I can’t even fathom a reason for it not being done already.

Presentations / Projects / Department Updates

Punch 4 Parkinson’s presentation by Seán P. McCormack, BSN, RN: Well, this was a no go as the presentor didn’t show up.

Mayor’s Report

The mayor hit on a lot tonight:

Flu season: Health and Human Services is doing flu shots for staff and seniors.

Trash and recycling: Tonight’s contract is the trash reset he’s been promising for a while. Lower collection price, better resources, a new app and website for cart repair and bulk items, and a sticker system for barrel renewal. There’s also a bid for recycling in 55+ communities. The mayor is proud to recommend it, and the vendor is here for discussion later.

BILH crisis response: New clinician services are on the agenda. Last year cost $275K, and tonight’s contract is $138K, about 50% in savings. The clinicians help officers responding to mental health issues.

The Loop: Ongoing discussions with parties looking to bid. He reminded everyone this isn’t a business issue for the Loop itself; the company that ran it is in bankruptcy for other reasons.

GIC enrollment: Major progress. 100% enrolled for current employees. The schools have one enrollment pending and fewer than 20 retirees outstanding. He also previewed a vote on tonight’s item on health insurance for elected officials and recounted the savings and the process change.

Timony roof: A project that can’t wait, since classrooms are being relocated due to water intrusion. Expected cost is about $4M. Tonight’s contract is for engineering services.

Data centers: The moratorium is back up for a vote coming out of zoning.

Industrial zoning proposal: A major effort to update Methuen’s rules and make the city competitive and desirable.

Firefighter gear: He signed off on joining a class action with Revere over chemical and turnout gear. The manufacturer withheld information on PFAS.

Election Day is tomorrow. Go vote, and bring a children’s book to donate at polling stations.

Events. Lots of them. I will try to get a list up later.

Questions from the council: Drew asked for the tree lighting date. It’s Sunday, December 6.

CAFO Report

Searles Estate expenses and revenues (Req. of Clr. Soto): No changes.

City credit card use and limits (Req. of Clr. Soto): The city has two credit cards with a $10K max on each. They’re meant for items that can’t go through the warrant process and for true emergencies. Purchasing maintains, tracks, and reconciles the cards. Anyone can use them, but they’re signed out from purchasing and need a PO. A recent email went out saying the cards were maxed out; the CAFO said that was a timing issue from large purchases for upcoming events.

Drew asked why a $5,700 payment went on a credit card instead of an invoice. The CAFO said the DJ for the Halloween party has to be paid up front and the card gives the city security. Soto wanted to know why it’s only a $20K credit line for a business this size. The CAFO said it can be looked at, but credit cards shouldn’t be the go-to payment process. Drew asked whether it makes sense for the rec department to have a dedicated card.

The warrant process is the purchasing process which includes getting a purchase requisition and purchase order then waiting for payment to issue. Vendors like those used for events won’t wait for that. For them, credit cards make sense. Soto asking to increase them shows a lack of understanding of municipal finance.

Finance Department org chart (Req. of Clr. Soto): The CAFO handed out copies of the org chart and another sheet showing which departments roll up to the CAFOs office. The department is seven people in total. Soto asked about succession planning and who would take over if the CAFO were gone. The CAFO said no one: all the roles are autonomous, and everyone does all they can, but they aren’t CAFOs. “If and when you aren’t here,” Soto said. This got weird. Soto wants job descriptions. Drew asked why the city has a finance director with no direct reports: “What’s she directing?”

What’s she directing? …Finances, John.

A succession-planning question asked as “if and when you aren’t here” is not a great way to ask it, and the answer, that nobody else can do the job, is not a great one either. Both should have been handled outside a public meeting. The underlying question, who runs finance if the CAFO is out, is still a fair one but the way it sounds is that Soto is putting out a hit on the CAFO.

Payment procedures for School Department contracts and renewals (Req. of Chair Soto): Soto asked the CAFO to explain the warrant process. The CAFO explained that she reviews all purchase requisitions and reviews contracts as needed. Weekly warrants are signed by the school committee, reviewed by the CAFO, then reviewed by the mayor, and then funding can go out. Soto wants a detailed report on what happened and how it can be avoided, plus an independent opinion on IT expertise.

DiZoglio said there are ways to use existing resources. He was against consolidation and now wants to cross-train. He also wants to call vendors to validate that emails and invoices are real.

The council danced around an issue here. At the end of the day nothing bad happened. Long story short, a vendor was hacked and the city got a bill with a new bank account. The bill is due but that money would have gone to a bad actor. It was caught. The suggestion of calling vendors to verify invoices sounds sensible until you remember the city processes hundreds, if not thousands, a month. That’s not a control, it’s a full-time job we are already unstaffed for. The better question is why aren’t we working on a platform that vendors update their own banking info in the tool like companies all of the world use?

Requests of Councilors

MHA trash cost breakdown and tonnage fees (Soto): They should plan a meeting.

Unaccepted ways roadmap on the city website (Valley): There is a test site up.

Echo Lane sewer connection betterment fees (Valley): Residents want the same deal that was offered in the 80s, which isn’t realistic because the world is very different. The mayor will work on something and see what he can do for something comparable.

Buildings Audit RFP status (Drew): To be discussed with the new superintendent appointed earlier tonight.

HHSI permit fees review (Drew): Up at the next meeting for sure.

Solid waste tonnage / tipping fee report and FY’2028 contractor transition (Drew): Discussed in the mayor’s report.

GIC transition enrollment status (Drew): Discussed in the mayor’s report.

The Loop bankruptcy / sale update (Drew): Discussed in the mayor’s report.

Barrel fees: emails and follow-up calls (DiZoglio): Meetings scheduled.

DiZoglio also asked about employees on OBRA, those who are part-time or otherwise don’t qualify, and library staff. The library will be moving into the pension system.

Drew asked where the monthly tonnage update on the trash contract is. The mayor said it was in an email from a few days ago.

Public Service

A. Grants

Public Service Grant #31358901, Taft Avenue: National Grid to install one JO pole (new pole P4443) on Taft Avenue, approximately 40 feet northwest of the centerline of the intersection with Goodrich Avenue (VIEW BACKUP). Passes unanimously.

B. Licenses

None.

C. Contracts

C-27-40: United Compressor & Pump Services, Inc. (Plaistow, NH), Replacement of One Sewer Pump at Bridle Path Lane, $32,891.63Includes removal and disposal of the old pump, with all labor, materials, and equipment included.

Drew asked why the two bids were so different and whether the scope is covered. DPW Director Bower said yes. Valley asked about quote expiration, and Bower said it’s fine. Passes unanimously.

C-27-41: SHI International Corp. (Somerset, NJ), CityWorks Asset Management Software, Authorized Users and One-Year Subscription, $38,684.21

Valley noted the quote has expired. Bower said the office is on it and that this is a renewal they use daily. Soto asked if this is the project management tool. Bower explained it’s mostly a water department tool to catalog everything they do. Drew asked the same question. Bower explained it’s GIS functions, restated what he’d told Soto, and described it as asset management and work order management. Passes unanimously.

C-27-42: Jessica Powers (Salem, MA), Full-Time One-Year Grant Position, Data Cataloger for the Historical Commission, $72,800.00

Valley asked if it’s a matching grant. It isn’t. Drew asked about deliverables. The mayor explained this is digitizing over 50,000 items to move from paper to digital. Dan Gagnon, president of the Historical Commission, explained it’s a three-year grant, the city retains all of the information, and it’ll be online. Passes unanimously.

C-27-43: Andrew Brockway & Associates (Acton, MA), Engineering Services for Architectural Needs of Certain Parts of the Timony Grammar Roof, $29,000.00

Valley needed clarification on minutes from June 2023 saying Timony was renovated. The mayor said it was the Tenney that was done then. Valley read the minutes outload. The mayor said the minutes are wrong, and it’s the Tenney.

Marsan questioned the type of roof chosen. The mayor said this is just engineering and is far from finalized. Drew asked which parts of the roof. The mayor said it’s the whole roof and he doesn’t know why the agenda item was worded that way. Drew was worried about scope. The mayor said he has faith in the scope thanks to Bruce Stella and his guidance and leadership on this project.

Passes 8-1, Drew voting no.

C-27-44: Northeast Behavioral Health Corporation (Danvers, MA), Mental Health Care and Jail Diversion Program, $138,129.00

An effort to sustain the PATH program’s services in a more fiscally prudent way. A rep from BILH gave an overview and explained that this ties into the CBHC (Community Behavioral Health Center) program, with a clinician embedded with MCI (Mobile Crisis Intervention).

Santos asked if anyone is going to be the police department, a point that had been explained many times already tonight. The mayor explained it again. Marsan pointed out that his packet was missing Attachments A and B, and the mayor directed him to where they are. Drew asked about performance data to understand where things stand at renewal time. The rep said they track everything. Drew asked for reports every four months to show status. Simard said he worked with them when he was in Lawrence and called them “the gold standard.” Valley asked who they report to. The mayor said it’s dual track, with the PD and the Health Department. Soto asked about the PAC car, and the mayor said he needs to follow up on that.

Passes unanimously.

C-27-45: Waste Management of Londonderry, Inc., Curbside Trash and Recycling, Plus Dumpster Pickup at Certain Locations

Amount, as listed:

Year 1: Annual Rate $2,689,790 / Monthly Rate $224,150

Year 2: Annual Rate $2,824,284 / Monthly Rate $235,357

Year 3: Annual Rate $2,965,498 / Monthly Rate $247,125

Year 4: Annual Rate $3,113,773 / Monthly Rate $259,481

Year 5: Annual Rate $3,269,461 / Monthly Rate $272,455

The mayor restated that this is the culmination of the trash reset. Waste Management was in the room. “In for a significant step up,” the mayor said.

The vendor introduced themselves, and Soto interjected to suggest the body would need more than 5 to 10 minutes. The mayor said that if the council waits, the city will likely need to rent trucks, and he explained that the lead time for the vendor to get trucks is the issue.

Drew said he didn’t get the contract until Thursday of last week and called having to pass it tonight “BS.” Trash is the “single most visible issue our city sees every day,” he said, and noted that after the mayor touted the size of the vendor, it still needs six months.

DiZoglio asked about barrels. The mayor asked if he had read the contract. DiZoglio said yes, “sort of.” Waste Management said it does provide barrels but has agreed to use the city’s existing ones, and that the city remains in control of them throughout the contract. Simard said the council may need more time, and that he feels bad about the HOA equity and MHA questions that are still open.

The solicitor said this is an executive function, the council only appropriates, and suggested asking the CAFO what was discounted on the basis of passing quickly for lead time. Soto doubled down on needing more time. The CAFO explained that avoiding truck rentals saves the city $165K. The vendor said it has capacity for regular levels of service but not enough to add a whole city. The plan is to buy five new trucks for the city at about $500K per truck, and the vendor noted that lead times of 12 to 18 months are the norm for trucks. The vendor said it is willing to hedge the bet, as a goodwill gesture, and eat the rental costs in exchange for a quick signing.

Drew asked if this could wait a week for a special meeting. The vendor said it has already extended, so it needs to happen soon. The bid dates from May, and Drew wanted to know why it took so long and why they didn’t get it right. He asked about the term, and the solicitor explained it’s five years and subject to appropriation. The solicitor also laid out the benefits negotiated into the contract, since his office actually read it.

Simard supported holding it so the body and residents can get answers. Marsan suggested a special meeting next Monday, with a public hearing beforehand. The vendor pointed out the city’s flexibility on dumpster placement and fill.

Motion to table. Passes unanimously.

Other Officers and Committee Reports

Unaccepted Ways Committee: Valley restated the plan the mayor discussed for getting roads paved. The roads around the lake that were taken by eminent domain are to be added to the CIP for 2027.

Public Safety: Meeting Thursday at 4:30.

Unfinished Business

Resolutions

TR-26-90: A Joint Resolution Calling for the Reopening of the Federal Investigation into Corruption Involving the Former Leadership of the Methuen Police Department (Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Councilor Simard). Charter objected October 19, 2026.

Marsan explained that he spoke with the solicitor before his vote, called Ethics, and will be recusing himself. Pesce said she also called Ethics, and because her dad was mayor and he could be called as a witness, she is recusing herself too, both on the advice of Ethics.

Simard said he doesn’t think Pesce doesn’t have a conflict. DiZoglio praised Marsan and Pesce for calling Ethics, then talked about how he was a protester when this happened confirming this is personal.

The mayor spoke about how they tried to deliver a victim impact statement until the judge decided the victim wasn’t a victim. He reminded the council of the huge civil liability and how this resolution may protect the city for all the arrests made by Fountain.

Santos, Valley, and Soto voted no. Passes 4-3, with Marsan and Pesce recused.

TR-26-93: Acceptance of a Fiscal Year 2025 Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program Award, $27,999.02 (Request of Mayor Beauregard) (VIEW BACKUP). Passes unanimously, with no discussion at all.

TR-26-94: Acceptance of a $48,759.90 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Fiscal Year 2027 Federal Municipal Road Safety Grant (Request of Mayor Beauregard) (VIEW BACKUP). Passes unanimously, no discussion.

TR-26-95: Resolution Accepting a Gift of Equipment from Planet Fitness to the Fire Department. Passes unanimously, with Drew thanking the FD for the list.

Ordinances

TO-26-20, Amended: An Ordinance Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in the City of Methuen (removed from the table) (VIEW LETTER). A friendly amendment reverted to the table of use regulations from the earlier document. Passes unanimously. The main motion passes unanimously.

New Business

Resolutions

TR-26-97: Acceptance of a 2026 Sustainable Materials Recovery Program / Recycling Dividends Program Municipal Grant, $36,000 (Requested by Mayor Beauregard). Passes unanimously, no discussion.

TR-26-98: Transferring $33,000 from the Edwin J. Castle Fund to Fund Various Awards (Requested by the Commission on Trust Funds). Valley asked about the formation of a training program and a restriction to Methuen residents. The decision was made by the Castle Fund. Drew said that in his research he was told the fund is for Methuen and the people of Methuen. The mayor explained that the city does things other cities have nonprofits do, like the Santa parade and the food drive when SNAP was frozen.

Drew moved to update the third item to $2,000 to the American Legion for the band, correcting an error that referenced the Santa parade. Passes unanimously. The main motion passes unanimously.

TR-26-99: Resolution Regarding Group Insurance Commission Eligibility (EPA Requested) (Requested by Mayor Beauregard)

The mayor restated that it’s an option available to the city and up to the council to vote. He explained the changes in going from self-insured to GIC.

Pesce said she was told by State Ethics to abstain from the vote, and the solicitor told her she needs to leave the room. Simard confirmed that this trumps the ordinance in place. The solicitor explained the step is required by the GIC.

Simard asked whether MassHealth members would lose coverage if the city offered them GIC. The solicitor said no, that’s not how it works. The mayor said he spoke with the EOHHS secretary, confirming GIC and MassHealth run together with MassHealth as secondary.

DiZoglio asked about OBRA, and how some staff won’t get insurance while the council wants to take it. The solicitor said the consultant says there are plans for the OBRA people. Drew asked if the city is legally required to give all part-time employees health insurance. The solicitor said no. The conversation continued around part-time employees and the GIC rules.

Soto asked about the financial impact. The mayor said it’s all different. Valley asked how the CAFO came up with three councilors, and the CAFO said she heard from three.

The resolution fails unanimously, with Pesce out of the room.

TR-26-100: A Resolution Authorizing a Home Rule Petition Relative to Unaccepted Ways Maintenance (Requested by Mayor Beauregard and the Unaccepted Ways Committee). The mayor explained the process and how it works in other cities. He listed off a lot of roads that aren’t accepted, including Ranger Road, the entry to the high school. Passes 8-1, Drew voting no.

Ordinances

TO-26-22: An Ordinance to Modernize the Industrial Zoning Ordinance of the City of Methuen and Promote Economic Competitiveness (Requested by Mayor Beauregard and the Industrial Zoning Working Group). Procedurally this needs to be tabled for Community Development and a public hearing. Tabled it goes.

Any Other Business

None recorded.

Adjourn

That’s a wrap on November 2, 2026. The full agenda is available at the City of Methuen website and meetings are archived at MethuenTV.

Have a tip, a correction, or something you want covered

Over the last few weeks, news hit the City Councilors and School Committee members that they would be treated as eligible for health insurance when the city moves to the state’s Group Insurance Commission (GIC) on January 1, 2027.[1]

They shouldn’t be.

Methuen’s own ordinance says they are not eligible. The council tried to change that last December and failed. Inside Methuen then learned from several elected officials that the same benefit may be arriving through the state’s system. When I started this article earlier in the week, I was prepared to say this was being done without a vote and should be stopped.

Enter TR-26-99.

Today, while working on the preview article for Monday’s Council meeting, Resolution TR-26-99 appeared on the council agenda.

Resolution TR-26-99, titled “Resolution Regarding Group Insurance Commission Eligibility” requested by Mayor Beauregard, would make “persons elected by popular vote” eligible for GIC health insurance “during the entire term for which they are elected.” It would take effect upon the city’s Notice of Transfer to the GIC. Only members of mosquito control projects and local housing and redevelopment authorities are carved out. This is up for a first vote at the Council meeting on November 2^nd.

Ten months ago, the same idea was stopped. It should be stopped again.

What the mayor got right

First and foremost… credit is due where it is earned. Joining the GIC was the right call, and Mayor Beauregard was the driving force behind the effort. The agreement the mayor and the Public Employee Committee ratified in June moves employees, retirees and their families to the GIC on January 1, 2027. The city projects savings of at least $11.2 million through fiscal 2030 for the city, employees and retirees, and says deductibles will be more than 50 percent lower. It also ends the city’s exposure to claims under a self-insured system, and the city has said the savings put it in a position to make additional investments in public education. The Public Employee Committee, led by President Kara Blatt, deserves a lot of praise for working through the tedious process and reaching a successful agreement.

The work of getting everyone enrolled has been just as demanding. The mayor told Inside Methuen that the city’s GIC enrollment team has been signing up retirees who cannot be reached by email or phone, in person. He said about 496 eligible people had not enrolled as of last week and that the number is now roughly 10 retirees, after he secured an extension of open enrollment to Friday, November 13. He also said Nevins Library staff will keep their coverage because the city is adding them to its retirement system, and that alternatives are lined up for workers who pay into OBRA and are not eligible.

The city already said no

The city’s pay ordinance, in effect since January 1, 2024, sets councilor pay at $10,000 a year and School Committee pay at $6,000. It states that elected members of both bodies are not eligible for city health insurance because they do not work 20 hours a week for the city.[2] The Eagle Tribune has reported that an earlier council removed the insurance option while raising elected officials’ pay.[3]

In December 2025, the council tried to reverse that. On December 15, councilors approved, 5 to 2, a resolution (TR 25 73) letting themselves and, by amendment, School Committee members opt into city insurance on the same basis as city employees.[3][4] Mayor Beauregard vetoed it. At a packed and raucous special meeting on December 30, the override failed 5 to 2, one vote short of the six the charter requires, with only seven members seated.[5][6] The Eagle Tribune reported that elected officials would remain ineligible.[5]

The idea did not lose on the merits among councilors. It was blocked by a veto the council could not override. The mayor’s stated concern was that the resolution had been approved without a thorough analysis of its fiscal impact.[7] The city’s own estimate at the time put the cost at roughly $86,000 to $250,000 a year for nine councilors, depending on the plan, and the Eagle Tribune reported it could pass $400,000 a year if all 15 possible officials enrolled.[3][5]

What state law says

Two Massachusetts laws cover public health insurance, and they treat elected officials differently.

• Chapter 32A, which governs the GIC, says anyone elected by popular vote is eligible, no matter how many hours they work.[8]

• Chapter 32B, which governs city and town plans, says an elected official who works less than half time can be covered only if the city chooses to allow it. This is called a “local option.”[8]

In 2013 the GIC said that when the two laws conflict, the city’s 32B choice controls.[8]

Today’s GIC regulations say the same thing in practice. Officials elected by popular vote are eligible, but those whose regular work week is under 18.75 hours are covered only if the city opts in, and cities must tell the GIC each year, by May 1, about any change.[9] The 2013 bulletin also says the GIC would assume a city’s past practice reflected its local choice unless told otherwise.[8]

There is a catch.

Once a city moves its employees to the GIC, the GIC makes the final eligibility determinations, and if it concludes someone is not eligible, that decision is final.[10] If Methuen did not clearly tell the state that its elected officials work under the threshold and are out, the state’s default could treat them as in. If the city did report them as eligible before any council vote, that was a decision made behind residents’ backs. That is why the public needs to know what the city told the GIC. Inside Methuen’s records request is pending with the State.

Then the resolution appeared

Since Methuen currently has an ordinance that exempts the part-time elected officials from health insurance, they needed TR-26-99 if they want to get them coverage. Its wording is not limited to councilors and School Committee members. The city should say exactly who it covers. It also does not say that it amends or repeals the 2024 ordinance, and it does not dispute that elected officials work fewer than 20 hours a week. To be fair, the 20 hour a week rule is no longer relevant under the 32b.

The resolution’s own words matter. It says “applicable law and GIC regulations permit participating municipalities to consider persons elected by popular vote employees eligible,” and, since the mayor is bringing this resolution forward, it would appear that the mayor now supports “exercising the local option to extend eligibility.”[11] That treats eligibility as something the city must choose to extend. If so, no elected official should be treated as eligible until the council votes.

They should also clarify the language as to which elected officials. Will this cover Methuen’s GLTS members? How about the Nevins Trustees?

What has and has not changed

Something real has changed. Methuen is leaving its self insured system for the GIC on January 1, 2027, and, as stated earlier, the city projects savings of at least $11.2 million through fiscal year 2030 for the city, employees and retirees combined.[1] TR 26 99 leans on that fact.

But those savings belong to the transition. They are not a price tag for adding elected officials In December the objection was a missing fiscal analysis. The CAFOs report gives us one.

What it would cost

The attached CAFO report on the agenda puts a number on it. A city summary of TR 26 99 says three elected officials have expressed interest in joining the GIC, at an estimated cost of about $77,000 a year. That figure is based on an average of roughly $26,000 per subscriber across the city’s family plan options. Because the switch happens in January, the summary puts the fiscal year 2027 impact at about $38,500 and says the health insurance budget “appears sufficient” to cover it without a new appropriation.[12]

That estimate counts only the three officials who have spoken up so far. The resolution opens eligibility to every elected official for their entire term, and to whoever holds those seats in the future. At $26,000 per person, all nine councilors would cost about $234,000 a year, and 15 eligible officials would approach $390,000. Those numbers line up with the city’s own December estimate of up to $250,000 for nine councilors and the Eagle Tribune’s report that the cost could pass $400,000.[3][5] The summary itself says the figure will move depending on which plans officials pick and whether they take single or family coverage.

In December, the mayor vetoed the last version because it lacked a thorough analysis of its fiscal impact. A single paragraph that prices three unnamed enrollees and says the budget “appears sufficient” is not that analysis. Before anyone votes, the council should see the cost if every eligible official enrolls, broken out by single and family plans, projected over several years.

Who should(n’t) be voting?

The State Ethics Commission has addressed this kind of situation. In a 2011 letter written about the state’s municipal health insurance reform law, its general counsel said the conflict of interest law, G.L. c. 268A, section 19, bars city councilors from participating in matters where they have a foreseeable financial interest, and that a councilor with municipal health coverage, or who intends to get it, has such an interest.[13] The letter describes exceptions. An official who will not enroll, for example because of coverage through a spouse, may vote. A general policy exception exists, but the Commission reads it to require that a substantial segment of the town’s population, at least 10 percent, share the interest. And a rule of necessity can apply if conflicts leave a body without a quorum.

That letter was about a different statute, so Inside Methuen is not saying it settles the question here. We are saying the question has to be answered before the vote. Each councilor should state publicly, on the record, whether they intend to enroll, and the solicitor should say who may lawfully vote.

If nothing else, any vote should not take effect until after the next election otherwise the conflict of interest in real.

Better candidates?

Supporters will argue, as the December sponsor did, that coverage promotes fairness and equity, encourages civic participation and helps recruit qualified people. They will also note that state regulations treat popularly elected officials as eligible for GIC coverage, with the choice left to the city where the official works under 18.75 hours a week.[9] Those are fair arguments to make… especially if you don’t know the history of the Council.

Our view is that they do not hold up. It’s important to remember, health insurance was once a benefit of the council position. There is little to be said about past councils that would suggest they were better than what we have had since removing the benefit. Nothing in TR 26 99 offers evidence that a health benefit produces better councilors. A benefit attached to a $10,000 a year part time post is just as likely to draw candidates who want the coverage as candidates who want to serve. The people asking taxpayers to pay for it are the people who would receive it, less than a year after being told no. That is overreach, and members who vote yes should expect to answer for it.

I am curious how this all unfolds. More to come after the meeting.

Sources

1. City of Methuen, Mayor and Public Employee Committee announce GIC agreement (June 25, 2026)

2. City of Methuen, compensation ordinance for elected officials (effective Jan. 1, 2024)

3. Eagle Tribune via InsuranceNewsNet, Council approves insurance option for elected officials

4. Methuen City Council meeting minutes, December 15, 2025

5. Eagle Tribune, Methuen City Council fails to override insurance, no confidence vetoes (Dec. 31, 2025)

6. Eagle Tribune via InsuranceNewsNet, Methuen council plans special meeting for Tuesday

7. Blank.

8. GIC Bulletin FY13 02

9. 805 CMR 9.02, Elected Officials, via Justia

10. Mass.gov, Coverage and Eligibility for Municipal Group Insurance

11. City of Methuen, TR 26 99, Resolution Regarding Group Insurance Commission Eligibility (requested by Mayor Beauregard)

12. City of Methuen, CAFO report on TR 26 99, City Council agenda for November 2, 2026

13. State Ethics Commission general counsel letter on elected officials and municipal health insurance, Sept. 2, 2011 (copy in Chilmark town archive)

Monday night is a full one. The Council meets at 7:00 P.M. in the Great Hall at the Searles Building, and the agenda is packed with a five year, nearly $15 million trash contract, a gift from Planet Fitness, a Home Rule Petition on unaccepted ways, and a rewrite of the industrial zoning ordinance.

Councilors are also arriving with a stack of homework for city departments, from credit card limits to the status of The Loop. If you like your civic life with a side of follow up questions, this is your meeting.

Here is the whole thing, in the order the agenda lays it out. No reshuffling, no cherry picking.

The Opening Items

The meeting starts the usual way:

1. Roll call,

2. Acceptance of the agenda,

3. The Pledge of Allegiance,

4. Invocation and a moment of silence,

5. Public Participation, and

6. Organizational Business.

   1. Acceptance of the Minutes of the October 19th, 2026 Regular Meeting.

   2. Proclamations and Correspondence

We are expecting a full Council Monday night.

Consideration of Appointments

• Jeffrey Farelli: Superintendent of Building Maintenance. Backup is linked.

  This appointment is will sail through. Looking at the back up, the references read like a campaign finance report for almost every elected official with big important Methuen names like Tulley, Difiore, and Sheehan. I don’t know Jeff but if it wasn’t a done deal, that line up would have pushed him over the finish line.

• Michael Welch: Conservation Commission. Backup is linked.

  You may remember Mike Welch from the Unaccepted Ways Committee. He is the resident consultant hired by the City/City Council and somehow his street made its way to the top of the list for unaccepted ways to be paved. He knows his stuff when it comes to roads and clearly has the enginnering background. This will be interesting… if there is any discussion at all.

Presentations, Projects, and Department Updates

The one presentation of the night is Punch 4 Parkinson's, presented by Seán P. McCormack, BSN, RN.

Punch 4 Parkinson’s, a Boston-area nonprofit that pays for non-contact boxing training for people with Parkinson’s disease.

Founder Ryan Roach, a Boston Fire Department lieutenant and professional boxing manager, started the group after seeing how boxing helped his uncle, trainer Freddie Roach, and civil rights leader Jesse Jackson manage their Parkinson’s symptoms. The group connects patients with certified boxing facilities and covers the cost, which insurance doesn’t cover.

Since 2015, the organization says it has raised more than $1 million and supported over 400 people, whom it calls “Warriors.” It puts the annual cost of boxing support at close to $5,000 per person. The group has since expanded to people with multiple sclerosis.

Not sure what the purposes of this presentation is though. Are they asking the City for something? Setting up shop here? We shall see.

Mayor's Report

As usually, the mayor will cover the councilors requests plus other fun things he has to share.

CAFO Report

All four items come from Councilor Soto, and all four are the kind of questions that make a budget nerd sit up straight.

• Searles Estate expenses and revenues (Clr. Soto): A request for an update on what the Searles Estate is costing and what it is bringing in.

  The question that should be asked is what is the plan? How are we going to start turning this location into a revenue center for the City. Or, if nothing else, a self sustaining entity.

• City credit card use and limits (Clr. Soto): A request for clarification on how the city uses credit cards and what the limits are.

• Finance Department organizational chart (Clr. Soto): Who sits where in Finance.

• School Department contract payments (Chair Soto): Clarification of payment procedures for School Department contracts and renewals.

Requests of Councilors

Trash is the star of this section, and not for the first time.

• Housing Authority trash costs (Chair Soto): A cost breakdown and the tonnage fees for Methuen Housing Authority trash collection under the city's municipal trash contract.

• Unaccepted ways roadmap (Clr. Valley): A request that the City Solicitor and DPW build a dedicated section on the city website with a start to finish roadmap for accepting unaccepted ways. That means an overview, an online application or petition form, eligibility rules and documentation, fees, betterments and other costs, estimated timelines, and contact information.

• Echo Lane sewer connection (Clr. Valley): Clarification on the betterment fees and upfront costs the Mayor mentioned for the project.

• Buildings Audit RFP (Clr. Drew): A status update.

• HHSI permit fees review (Clr. Drew): A status update on an issue raised during the FY'2027 Budget Workshop.

• Solid waste (Clr. Drew): The tonnage and tipping fee report, current collection performance, and an update on the FY'2028 contractor transition.

• GIC transition (Clr. Drew): Enrollment status, employee and retiree outreach, and help for unenrolled or ineligible members.

• The Loop (Clr. Drew): An update on the bankruptcy and sale proceedings, city engagement, and the economic development strategy.

• Barrel fees (Clr. DiZoglio): Is anyone sending emails, and if there is no response, are we following up with a phone call?

Public Service

A. Grants

Public Service Grant #31358901, Taft Avenue: National Grid wants to install one JO pole on Taft Avenue, starting about 0 feet northwest of the centerline of the Goodrich Avenue intersection and continuing about 40 feet northwest. The new pole is P4443. Backup is linked in the list near the top.

B. Licenses

None.

C. Contracts

C-27-40 United Compressor & Pump Services, Inc. of Plaistow, NH, to replace one sewer pump at Bridle Path Lane. It covers removal and disposal of the old pump, plus all labor, materials, and equipment, for $32,891.63.

C-27-41 SHI International Corp. of Somerset, NJ, for the CityWorks asset management system software, authorized users, and a one year subscription, for $38,684.21.

C-27-42 Jessica Powers of Salem, MA, for a full time, one year grant position as Data Cataloger for the Historical Commission, helping organize the digital local history collection, for $72,800.00.

C-27-43 Andrew Brockway & Associates of Acton, MA, for engineering services on the architectural needs of certain parts of the Timony Grammar roof, for $29,000.00.

C-27-44 Northeast Behavioral Health Corporation of Danvers, MA, for the Mental Health Care and Jail Diversion Program, for $138,129.00.

C-27-45 is the big one. Waste Management of Londonderry, Inc. would handle curbside trash and recycling, plus dumpster pickup at certain locations, on this schedule:

• Year 1: annual rate $2,689,790, monthly rate $224,150.

• Year 2: annual rate $2,824,284, monthly rate $235,357.

• Year 3: annual rate $2,965,498, monthly rate $247,125.

• Year 4: annual rate $3,113,773, monthly rate $259,481.

• Year 5: annual rate $3,169,451, monthly rate $272,455.

Add it up and the five annual rates come to $14,762,796. One thing worth a second look: the Year 5 monthly figure of $272,455 does not match the Year 5 annual figure of $3,169,451 as listed, so expect someone to ask about that - probably Drew (calling it now). It pairs neatly with the councilor requests above on tonnage, tipping fees, and the FY'2028 contractor transition.

Everything else in this section will pass with little to no issue.

Other Officers and Committee Reports

None are listed on the agenda.

Unfinished Business

Resolutions

TR-26-90 A Joint Resolution of the Mayor and City Council calling for the reopening of the federal investigation into corruption involving the former leadership of the Methuen Police Department. Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Councilor Simard. Charter Objected on October 19th, 2026, so it returns this week.

Back by Charter Objection from the last meeting, tonight we get a full vote on this agenda item. It will be interesting to see how people vote and what nonsense they use to try and justify it.

TR-26-93 Authorizes acceptance of a Fiscal Year 2025 Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program award of $27,999.02. Requested by Mayor Beauregard. Backup is linked in the list near the top.

TR-26-94 Authorizes acceptance of a $48,759.90 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Fiscal Year 2027 Federal Municipal Road Safety Grant. Requested by Mayor Beauregard. Backup is linked in the list near the top.

TR-26-95 Accepts a gift of equipment from Planet Fitness to the Fire Department.

Ordinance

TO-26-20 Amended An Ordinance Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in the City of Methuen. The agenda notes a motion to remove it from the table. 

This is a 1-year hold on Data Centers. Hopefully, someone can “friendly amend” this to extend the timeline a bit longer. One year in City Government time is the equivalent of a few days. This needs to be a 3 to 5 year hold otherwise its just for show.

New Business

Resolutions

TR-26-96 A Joint Resolution of the Mayor and City Council calling for state and federal funding for the Arlington Neighborhood Infrastructure Project (EPA requested). Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Councilor MacLaren.

This is absolutely a worthy cause … safe and clean drinking water shouldn’t be a privelege. If this issue was discovered in the Arrowwood neighborhood, it would have been fixed by now.

That being said, “it’s just a piece of paper that does nothing” so it will be interesting to see who signs on especially after the hardline stance they took and will likely continue to take on the Solomon letter.

TR-26-97 Authorizes acceptance of a 2026 Sustainable Materials Recovery Program and Recycling Dividends Program municipal grant of $36,000. Requested by Mayor Beauregard.

TR-26-98 Transfers $33,000 from the Edwin J. Castle Fund to fund various awards. Requested by the Commission on Trust Funds..

$33,000 from the Castle Fund: $14,800 for a Nevins Library nonprofit training program and $18,200 for musical performers at the 2026 Methuen Santa Parade.

TR-26-99 A Resolution regarding Group Insurance Commission eligibility (EPA requested). Requested by Mayor Beauregard. It lands in the same meeting as Councilor Drew's GIC transition update.

This is sneaky… In December, Mayor Beauregard vetoed a council resolution that would have given elected officials city health insurance, saying it had been approved without a thorough analysis of the cost. Residents packed the Great Hall to oppose it, and the council fell one vote short of overriding him. Ten months later, the mayor is asking the council to do essentially the same thing. TR-26-99 would make every popularly elected official eligible for state GIC coverage for their entire term. The only change is the plan they would join. The resolution leans on $11.2 million in projected savings from moving to the GIC, but that figure says nothing about what it costs to insure part-time councilors and School Committee members.

Yes, the cost has changed dramatically under the GIC. Residents were told in December that this benefit needed a full financial analysis, so they are entitled to see one now. They are also entitled to an explanation of why the answer changed, and to know whether the people voting on this resolution will be the ones who benefit from it.

TR-26-100 Authorizes a Home Rule Petition relative to unaccepted ways maintenance in the City of Methuen. Requested by Mayor Beauregard and the Unaccepted Ways Committee.

Keep Councilor Valley's roadmap request in mind. This will allow all those unaccepted ways to be paved on the City dime.

Ordinance

TO-26-22 An Ordinance to modernize the Industrial Zoning Ordinance of the City of Methuen and promote economic competitiveness. Requested by Mayor Beauregard and the Industrial Zoning Working Group.

This is long overdue. We need an overhaul in our zoning to get Methuen out of the industrial revolution age of doing business.

Any Other Business for the Good and Welfare of the Community

This is the open floor at the end of the night, followed by adjournment.

Signing Off

The Council meets Monday, November 2, 2026, at 7:00 P.M. in the Great Hall, Searles Building, 41 Pleasant Street, third floor. You can also watch on Channel 8 (Comcast), Channel 32 (Verizon), or at Methuen.gov/livestream, and the full agenda and backup are linked above.

The Loop at 90 Pleasant Valley St. is listed by A&G Real Estate Partners, the firm hired to sell properties in the bankruptcy of investor Michael Shabsels and his brother David, according to the Boston Business Journal. Entities linked to Michael Shabsels paid $74 million for the center in 2022. The Loop is not connected to the federal fraud allegations against the brothers over pandemic aid. It is simply one of roughly 50 properties in 22 states caught up in the bankruptcy.

Let's start with what's at stake…

Methuen has been here before. When the old Methuen Mall closed in the late 1990s, the site's annual tax revenue reportedly fell from about $60 million to $18 million. The Loop rose from that wreckage and has since anchored the city's tax base. Whoever buys it next will shape Methuen's finances for a generation.

Now the hard truth about competition.

Just across the border, Tuscan Village in Salem, N.H., offers shopping with no state sales tax. Methuen can't match that, and a fight over price is a losing game. A shopper hunting for a coat will go where it costs less.

But nobody drives 30 minutes for a coat. People travel for an evening. That's the lane Methuen can own: live entertainment.

A mid-size music and performance venue at The Loop would give visitors a reason to arrive at 6 p.m. instead of leaving at 5, feeding the restaurants, theater and shops already on site. Methuen already has a musical identity in its Memorial Music Hall, and a modern venue could build on that story.

Should the city buy the center outright? Probably not. Ownership would pull The Loop off the tax rolls, saddle taxpayers with retail risk, and likely require borrowing on a scale that deserves a much harder look. Even at a bankruptcy discount, the number would be large for a municipal budget.

Better for the city to play matchmaker.

Recruit a buyer with entertainment experience, then offer what a city can: faster permitting, zoning flexibility, and perhaps a tax increment financing deal tied to the venue actually opening.

"We've already begun exploring opportunities to reimagine the long-term future of The Loop, and this news will certainly accelerate those discussions," Mayor Beauregard told Inside Methuen.

That's encouraging. It also raises the stakes.

Bankruptcy sales run on a court's schedule, not a city's. If those discussions are accelerating, residents deserve to know who is at the table, what the city is willing to offer, and what it won't give up. A deal negotiated quietly can still be the right deal, but the public will live with it for decades.

Methuen got a second chance once before. The question is whether it will use this one well.

Source: Boston Business Journal, "Bankruptcy case puts Loop Shopping Center and Westborough Executive Park up for sale" (Oct. 20, 2026)(https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/news/2026/10/20/shabsels-fraud-bankruptcy-real-estate-sale.html)

Monday night’s meeting had a little of everything: lead pipes, e-bike assaults, school contracts nobody can agree on and a Solicitor who likely wouldn’t do well under oath, and a federal corruption investigation that the city’s own leaders are still arguing about supporting a request to reopen.

Best councilor of the night goes to Drew. He asked about the VSO’s unmet needs, contract management software, and trash accountability, and then spent real time making sure next year’s paving list isn’t overly ambitious. Good questions all night. Not glamorous, but it’s the job. Then he stepped up big to ensure the letter to the feds on the police department investigation lived to see another day.

The headline is TR-26-90, the joint resolution calling for the federal investigation into the former police leadership to be reopened. It did not get a vote. It did get a procedural fight, and the tally on a failed motion to table tells you plenty about where people stand.

Full disclosure: I spoke during public participation, so you’ll see my name below. I tried to keep the reporting straight and put my opinions in the italics.

Roll Call / Agenda

Pesce was absent. The agenda was accepted with no changes.

Pledge / Invocation / Moment of Silence

The invocation leaned heavily on Jesus. There was also a moment of remembrance for Don Ruccio.

Public Participation

Seven people spoke in person, and two statements were submitted in writing.

Laurie Keegan*, a School Committee member, walked through the history and process behind the school contracting problems. Her point: the delays hold up services and products for students, and they cost the city more money.

Dan Shibilia (yours truly) spoke in support of fixing the school contract process, but focused on TR-26-90 and the call to reopen the federal investigation. I asked the council to do the right thing.

Greg Curtis described an incident on the rail trail where he and other walkers were assaulted by a group of teens on e-bikes. He said the police have photos of the kids involved and hope the city can do something for long-term safety along the trail.

Linda Soucy spoke about the condition of the water pipes in the Arlington district and the ongoing effort to remove lead service lines. She called it a long-overdue basic safety issue. She said she has spoken with much of the legislative delegation and is working on securing the funding. She also raised a moratorium on hookah request.

Ruth Estes also spoke in support of getting the Arlington neighborhood project done.

Jade Jalbert spoke in support of the investigation letter and described the unresolved matter in strong terms. She also called out Marsan over comments made at the last meeting and his potential conflict of interest as he voted to support Solomon and others when this whole thing started. Near the end of her statement, Chair Soto started a side conversation with the clerk, and Jalbert called her out for not paying attention.

Diane Alaimo spoke in favor of the letter and voiced frustration that her councilors (East End, Marsan, and Soto) did not sign on. She appreciated the letter drafted by the mayor and Simard.

Two written statements were also submitted:

• Alejandro Baez*, a School Committee member, wrote in support of resolving the school contract issues.

• Sid Harris urged the mayor to appoint a city official to the Commission on Disabilities, which is a state requirement.

*Comments made by these School Committee members reflect their own opinions and not that of the body.

Minutes

The minutes of the October 5, 2026 regular meeting and the correction to the September 24, 2026 special meeting were taken up together. Soto asked for a change to a statement attributed to her, and it was approved and accepted. The second set of minutes was approved.

Proclamations / Correspondence

None.

Appointments

Marylin Murphy, Council on Aging. Appointed with no discussion.

Presentation: Veterans Service Officer, 90 Days in Review

Jordan Normandia presented on his first three months. He’s focused on three things: supporting veterans and their families, supporting existing programs, and making services more accessible.

Some of the highlights include…

• 20 active cases and upwards of 100 walk-in visits

• $42,000 in benefits obtained for veterans in 90 days

• Help with benefit and rate increases, annuities, housing assistance, and transportation, plus services for surviving spouses and families

• House calls, community office hours, and work with nonprofits and other local VSOs

• Accreditation in progress and expected soon

Drew asked about the biggest unmet need. Jordan said administrative outreach: many vets don’t know about their benefits or don’t want to ask. Drew asked what the council can do to help. Jordan’s answer: send people his way and spread the word.

In his presentation, the VSO mentioned Chapter 115 and “the Woods” on multiple occasions. Soto asked him to clarify Chapter 115, and Jordan explained the state aid program for veterans which he often helps them apply for benefits. She also asked about housing options available, questioning his mention of “the Woods,” he explained it’s senior housing.

Jordan also shared a list of upcoming events. I will be connecting with him to share those here.

Mayor’s Report

The mayor started with the Arlington lead pipe issue raised during public participation. He said $13 million has been spent so far and $88 million is still needed. He said everyone from local officials to the federal delegation is working on it. He also blamed federal “big beautiful bill” cuts for holding up state-approved funds.

Other items:

• Facilities audit: A meeting with Trane is set, and they’ll work toward the audit RFP. Because Trane is a state vendor, the audit would be free to Methuen.

• Paving: Continues over the next few weeks, with about 8 miles of roadway expected to be completed. There was also a lot of conversation about what will get done in the spring and how the next fiscal year plan may be over ambitious.

• Trash and recycling: 30 carts went out in September and 20 so far in October. Turnaround is about two weeks from order to delivery. The city is working on contacting people about fees.

• Constellations program: Ongoing, with a full report coming next week. Systems and training are still works in progress.

• Police chief search: The cost is covered by the HR other expenses fund.

• Superintendent search: The consultant will meet with groups of parents.

• Zoning modernization: Nearly done, aimed at attracting businesses in fields like life sciences and R&D. The mayor said it could also draw breweries and wineries.

• Dolly Parton Imagination Library: A program mailing books to children under 5, with more at the November meeting.

• Reminders: Employees and retirees must enroll in the GIC, because enrollment is not automatic. He also covered Halloween, early voting, the vets parade, and the Santa parade.

No changes since the last meeting on Searles, and nothing new on back taxes.

CAFO Report

The CAFO was not present. Soto used the absence to raise continuity planning for what happens if something happens to the CAFO. Two items were on the list:

• Update on Searles Estate expenses and revenues (Soto). No change since last meeting, per the mayor.

• Status on outstanding back taxes and recovery to date, first asked at the beginning of the year (Drew). Nothing new, per the mayor.

The whole exchange was awkward. It almost felt like Soto was trying to plan a hit or a contract nonrenewal of the CAFO.

Requests of Councilors

MHA Trash Collection and Tonnage Fees (Soto): The mayor suggested a meeting to get everyone on the same page. Soto circled back to condos and their desire for trash pickup. The mayor said he offered dumpsters, but condo owners don’t want them. Soto’s point was that housing residents don’t pay taxes while condo owners do.

It’s important to note that the City never took away curb side trash pick up from condos and neighborhoods in associations. They never had it. They knew it moving into those homes. To compare these residents and the tax status to those of public housing is insulting and simply ignorant.

School Contracts and the Legal Department (Soto): The mayor pointed to duplicated services between the city and schools, including IT and HR, and said monthly meetings with everyone involved are coming. The solicitor said every contract the schools sent has been processed. He cited last year’s boiler contract and said he wants renewals handled in May instead of August. The open question is who is responsible for that: the school side or the vendor. He explained that all goods and services go through legal and said the schools aren’t following the rules.

Soto, to her credit, said she wants to smooth the process, which is long overdue.

Drew asked about a contract management system. The solicitor said IT has no idea. Drew wants to figure out how to get one. DiZoglio wanted the focus kept on what students need.

Then came the contradiction. The solicitor insisted there are zero contracts sitting with legal. Soto said the letter delivered today from the school business superintendent says there are three.

Since these comments, I have confirmed with 2 school committee members that this is inaccurate. There are contracts sitting with the Solicitor.

Two city officials, one letter, and no agreement on whether three contracts exist. Whatever the real number is, this is exactly why Keegan came to the podium and Beaz submitted a public participation piece. Parents and Students don’t care whose fault the paperwork is. A shared tracking system would settle this argument in about five minutes, and Drew is right to push for one. Also a CLM (contract management tool) is basic functioning for any business with contracts.

Unaccepted Ways Website Roadmap (Valley): The mayor said it’s still in the works. A demo will be sent to Valley for feedback before it goes live.

Echo Lane Sewer Betterment and Upfront Costs (Valley): The mayor explained that the money is available in the CIP to pay upfront. The mayor believes residents are hung up on the concept of a betterment and having to pay it back. Valley wants to know whether the city will cover the cost for residents. The solicitor explained the mechanics: the cost is assessed to homeowners over 20 years. The mayor acknowledged that residents are hoping to avoid any betterment payment.

Buildings Audit RFP Status (Drew): Addressed in the mayor’s report.

Email Signature Standardization (Drew): The mayor said he’s seeing the new signature but has no way to measure adoption. If you see anyone not using it, tell him. He joked that the council is also invited to adopt it.

HHSI Permit Fees Review (Drew): A finalized version will be in front of the council in November.

2026 Paving Program (Drew): Already addressed, though Drew spent a good amount of time making sure next year’s list isn’t overly ambitious.

Constellations Program Update (Drew): Already addressed.

Trash and Recycling Performance and FY2028 Transition (Drew): Drew thinks the current contractor is missing more pickups lately and wants to hold them accountable. His point: they can’t mail it in for the final nine months of the contract.

Valley said she worked with IT on a trash app for schedule lookups and other trash issues, launching next week. DiZoglio asked why the contractor hasn’t been held accountable. The solicitor said the city doesn’t jump straight to fines, and that working things out is easier than penalizing. He said he’d only assess fines if directed to by the DPW director.

Simard asked about the transfer station and bulk pickup. The mayor said the senior bulk pickup program is growing and runs on the honor system, so it may need a look. Drew wants an update on tonnage.

ALPR / Flock Replacement (Drew): The mayor said he’s working with the CIO on alternatives and has heard from many residents thanking him for moving away from Flock, with none in support. He called it an ongoing conversation at all levels. Drew asked directly whether the mayor intends to move away from Flock. The mayor answered that Flock is done and dead: with no appropriation, it has no money.

Permanent Police Chief Search (Drew): Already addressed.

Barrel Fee Follow-Up (DiZoglio): Already addressed. The mayor added that a robocall and a draft email are planned.

Contracts

C-27-39: Blue Integrity Consulting, LLC (Salem, MA), Police Chief Executive Search, $29,500.00

Drew asked why this wasn’t the lowest bid. The mayor said the difference is small, about $1,500, and that the firm’s local value and experience make it the best value over lowest cost. Drew had clearly read the recent article, and he asked the question I posed: is this the same firm? The mayor confirmed it is not.

Simard explained that the price is lower because this isn’t a nationwide search, which the city doesn’t need. He called the consultant the gold standard in the state and said he has faith in the process. Soto objected and said Simard should face the same scrutiny over talking to the consultant that she gets when she talks to people.

Passes unanimously.

I’ll admit I couldn’t help but snicker when Soto asked that Simard get the same scrutiny she gets for talking to people. Here’s the thing: scrutiny isn’t a flat tax that everyone owes equally. It follows track record. Simard spoke with a consultant about a search the whole council was voting on, in public, with the mayor answering Drew’s questions about price and the firm’s background on the record. That’s a councilor doing homework before spending $29,500 of taxpayer money. The scrutiny Soto gets comes from her own past behavior and actions, and no amount of “what about him?” changes that. If she wants to be held to the same standard as Simard, the path is simple: put the city first, every time, the way he has for his entire tenure on the Council. Standards are earned, not requested. This starts by supporting the letter to reopen the investigation.

Committee Reports

None.

Unfinished Business / Resolutions

TR-26-89: Resolution to Amend TR-13-8, Annual Performance Evaluations for City Council Employees (Soto)

Passed without a single word of discussion. 7-1-1, Simard voting no.

TR-26-90: Joint Resolution of the Mayor and City Council Calling for the Reopening of the Federal Investigation into Corruption Involving the Former Leadership of the Methuen Police Department (Mayor Beauregard and Simard)

After the motion was made and seconded, there was an awkward silence. Finally, Drew acknowledged that the public wants this and that the full body should be present. He moved to table, seconded by DiZoglio.

Marsan, Santos, Valley, and Soto voted no, and the motion to table failed.

Drew then raised a charter objection to move the resolution to the next regular meeting. Simard and DiZoglio supported locking it in. MacLaren was right there with them.

Drew’s charter objection was a hero move and I didn’t see it coming. The resolution now lands at the next regular meeting. So, unless one of the 5 original supporters are absent, or flip, it should pass. It will be nice to see Councilor Pesce take this vote after her comments at the last meeting.

Meanwhile, four councilors voted against even delaying the vote. That’s an awkward position, and it says a lot about who they’re answering to. I think this was very likely planned but of course I can’t prove that.

TR-26-92: Resolution Accepting a Gift of 9/11 Memorial Banners (DiZoglio)

Passes unanimously, no comments.

Unfinished Business / Ordinances

TO-26-21: Ordinance Amending the Wage and Salary Classification Plan, Unaffiliated, to Add the Position of Sealer of Weights and Measures

Passes unanimously, no comments.

New Business

Open Meeting Law Complaint, dated September 9, 2026. Referred to legal, unanimous.

Open Meeting Law Complaint, dated September 29, 2026. Referred to legal, unanimous.

New Business / Resolutions

TR-26-93: Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a Fiscal Year 2025 Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program Award, $27,999.02 (Mayor Beauregard) — backup

Passes unanimously, no comments.

TR-26-94: Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a $48,759.90 Commonwealth of Massachusetts FY2027 Federal Municipal Road Safety Grant (Mayor Beauregard) — backup

Passes unanimously, no comments.

TR-26-95: Resolution Accepting a Gift of Equipment from Planet Fitness to the Fire Department

Drew asked who put this on the agenda and was told the mayor brought it forward. He asked what the equipment is. The deputy chief said it’s eight pieces, including treadmills, StairMasters, and some weights. Santos asked where it’s going, and the deputy chief said it will be shared across the stations.

That’s a wrap on October 19, 2026. The full agenda is available at the City of Methuen website and meetings are archived at MethuenTV.

Have a tip, a correction, or something you want covered? Reach out.

Related: City Council Preview: October 19, 2026

Well, the Council is back in the Great Hall on Monday night, and this agenda has a little of everything and the biggest piece has been telegraphed for us. There is the typical long list of questions for the Mayor, a contract to hire a search firm for a permanent police chief, and the second read of the joint resolution from the Mayor and a councilor asking for a federal investigation to be reopened.

A few things stand out right away…

1. Pesce will not be there. She has a planned family vacation.

2. Last meeting, she all but stated she was only supporting the resolution for the joint resolution to the feds for votes.

3. She knew when she voted she would not be at this meeting.

4. The first read passed 5-4. Without Pesce, it fails 4-4.

5. This was a master class is political pandering by Pesce.

The best part of this will get covered below… so keep reading.

Meeting Details

This is a Regular Meeting of the Methuen City Council on Monday, October 19, 2026 at 7:00 P.M. in the Great Hall of the Searles Building, 41 Pleasant Street, 3rd Floor.

Opening Business

Items 1 through 5 are the usual opening steps: Roll Call, Acceptance of the Agenda, the Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation and Moment of Silence, Public Participation, and Organizational Business. Public Participation is your chance to speak to the Council, and with this much on the agenda, it is a good night to show up.

We already know we will be down a Councilor at roll call.

My other pet peeve is the use of religion in the Invocation. As someone who believes in the seperation of church and state, this one blows my mind. Why is everyone ok with it?

Hopefully, the room is full of residents calling for the resignation of anyone not willing to serve the residents of Methuen and support the ask to reopen the investigation. …Although, the last time there was a call for a resignation, Chair Soto launched a war with the Housing Authority. So, be sure to think twice before going to battle if that is what you choose.

Reading and Acceptance of Minutes from Previous Meetings

The Council will take up the minutes of the October 5th, 2026 Regular Meeting and a correction to the minutes of the September 24, 2026 Special Meeting.

Proclamations/Correspondence

None this week.

Consideration of Appointments

Marylin Murphy, Council on Aging: The Council will consider her appointment to the Council on Aging, the board that helps shape services for the city’s seniors.

Presentations/Projects/Department Updates

Veterans Service Officer Presentation, 90 Days in Review: The Veterans Service Officer will report on the first 90 days in the role. It is a chance to hear what veterans in Methuen are asking for and how the office is handling it.

I’d hope to hear from veterans in the community about the performance of the VSO and not the VSO himself. Hopefully we get some insight during public participation.

Mayor’s Report

The Mayors report typically follows the questions in the requests of councilors and a few other fun tidbits the Mayor is able to share.

CAFO Report

• Update on Searles Estate Expenses and Revenues (Councilor Soto): Councilor Soto wants a look at what the Searles Estate is costing the city and what it is bringing in. Expect the numbers to get a lot of attention.

This is an ongoing request. The additional funds have been minimual - mostly just utitlites and some small items for upkeep.

The more interesting recent aspect is that the Friends of the Searles recently filed to form their nonprofit entity with the State (filing can be viewed here). How does the City plan to continue to work together with the organization that seems to be raising a bunch of money and working this property. That’s the question would should be looking for answers on. With no clear guidance if we ever intend to sell this land, we should have some kind of documented relationship with the Friends.

• Outstanding back taxes and recovery to date (Councilor Drew): Councilor Drew first asked at the beginning of the year what progress has been made on collections. This is the follow up, and it is a fair question to ask again.

This is another ongoing request. The reality is that this takes time… sometimes months and somtimes years to collect back taxes through the courts. What we should do is ask for a quarterly balance sheet to show debt off and debt on. Chasing this on a biweekly basis is a unproductive use of time.

Requests of Councilors

This is the longest section of the night, so here it is in agenda order.

• Methuen Housing Authority trash collection (Chair Soto): Clarification on the cost breakdown and tonnage fees for Housing Authority trash collection under the city’s municipal trash contract.

This is the result of the first call for resignation. It’s now being used to leverage the City to get trash pick up for condo complexes. You may remember this was a failed attempt in late 2025 right before the previous council rolled off by Pesce to get trash pick up in her neigborhood. Soto seems to have picked up that burden and is using low income seniors as her stepping stone.

• School contracts and the legal department (Chair Soto): Clarification on why school contracts have to go through the city’s legal department, and what is causing the delay in processing them.

This is truly a great question. I’ll start by saying the school is not perfect. They’ve made mistakes with contracts in the past BUT so has the City. However, the Solicitor doesn’t understand acadameia and the time sensitive nature of the world.

As you may recall, due to delays from his office, our AP students went without materials for a few weeks and our new literacy program was delayed. In addition, we had delayed contracting with the solar contracts.

There is a very valid arguement for letting the School either hire it’s own “in house” counsel or utilize its already engaged attorneys for the contract review in conjunction with the purchasing department.

• Unaccepted ways roadmap (Councilor Valley): A request that the City Solicitor and the DPW build a dedicated section on the city website walking residents through the acceptance of unaccepted ways. It would cover the process from beginning to end, an online application or petition form, eligibility requirements and supporting documents, fees, betterment assessments and other costs, estimated timelines, and contact information.

Valley was told this was almost done, twice. If it’s not done, I am sure she will be less than happy.

• Echo Lane sewer connection (Councilor Valley): Clarification on the betterment fees and upfront costs the Mayor mentioned for the Echo Lane sewer connection project. Homeowners on that street will want to hear the answer.

Homeowners on that street will want to hear the answer… if we ever get one.

• Buildings Audit RFP status (Councilor Drew): An update on where the Buildings Audit request for proposals stands.

This has been ongoing for months. If it’s that important, why hasn’t the council worked up a draft RFP for the Mayor’s office and purchasing to review? That’s what I would have done. Especially knowning this is a low priority item for an adminstration that has been under constant strain due to budget, staffing, and ongoing madness. Seems like it could have greased the wheels a bit.

• City employee email signature standardization (Councilor Drew): A rollout and implementation update on standardizing email signatures for city employees.

In my opinion, this should have been marked complete as the end of the last meeting. It’s unclear what Drew is looking for at this point since the language on this ask hasn’t changed.

• HHSI Permit Fees Review (Councilor Drew): A status update on the review of HHSI permit fees, which came up during the FY2027 Budget Workshop.

These new fee schedules were assumed in the budget creation process. We should probably get them in and approved before we lose too much of that revenue.

• 2026 Paving Program (Councilor Drew): Which streets are done, which remain, the Spring 2027 list, and whether the work will be finished before winter.

The Mayor had a VERY aggressive paving plan for the year. This will be interesting to hear.

• Constellations Program (Councilor Drew): A financial and performance update on the program.

• Trash and recycling collection (Councilor Drew): Current service performance, missed pickups, and an update on the FY2028 contractor transition.

• ALPR / FLOCK replacement system (Councilor Drew): Status of the Automated License Plate Reader replacement system, along with an update on the privacy and data policy that will govern it.

This is the new hot button issue for the Council thanks to Valley and her grandstanding on being “flocked”. It didn’t impact her until it did and now they all care.

• Permanent Police Chief search (Councilor Drew): The status, process, and anticipated timeline for finding a permanent chief.

• Barrel fees (Councilor DiZoglio): An update on barrel fees, including whether anyone is sending emails out and, if there is no response, whether the city is following up with a phone call.

This request hasn’t changed in weeks. It’s starting to feel like we are being lazy with the agenda or this is a standing moment for DiZoglio to monologue about how messed up the trash system is and has been (as if we weren’t all already aware.)

Public Service

A. Grants: None.

B. Licenses: None.

C. Contract(s):

C-27-39 Blue Integrity Consulting, LLC of 16 Forest Front Street #207, Salem, MA 01970, for executive search services to conduct a comprehensive recruitment process for the position of Chief of Police for the Methuen Police Department, in the amount of $29,500.00.

Why it matters… this is the contract that puts the permanent chief search in motion, and it connects directly to Councilor Drew’s request for a timeline earlier in the night.

Someone should ask if this is the same firm we used when we hired McNamara a few years back?

There should also be some conversation about what they want to see in the next police chief. This particular conversation should be ongoing.

Other Officers and Committee Reports

No specific reports are listed on the agenda but we shall see what comes up.

Unfinished Business

Resolution(s)

TR-26-89 Resolution to amend TR-13-8, Resolution providing for annual performance evaluations: City Council Employees (Request of Chair Soto).

This is a second read to set up annual performance evaluations for employees who work for the City Council. It is housekeeping on the surface, but it is about how the Council manages its own staff.

Hopefully, someone asks for HR to weigh in on the process because the concept of it being annoymous that was floated last meeting seems wrong and likely illegal. Additionally, they would need to be carefully not to committ any open meeting law violations in the process of reviewing employees.

TR-26-90 A Joint Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Methuen Calling for the Reopening of the Federal Investigation into Corruption Involving the Former Leadership of the Methuen Police Department (Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Councilor Simard).

This is the big one. The Mayor and Councilor Simard are asking for the federal investigation to be reopened, and they want the full Council to go on record. Expect a real debate and a fair deal of back and forth.

The kicker here… the members who agreed have already signed it. The question becomes, if it fails, will the Mayor still send it with the signatures of those who voted yes in read one?

It’s also worth looking at those who didn’t sign and wondering who they really support.

TR-26-92 A Resolution Accepting a Gift of 9/11 Memorial Banners (Sponsored by Clr. Ryan DiZoglio).

The city would formally accept a gift of 9/11 memorial banners. A gift to the city has to be accepted by the Council, so this is the vote that makes it official.

Ordinance(s)

TO-26-21 An Ordinance Amending the Wage and Salary Classification Plan, Unaffiliated, to add the new position of Sealer of Weights and Measurers.

This creates a new position in the city’s pay plan for employees who are not in a union. A Sealer of Weights and Measures is the person who checks that scales, gas pumps, and similar devices are accurate, so this protects both shoppers and businesses.

New Business

Open Meeting Law Complaint, Dated September 9, 2026

Open Meeting Law Complaint, Dated September 29, 2026

Two Open Meeting Law complaints are on the agenda, one dated September 9 and one dated September 29. The agenda does not describe the substance of either, so I will leave it there until the Council takes them up.

Resolution(s)

TR-26-93 A Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a Fiscal Year 2025 Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program Award, $27,999.02 (Request of Mayor Beauregard). This accepts an award from the Bulletproof Vest Partnership Program to help the police department with protective vests. Backup is linked on the agenda. View backup.

TR-26-94 A Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a $48,759.90 Commonwealth of Massachusetts Fiscal Year 2027 Federal Municipal Road Safety Grant (Request of Mayor Beauregard). This accepts a road safety grant of $48,759.90. Backup is linked on the agenda. View backup.

TR-26-95 Resolution Accepting a Gift of Equipment from Planet Fitness to the Fire Department. The Council will formally accept a gift of equipment from Planet Fitness for the Fire Department. Free equipment is always welcome, and the vote makes it official.

These should all be easy and quick. There is nothing of consequence here and this just helps the City.

Ordinance(s)

None listed.

Any Other Business for the Good and Welfare of the Community

The floor opens for anything else councilors want to raise before the meeting ends.

Adjourn

The meeting adjourns after the final business of the night.

Watch live:

• methuen.gov/livestream

• Channel 8 (Comcast) or Channel 32 (Verizon)

• YouTube: youtube.com/@MethuenMeetings

Methuen voters heading to the polls on Tuesday, November 3, will see the longest list of statewide ballot questions since 1994. Nine measures await you on the ballot, covering public records, public defender unions, primary elections, Election Day registration, state tax revenue, conservation funding, housing, marijuana sales and firearms. According to the Secretary of the Commonwealth and news reports, ballots in most Massachusetts cities and towns are expected to run two to three pages.

TL;DR

Early voting in Methuen starts this Saturday, October 17. The deadline to register to vote or update a registration is Saturday, October 24. With reports of voters being listed as inactive on their city or town voter lists occuring all over the country, election officials and voting rights groups are urging residents to check their status now, while there is still time to fix a problem.

You can check your status here on the MA Secretary of State website: Voter Status.

Here are the key dates you should be aware of as we prepare for a multipage ballot.

The Nine Statewide Ballot Questions

Questions 1 through 8 are laws proposed by citizen initiative petition. Question 9 is a referendum asking voters whether to keep or repeal an existing law, the firearms law the Legislature passed in 2024. Each question becomes binding law if a majority of voters approve it. The wording below follows the official summaries and yes and no vote statements published by the Secretary of the Commonwealth.

Question 1: Expanding the Public Records Law

What it does: Would make most records held by the Legislature and the Office of the Governor public records under the Massachusetts Public Records Law. It would exempt documents related to the development of public policy, and communications between legislators and constituents that are reasonably related to a request for help getting government benefits or services or dealing with a government agency.

A yes vote: Would make most records held by the Legislature and the governor's office public records.

A no vote: Would make no change to the Public Records Law.

Question 2: Collective Bargaining for CPCS Employees

What it does: Would specify that employees of the Committee for Public Counsel Services, the state agency whose staff includes public defenders, may engage in collective bargaining with their employer. After signing a bargaining agreement, the agency would have to ask the governor for the money needed to fund it.

A yes vote: Would specify that Committee for Public Counsel Services employees may form a union to bargain collectively.

A no vote: Would make no change to the law governing labor relations for these employees.

Question 3: State Primary Elections

What it does: Would eliminate party primaries for state elections and replace them with a single all party primary. All candidates, whatever their party, would appear on one ballot, voters could choose any candidate, and the top two finishers would advance to the general election. Candidates for governor and lieutenant governor would run jointly. Any group whose candidates for a statewide office won at least 3 percent of the primary ballots would receive political party status.

A yes vote: Would eliminate separate party primaries for state elections and create one primary in which the top two candidates advance.

A no vote: Would make no change to the laws governing primary elections.

Question 4: Election Day Registration

What it does: Would let eligible people register to vote, or update the address on their registration, at their polling place on Election Day. They would need proof of residency, such as a photo ID, utility bill, bank statement or lease, and would sign an oath under penalty of perjury. Someone without proof could cast a provisional ballot that counts only if the proof is supplied within the deadlines in the law. People already registered could not change their party enrollment on Election Day.

A yes vote: Would permit eligible citizens to register or update their address at their polling place on Election Day.

A no vote: Would make no change to the laws governing voter registration.

Important for this year: the proposed law would not take effect until January 1, 2028. For the November 3, 2026 election, the registration deadline is still Saturday, October 24.

Question 5: State Revenue Limit and Rebate

What it does: Would limit the revenue the state can collect in a year to the prior year's net revenue, increased by the average growth in Massachusetts wages and salaries over the most recent three years. Any excess would be refunded to taxpayers the following year. Revenue from the surtax on incomes over $1 million would be counted. It would take effect July 1, 2027.

A yes vote: Would change the limit on state revenue collection as described above and provide for a rebate of revenue above the limit.

A no vote: Would make no change to the law on state revenue collection.

Question 6: Natural Resource Conservation Fund

What it does: Would create a Nature for All Fund. Subject to appropriation by the Legislature, it would receive 50 percent of state sales and use taxes on sporting goods, recreational vehicles and golf courses in its first year, and 100 percent after July 1, 2028. The money could be spent on natural resource conservation, including protecting land and water and creating or improving parks, trails and green spaces. A 15 member board would oversee it. It would take effect July 1, 2027.

A yes vote: Would create a fund for natural resource conservation financed by some state taxes on sporting goods, recreational vehicles and golf course use.

A no vote: Would not create the fund or change how those sales and use taxes are spent.

Question 7: Single Family Homes

What it does: Would allow a single family home to be built in a residentially zoned area if the lot is at least 5,000 square feet, has at least 50 feet of frontage on a street or public way, and has access to public sewer and water. Cities and towns could still reasonably regulate things like height, distance from neighboring buildings, open space, parking and short term rentals.

A yes vote: Would allow single family homes on lots of 5,000 square feet or more in residential areas, subject to reasonable local regulation.

A no vote: Would make no change to the law on building single family homes.

Question 8: Prohibit Retail Sale of Adult Recreational Use Marijuana

What it does: Would repeal the laws that legalize, regulate and tax the retail sale of recreational marijuana. Adults 21 and older could still possess up to one ounce, with no more than 5 grams of concentrate, and gift that amount to another adult. Possessing between one and two ounces would bring a $100 civil penalty and forfeiture. Licensed recreational businesses could apply on an expedited basis to become medical marijuana dispensaries, and the Cannabis Control Commission would regulate only the medical market. It would take effect January 1, 2028.

A yes vote: Would prohibit the legalization, regulation and taxation of retail sales of adult recreational use marijuana and change the penalties for possession.

A no vote: Would make no change to the law on marijuana.

Question 9: Firearms Regulation (Referendum on an Existing Law)

What it does: This is a referendum on the firearms law approved by the House 124 to 33 and the Senate 35 to 5 on July 18, 2024. The law, among other things, lets school administrators and licensed health care providers ask a court for an Extreme Risk Protection Order, penalizes untraceable ghost guns and requires serial numbers on most firearms, requires a person to be 21 to own a semiautomatic rifle or shotgun, expands the definition of machine gun to include devices such as bump stocks and Glock switches, and bars carrying firearms in government buildings, polling locations and schools with certain exceptions.

A yes vote: Would keep the law in place.

A no vote: Would repeal the law.

Where to Read More

The Secretary of the Commonwealth's Information for Voters booklet, known as the Red Book, was mailed to every registered voter household in September. It includes the full text of each proposal, the official summaries, and arguments for and against. It is also available at www.VoteInMA.com. The League of Women Voters of Massachusetts (lwvma.org) and CommonWealth Beacon (commonwealthbeacon.org) have published explainers, and the League has taken positions on some questions. Readers should weigh those groups' stated positions alongside the official arguments.

How to Register to Vote

Voters must be registered by Saturday, October 24, to vote in this election. To register in Massachusetts you must be a U.S. citizen, a Massachusetts resident, and at least 18 years old by Election Day, and you cannot be currently incarcerated for a felony conviction. Sixteen and seventeen year olds can preregister.

Online: Go to www.sec.state.ma.us/ovr (also reachable through www.VoteInMA.com). If you have a Massachusetts driver's license or state ID, you can register or update your information online.

By mail: If you do not have a Massachusetts driver's license, use a paper registration form. Mailed forms must be postmarked by October 24.

In person: Forms are available at the City Clerk's Office, 41 Pleasant Street, Searles Building, Room 112, and at the early voting site. Call 978.983.8515 to confirm options for the final day.

If you have moved, even within Methuen, update your registration by the same deadline. Without an update, your name may not be on the list at your new precinct.

Check Your Registration Status Now

Check at www.sec.state.ma.us/voterregistrationsearch, or through www.VoteInMA.com, or call the City Clerk at 978.983.8515. The look up shows whether you are registered, your party enrollment, and your voting precinct.

About voters who have been "unenrolled" or made inactive

Some residents say large numbers of voters have been "unenrolled" lately. In Massachusetts, "unenrolled" has a specific meaning: a registered voter who is not enrolled in any political party. That is a normal status and does not affect your right to vote. What has worried voters is something different: being listed as inactive, or being dropped from the voter list altogether.

Recent reporting by the Dorchester Reporter describes lifelong, regular voters in Boston who found themselves listed as inactive, and notes that high inactive rates were also seen in some gateway cities outside Boston. Voting rights advocates have questioned the statewide inactive figure, which the state reported at about 15 percent in 2024. The ACLU of Massachusetts told the newspaper it is not seeing the kind of voter suppression in the state that has been reported elsewhere. This article did not find published inactive voter figures for Methuen specifically. Residents with questions can ask the City Clerk.

Here is how the state says the process works:

Voters who do not return the annual city census are placed on the inactive list. They remain registered and can still vote.

Inactive voters stay registered until they fail to vote in two consecutive biennial state elections, after which they are removed from the list.

If you are listed as inactive, your status appears on the voter list when you check in at the polls. You will need to show identification and sign an Affirmation of Current and Continuous Residence, which restores you to the active list.

You are also restored to active status by filling out a new registration form or by submitting something to election officials, signed under penalty of perjury, that confirms your address.

If the look up shows you are not registered at all, you must register by October 24. After that date, you cannot register for this election. Separately, a federal judge in Boston dismissed a U.S. Justice Department lawsuit in April that sought the state's full voter list, the Boston Globe and WGBH reported. That case concerned access to the list, not local list maintenance.

Three Ways to Vote

Early voting in person

Early voting runs from Saturday, October 17, through Friday, October 30, at Sanborn Hall, Public Safety Building, 90 Hampshire Street. All registered Methuen voters may vote early. The City of Methuen has posted the following schedule. Once an early ballot is cast, it is final, and you cannot vote again on Election Day.

Questions about early voting can go to the City Clerk's Office at 978.983.8515. The state also lets you search early voting locations and times by city or town at www.sec.state.ma.us/earlyvotingweb/EarlyVotingSearch.aspx.

Voting by mail

Any registered voter can vote by mail without giving a reason. Every registered voter was mailed an application earlier this year. If you have not applied, the City Clerk must receive your request by 5 p.m. on Tuesday, October 27, but apply as soon as you can. Track your application and ballot at www.TrackMyBallotMA.com.

Return your ballot by mail, postmarked on or before November 3 and received by 5 p.m. on Friday, November 6.

Or use the secure drop box outside City Hall at 41 Pleasant Street, ground level entrance, or deliver it to the City Clerk or an early voting site.

The Secretary of the Commonwealth recommends that if you have not mailed your ballot within a week of Election Day, you use a drop box or return it in person so it is counted.

Election Day, Tuesday, November 3

Polls are open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Anyone in line at 8 p.m. is entitled to vote. Your polling place depends on your precinct. Methuen is divided into East, Central and West districts with multiple precincts. A precinct map is posted on the City of Methuen Voting and Elections page at www.methuen.gov/856.

Where Do I Vote?

Enter your home address at www.WhereDoIVoteMA.com. It will show your Election Day polling place, your early voting site and times, and the items on your ballot. Polling places can change between elections, so look it up even if you have voted in the same place for years.

What to Bring and Other Things to Know

Identification: Most Massachusetts voters do not need ID. You may be asked for it if you are voting for the first time in Massachusetts, are listed as inactive, cast a provisional or challenged ballot, or a poll worker has a legal reason to ask. Acceptable proof typically includes a driver's license, state ID, recent utility bill, rent receipt or lease.

Bring your own research: The ballot is long. Marking a sheet at home from the Red Book can save time in the booth.

Party enrollment and primaries: Unenrolled voters can choose which party's ballot to take in a state primary. A voter who wants to switch parties must update the registration before the deadline.

Voters with disabilities: The Secretary of the Commonwealth's Elections Division lists accessible voting options at www.sec.state.ma.us.

Problems at the polls: Ask the poll worker to call the City Clerk to confirm your registration. If there is still a dispute, ask for a provisional ballot.

Official sources

Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 2026 State Election Ballot Questions (official ballot wording, yes and no vote statements, nonbinding district questions): www.sec.state.ma.us, Elections Division

Secretary of the Commonwealth, 2026 Information for Voters (the Red Book) and Your 2026 Voting Options: www.VoteInMA.com and www.sec.state.ma.us

Register to vote online: www.sec.state.ma.us/ovr

Check your registration: www.sec.state.ma.us/voterregistrationsearch

Find your polling place and ballot: www.WhereDoIVoteMA.com

Early voting locations and times by city or town: www.sec.state.ma.us/earlyvotingweb/EarlyVotingSearch.aspx

Track your mail ballot: www.TrackMyBallotMA.com

Secretary of the Commonwealth, Inactive Voters page: www.sec.state.ma.us, Elections Division, Voting Information

Secretary of the Commonwealth, Find My Local Election Office and Dropboxes (Methuen listing): www.sec.state.ma.us, Elections Division, Voter Resources

Mass.gov, Protecting Your Right to Vote (eligibility and ID guidance): www.mass.gov

City of Methuen

Voting and Elections page, precinct map, and districts: www.methuen.gov/856

Office of the City Clerk: www.methuen.gov/182

News Flash notices, including "Methuen Announces Early Voting Schedule for November 2026 Election" and "Vote by Mail Applications Arriving for 2026 Elections": www.methuen.gov and cityofmethuen.net

News and nonprofit sources

CommonWealth Beacon, "Massachusetts 2026 ballot questions, explained": commonwealthbeacon.org

CBS Boston, "Here are the 9 ballot questions Massachusetts voters will consider in the November e

Written by: Dan Shibilia

If you only have time for one thing from Monday night, it’s TR-26-90: the joint resolution from the Mayor and Simard asking the feds to reopen the investigation into the former leadership of the Methuen Police Department.

It passed its first read 5-4. Then the emergency preamble failed 4-5. That sets up a second read at the next meeting, and the math gets interesting fast when you know the facts behind the scenes. This is where we learn a lot about our elected officials and who they have decided to support in their roles.

An emergency preamble “EPA" is a motion that makes a resolution active after one read instead of requiring two reads.

Spoiler alert: it is not always the taxpayers.

The rest of the night had a little of everything. A Great Hall that’s an acoustic mess. A Little Free Pantry debate that somehow involved allergies, animal-proofing, and a legal notice we were told we don’t need. A Housing Authority trash price Soto wants to understand before she tries it on the condos. And three contracts that passed without anyone saying a word.

Also: the invocation was about leadership. Hold that thought because it becomes comical in a sad way at the end of the night.

You can read the letter to the feds here, the agenda is here, and the video is on the Methuen Meetings YouTube channel.

Here’s everything, in order.

Roll Call / Agenda

All present and accounted for.

The Mayor pulled C-27-34 and C-27-37 from the agenda. The agenda passes with that one change.

Pledge / Invocation / Moment of Silence

Santos delivered an invocation about leadership. Since I knew what was coming later in the meeting, it was comical, and it set up the Solomon letter discussion perfectly. Self-awareness was not on the agenda or a skill processed by our esteemed chair and her servants.

Public Participation

Larry Smith, author of the Methuen-famous 6 Degrees of Corruption book, spoke first. He told the council about the whistleblower case that is pending in Suffolk County against the MPTC board. He also said the court is using the 8th Amendment to give officers back their pensions, and he’s concerned that’s where Fountain and Solomon are headed. He reminded the city that we’re on the hook for everything Fountain did, and said he thinks the state is hanging Methuen out to dry.

When he finished, Soto asked, “who is MPTC?” Smith explained it’s the Municipal Police Training Committee.

Arthur Hardy, a longtime Methuen cop and former Patrolman Union President, recounted how he was a target of Solomon and spent over a year on suspension until it was overturned. He explained how it all stemmed from how he was tasked with training Fountain and asked too many questions. He recounted that after a few days of training Fountain was promoted to Detective. Hardy said he raised concerns about Fountain, and that’s what put the target on his back. He described Solomon as having total control over the department and advocated for the federal review.

[My take]: Soto asking who the MPTC is, in a room where that exact question was the whole point of the speaker’s remarks, is concerning given her role and tenure on the Council. It’s a basic piece of the story the council was about to vote on.

Also, Hardy left out a major piece of the puzzle… He didn’t mention that the City lost in Court thanks to Solomon’s handling of the matter and we had to give him all the back pay. This fact helps present a more accurate picture.

Minutes

The minutes from the Monday, September 21, 2026 Regular Meeting and the Thursday, September 24, 2026 Special Meeting both pass. Pesce voted present on the 21st since she wasn’t at that meeting, which makes sense.

Soto asked about how her question was recorded: whether the council was bringing back the letter from Chief MacNamara. The Solicitor said he didn’t read the minutes (not his job), but confirmed everything was done properly.

[My take]: This was on purpose. Soto needed to sound like she’d been paying attention to the bigger issues and care about the City before turning her back on the citizens later in the night.

Presentation: Great Hall Audio, Visual & Lighting Assessment Report

MacLaren read into the record the report prepared by Karen Hayden, Director of Methuen Community Studios. The long and short of it is that the room is an acoustic mess because of the hard design and high ceilings. Lighting can be updated and window treatments added, but that’s a small band-aid. The real problem is the reverberation off the ceilings.

DiZoglio suggested using electrical services from GLTS. Hayden didn’t know their capabilities, but said the height may be a concern. Drew pointed out that a scissor lift can’t get up to the Great Hall, so any work would have to be done on scaffolding.

… This is another project that has little benefits with potential neverending costs that we don’t need right now. We should just hold the meetings somewhere else that is more practical.

Mayor’s Report

The Mayor started with TR-26-90 and read the letter into the record. He said the past council spoke with one unified voice and hopes this council can do the same.

Other items:

• Little Free Pantry: The program is getting a grant. It’s the same idea as the little free library but for shelf-stable food.

• Website: Progress is being built in response to Valley’s request.

• Housing Authority trash: Already discussed; he’s happy to take questions.

• Buildings audit: They found another community that did the audit Drew is asking for, and used it to show cost and how much bigger Methuen is. He said funds are available.

• Email signatures: Per the signature item, an email is out to adopt the new standard.

• Barrel fees/trash: The Mayor met with DiZoglio on trash.

• GIC: Moving forward; open enrollment is open.

• Methuen Literacy Book Buddy program: Ties 3rd graders with a pen pal. Sign up at Methuenreads.org.

• 5 Wallace St: this location was one of the sites linked to the human trafficking. It is inow a YWCA, which he called coming full circle. People can go there for help to get their lives on track.

• Savings: He also hit on savings thanks to the electric aggregation program.

• Events: He listed off many new events coming up.

Valley asked about Echo Lane. The Mayor is still working on it and said a response is coming.

CAFO Report

Searles Estate Expenses & Revenues (Req. of Soto): About $14k in new expenses. Most of it is tied to National Register prep work, plus new locks and other items.

Outstanding back taxes and recovery to date (Req. of Drew): Drew asked at the beginning of the year what progress had been made in collections. Two summaries were provided. One shows $6.1M collected since 2019. The other is an analysis of the $7M still outstanding.

Requests of Councilors

Housing Authority Trash Collection (Soto): Soto requested clarification on the cost breakdown and tonnage fees for Methuen Housing Authority trash collection through the city’s municipal trash contract. The fee per the Mayor’s report is $190/w, but Soto said she called Harvey (the trash provider) and wants this on the agenda to understand the real price. If it’s that low, she wants to start providing condos and others others currently not serviced by City trash services with trash pickup.

The Mayor explained some condos use dumpsters, and said he offered developments dumpsters and was turned down with a response that was essentially “curb side or nothing.”

Unaccepted Ways Roadmap (Valley): Valley asked the City Solicitor and DPW to develop a dedicated page on the city website with a step-by-step roadmap for accepting unaccepted ways, including the process, an online application or petition, eligibility and documentation, fees and betterment assessments, timelines, and contacts.

The Solicitor said it’ll be up this week. Valley was upset, since that’s the same answer she got last week. The Solicitor explained he can put it up, but it’s not done.

Echo Lane Sewer Connection Costs (Valley): Betterment fees and upfront costs mentioned by the Mayor. Addressed earlier in the Mayor’s report.

Buildings Audit RFP (Drew): The Mayor restated what he said in his report.

Email Signature Standardization (Drew): All set, but Drew wants a percentage. The Mayor doesn’t have one, but restated that adoption is rolling out.

HHSI Permit Fees Review (Drew): No update, due to other issues that came up.

Barrel Fees Follow-Up (DiZoglio): DiZoglio said he’ll be meeting with the Mayor this week.

Public Service

Vehicle for Hire License: Zanr Transportation, LLC (Joseph J. Aime, 93 Haverhill Street)

Moved by Drew, seconded by DiZoglio. No discussion. Passes unanimously.

C-27-35: EPlus Technology, Inc., Virus Protection, $34,291.49

Passes unanimously without a single word.

C-27-36: Energy Source, LLC, Energy Conservation Project and Building Maintenance Upgrades at the Timony Grammar School, $300,000.00

Project total is $300,000. Of that, $222,580.00 is paid directly from a City grant and $77,420.00 is paid with utility incentives paid directly from National Grid and Eversource to the vendor. Passes unanimously with no discussion.

Order Calling for State Election, November 3, 2026

Passes unanimously, again with no discussion.

New Business / Resolutions

TR-26-89 — Resolution to Amend TR-13-8: Annual Performance Evaluations for City Council Employees

Moved by Santos, seconded by DiZoglio.

This was brought forward by Soto to create a uniform review process for council employees, though it’s housed with HR. It covers the two clerks and the Solicitor. Drew asked who creates the form. Soto said the standard form used by the state is attached. Drew then asked who’s covered, which Soto had just stated. Maybe he couldn’t hear in the Great Hall. The evaluations would be anonymous.

Passes 8-1. There was no roll call or mention of who voted no.

TR-26-90 — Joint Resolution of the Mayor and City Council Calling for the Reopening of the Federal Investigation into Corruption Involving the Former Leadership of the Methuen Police Department (EPA requested) (Mayor Beauregard and Simard)

Soto passed this straight to Simard without getting a motion and a second. Simard started, and the Solicitor helped correct the misstep.

Simard recounted his experience with the harassment lawsuit Fountain filed against him, which was dismissed. “This is what happens when you fight bullies in this City, they go after you in district court,” he said, referring to Fountain suing to silence him years back. He believes there are unindicted co-conspirators. “Who you are and who you know,” Simard said, tying people to the company they keep. If nothing was done wrong, he said, there should be nothing to worry about. He hoped the council could vote unanimously.

Marsan was not in favor. He doesn’t think it helps us move forward, and doesn’t think going after those people would help us. He doesn’t think there’s new evidence (he’s also not an investigator), and he wants to be done with it. (Worth remembering he’s a friend of Solomon.)

DiZoglio voiced his support, but hopes it goes beyond the PD and covers all involved. He believes the council should do this for the citizens.

MacLaren was in favor. She agreed with Marsan that we need to heal, but said, “we can’t begin to heal until adequate justice is done.” She shared that from those she has spoken too many believe adequate justice was not done.

Pesce started by acknowledging her personal connection to the saga, given her father was mayor at the time and her personal connections with Solomon (she didn’t say that but that’s the connection). She said everyone knows Methuen because of this drama, and believes it started as a witch hunt. She said she too wants to know the hows and whys. She’s voting in favor, but doesn’t believe anything will come of it. She said, in a very political way, that she’s voting this way to keep people happy, but wants it over.

Pesce is right on one point: the council has no authority here. This is a plea and a hope and nothing more.

Simard addressed Marsan, calling out the elephant in the room: Marsan was on the council when all this started, making Solomon the highest-paid police chief in the nation and passing the Superior Officers Union contract. Simard graciously said Marsan had the wool pulled over his eyes. Simard also called out Marsan’s statements about the people he’s talked to, essentially implying he doesn't believe him and that we need to serve all the people who were wronged and the residents.

Santos asked how much this would cost the city in legal fees. The Solicitor said if any, minimal. The Mayor added that while there’s no cost with this, if anyone files against the city over Fountain and Solomon’s actions, it could be a lot.

Soto asked if the Solicitor had drafted the letter. He said no. She wanted the federal decision referenced in the letter attached so she could read it. She called Simard and the Mayor emotionally driven. She said we can’t move forward if we focus on the past. “I agree that the sentiment is very strong for those who lived it but personally I didn’t,” she said. She also focused on the statute of limitations and called this a waste of time. She took issue with statements of fact in the letter, though she didn’t say which ones.

The Solicitor tried to explain this would be a grand jury process, not something done by the City or through FOIA. Soto also asked why we aren’t just focusing on MPTC. She was concerned about who would represent her if she signed on and it came back and she got sued. The Solicitor explained city officials are immune, and that when he reviewed the letter he didn’t see anything that wasn’t true or already determined true by a court. She said she’d rather see the Mayor and Simard send it without the council, or have concerned citizens sign a petition.

She then said she’s consistent in how she votes, citing the GLTS issue over the superintendent’s pay, where she said she didn’t need to sign the letter because she “doesn’t have a problem with how much he makes.” She tried to make light of the fact that she’ll “get killed” (on social media) whether she votes yes or no, so “bring it on.” She said, “I don’t think this is necessary” and that she “feels uncomfortable signing on to this.”

The Solicitor reminded the body that nobody has to sign even if it passes.

The Mayor came back with answers. He’s going to send this letter regardless. “Everything we have done to this point has been done in a united sense,” he said. He talked about the effect a communication like this can have, recalling that a letter to the State Inspector General started this process. He said, “I am willing to testify under oath” that the week after Mayor Perry passed, he learned the coming indictments had been abandoned by the feds. He acknowledged that even if the chance is small, he has an obligation to run with this.

Drew said he doesn’t feel as jaded since he didn’t live here when it happened, but everyone he’s talked to wanted this, and he acknowledged he works for the people.

Marsan spoke up, upset about the “wool pulled over his eyes” comment. He feels he was lied to, too.

Soto interjected here, telling them she will not allow a back-and-forth exchange between the Councilors… but continued to taunt and provoke Simard, who, in typical fashion, kept his cool.

Simard reminded her of the multiple campaign of letters to multiple agencies about voter irregularities (after a voter was told she needed to check two boxes in a district race, Soto sent multiple letters, and Simard read them all), and asked, “where is your conviction here?” He added, “I think we owe the Citizens.”

After telling Simard and Marsan there wouldn’t be a back and forth between councilors, Soto told Simard he’s holding a grudge on the City Clerk’s behalf, and that this is clearly personal for him and others. But not her. “Nothing is going to come from it, why would I sign it,” she said. “If you’re a councilor sitting here for personal vendettas, you shouldn’t be sitting here, none of us should.”

[My take]: “Nothing is going to come from it, so why would I sign it” is a strange argument against a letter that costs nothing. If it doesn’t hurt, why not, Madam Chair? And the consistency defense, comparing this to a superintendent’s pay letter, tells you something. The council works for the people of Methuen. It isn’t a one-councilor show. Seems she doesn’t understand that.

The resolution passes 5-4, with Marsan, Santos, Valley, and Soto voting no.

The vote on the EPA had no discussion except a snarky remark from Soto to Simard that he always votes no on EPAs but will vote yes on this one. Marsan, Pesce, Santos, Valley, and Soto voted no. The EPA fails 4-5.

Here’s the fun part. This was a first read. Since the EPA failed, the resolution has to come back at the next meeting. Pesce is scheduled to be away with her family and miss that meeting. So unless someone changes their vote, this letter dies on a 4-4 vote.

[My take]: Was Pesce’s vote on the EPA strategic? I believe so. She’s not stupid and she knows what she’s doing. She voted yes on the first read, which she all but said was about electability and saving face then voted no on the EPA, forcing a second read when she knows full well it will fail. This is smart, manipulative, and very political of her.

TR-26-91 — Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a $7,500 2026 Catalyst Fund Grant from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation for the Little Free Pantry Initiative (EPA requested) (Director of Public Health Caeli Tegan Zampach)

View summary and letter & agreement on the agenda.

Moved by Santos, seconded by DiZoglio.

Drew asked who maintains the boxes after installation. The Mayor said Health and Human Services will. Marsan asked if they’re just like the library boxes. The Mayor restated everything he’d already said. Drew asked about liability if someone gets sick, and was told HHSI will monitor. Apparently Pesce made a comment off-mic that Soto repeated, asking about people with allergies who get sick. Director Zampach explained there are protections and no liability on the city.

Pesce asked who else does this and whether we’ve looked at how they manage. Zampach said that’s part of the planning, and that the city is copying from somewhere else.

Marsan wanted to leave a sign saying people shouldn’t fill the boxes, which suggested he didn’t understand how these mini libraries and pantries work. The Director cleared it up. Drew wanted a legal notice and is also concerned about the boxes being animal-proof.

DiZoglio worried about homeless people coming onto school property to get food. The Director said this is being considered and the city has a good pulse on the unhoused population. MacLaren defended those who need the help and tied it back to her time at MPS and the need to be more caring. DiZoglio defended his stance on access for people who shouldn’t be there.

Pesce moved the question. Passes unanimously. The EPA passes too.

TR-26-92 — Resolution Accepting a Gift of 9/11 Memorial Banners (Sponsored by DiZoglio)

DiZoglio bought the banners and doesn’t want to hold them. He wants them used. Drew was concerned about who’s going to store them. Passes unanimously.

New Business / Ordinances

TO-26-21 — Ordinance Amending the Wage and Salary Classification Plan, Unaffiliated, to Add the Position of Sealer of Weights and Measures

Moved by Santos, seconded by Simard. Soto asked for clarification on what’s allocated and when. The CAFO explained the position is hourly, not to exceed 15 hours a week. Passes unanimously.

Executive Session

The council voted on entering Executive Session under Exemption 7, M.G.L. c. 30A § 23(b), to discuss and vote on acceptance/disclosure of executive session minutes for July 1, 2024; September 16, 2024; February 6, 2025; July 6, 2026; August 13, 2026; and September 8, 2026. After the executive session, the council would adjourn without returning to open session.

Passes 5-4. The council goes into executive session.

That’s a wrap on October 5, 2026. The full agenda is available at the City of Methuen website and meetings are archived at MethuenTV.

Have a tip, a correction, or something you want covered? Reach out.

Written by: Dan Shibilia

Another Monday, another agenda, and this one comes with a twist at the very end.

The council meets Monday, October 5, 2026 at 7:00 P.M. in the Great Hall of the Searles Building, 41 Pleasant Street, third floor. I count no public hearings this time, no proclamations or correspondence, no appointments, no grants, and nothing under Unfinished Business. That makes for a lighter load on the formalities than usual. What it lacks in ceremony it makes up for in Requests of Councilors, where the trash questions pile up. As always, I am walking through this in the order the agenda is written, not the order I find most entertaining.

Opening Business

The meeting opens with Roll Call, Acceptance of the Agenda, and the Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation, and Moment of Silence. Public Participation follows, which is the time for residents to step up and say their piece before the council gets into the heavy lifting.

Organizational Business

Reading and Acceptance of Minutes from Previous Meetings: The council will take up the minutes from the Monday, September 21, 2026 Regular Meeting and the Thursday, September 24, 2026 Special Meeting. Routine, but it is the official record, so it is worth a quick read if you missed either one.

Proclamations/Correspondence

Nothing listed but it’s never stopped them before.

Consideration of Appointments

None this time either.

Presentations/Projects/Department Updates

Methuen City Hall Great Hall Audio, Visual, & Lighting Assessment Report Presentation: The Great Hall is where the council meets, where residents show up to speak, and where the cameras live for those watching at home. This presentation covers an assessment of the room’s audio, visual, and lighting setup. If you have ever strained to hear a speaker or squinted at a screen in that room, this is the report for you.

Mayor’s Report & CAFO’s Report

The Mayor’s report will likely follow the Requests of Councilors and some fun updates he usually throws in. I’m also sure he will hit on the monster resolution he brought forward with Councilor Simard.

CAFO Report:

A memo dated 10/2/26 from Chief Administrative and Financial Officer Maggie Duprey to the Mayor and City Council laying out the financial impact of this meeting’s agenda items. I have folded her numbers into the contracts and resolutions below, so you do not have to hunt for them.

• Request for Update on Searles Estate Expenses & Revenues (Councilor Soto): Councilor Soto wants a look at what the Searles Estate costs the city and what it brings in. Expect a numbers conversation about whether the property is paying its own way.

• Status on outstanding back taxes and recovery to date (Councilor Drew): Councilor Drew asked at the beginning of the year what progress had been made on collections, and he is circling back for an update. Unpaid taxes are money the city is owed, so the recovery number is the one to watch.

Requests of Councilors

• Methuen Housing Authority trash collection (Chair Soto): Clarification on the cost breakdown and tonnage fees for trash collection at the Methuen Housing Authority through the city’s municipal trash contract.

I guess what holds me up on this is the lack of purpose or end goal. What is Soto trying to accomplish? Why has there been no public discussion with how the funding works for housing and how adding trash would cause major issues?

• Unaccepted ways roadmap on the city website (Councilor Valley): A request that the City Solicitor and the DPW build a dedicated section of the website walking residents through the acceptance of unaccepted ways. The ask is detailed: a start to finish overview of the process, an online application or petition form, eligibility requirements and supporting documentation, any fees, betterment assessments, or other costs, estimated timelines, and contact information.

• Echo Lane sewer connection (Councilor Valley): Clarification on the betterment fees and upfront costs the Mayor mentioned for the Echo Lane sewer connection project. Neighbors on that street will want to hear these numbers.

• Buildings Audit RFP status update (Councilor Drew): A check on where the Request for Proposals for a buildings audit stands.

• City employee email signature standardization (Councilor Drew): A push to get city employee email signatures looking the same across departments.

Small item, big for anyone who has ever received a city email that looked a little different from the last one. But, it sounds like this was almost resolved at the last meeting.

• HHSI permit fees review and update status (Councilor Drew): An update on the review of permit fees at the Department of Health, Human Services and Inspections, which came up during the FY2027 Budget Workshop.

• Barrel fees (Councilor DiZoglio): Councilor DiZoglio asks whether anyone is sending out emails about barrel fees and, when there is no response, whether the city is following up with a phone call.

This will likely be more of the same from DiZoglio.

Public Service

A. Grants

None.

B. Licenses

Vehicle for Hire Company License Application, Zanr Transportation, LLC: Joseph J. Aime, 93 Haverhill Street, Methuen, MA 01844 is applying for a Vehicle for Hire Company License for Zanr Transportation, LLC. The backup is linked on the agenda if you want the details.

C. Contract(s)

C-27-34, Mayer Tree Service, Inc.: A one year contract with Mayer Tree Service, Inc. of Essex for brush grinding and removal of brush piles at the Transfer Station, in the amount of $39,048.00. That works out to $9,762.00 each time, four times a year. Per the CAFO, it is funded through the general fund DPW other expenses and solid waste budget, which currently has $50,000 available for it.

C-27-35, EPlus Technology, Inc.: A one year, $34,291.49 contract with EPlus Technology, Inc. of Herndon, VA for virus protection for the city. Not glamorous, but it keeps the city’s computers from catching something nasty. It comes out of the general fund IT other expenses budget, which currently has $397,147 available.

C-27-36, Energy Source, LLC: A $300,000.00 energy conservation and building maintenance upgrade at the Timony Grammer School with Energy Source, LLC of Smithfield, RI. According to the CAFO, the work includes installing a Building Management System platform and the first phase of system controls, wiring, and sensors, plus staff training and system monitoring support to keep the HVAC running efficiently. The project total breaks down as $222,580.00 from the FY26 Green Communities grant, which currently has $250,000 available, and $77,420.00 in utility incentives paid directly from National Grid and Eversource to the vendor. In plain terms, none of this is coming out of the general fund.

C-27-37, 978 Solar Development, LLC: A Net Metering Agreement with 978 Solar Development, LLC of Lowell. Under it, the city buys energy at a reduced cost and gets credit on its electricity bills. The CAFO projects 10% net metering savings per year on electricity expenditures once the solar farm is up and running, which looks to be about 18 months out. The vendor would also pay the city $5,000 after the commercial operation date of the first system. The solar systems are to be built in Wareham, MA.

D. Order Calling for State Election November 3, 2026

Order Calling for State Election November 3, 2026: The formal order calling the State Election for November 3, 2026. The backup is linked on the agenda.

14. Other Officers and Committee Reports

The agenda lists no specific reports under this heading.

15. Unfinished Business

Resolutions: None. Ordinances: None. The slate is clean.

16. New Business

Resolutions

TR-26-89, Resolution to amend TR-13-8, Resolution providing for annual performance evaluations: City Council Employees: This amends the existing resolution that sets up annual performance evaluations for City Council employees.

The CAFO says there does not appear to be a financial impact. The text of the amendment is in the linked document, so give it a read to see exactly what is changing.

TR-26-90, A Joint Resolution of the Mayor and City Council of the City of Methuen Calling for the Reopening of the Federal Investigation into Corruption Involving the Former Leadership of the Methuen Police Department: Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Councilor Simard and marked EPA requested.

This is the storm of the century. This is where we will learn a lot about our elected officials and their priorities. The resolution’s opening clauses say former Police Chief Joseph Solomon and former City Councilor Sean Fountain pleaded guilty to crimes involving unlawful police appointments and falsified credentials, that federal authorities previously investigated but closed the case without charges or a meaningful explanation to the city, and that the state prosecutions did not address the 2017 police contracts, Fountain’s exercise of police authority, or the conduct of others. It calls on United States Attorney Leah B. Foley to reopen the federal investigation or direct a fresh review of the evidence, and directs that the resolution and a signed letter go to her and to the Attorney General of the United States. Expect this one to draw a crowd and a lot of feelings.

TR-26-91, Resolution Authorizing Acceptance of a $7,500 2026 Catalyst Fund Grant from the Blue Cross Blue Shield of Massachusetts Foundation to Support the City of Methuen’s Launch of the Little Free Pantry Initiative: Requested by Director of Public Health Caeli Tegan Zampach and marked EPA requested.

The grant goes to the Department of Health, Human Services, and Inspections, and per the CAFO there is no match requirement. The grant letter and agreement sets a one year grant period from October 1, 2026 to October 1, 2027, paid in one lump sum once the signed agreement is returned, with regular reports and a final report required. The summary describes Little Free Pantries as the food version of a Little Free Library: donation based boxes of shelf stable food, community resources, and health education materials, sometimes with items like can openers, personal care products, and naloxone. It says the city is proposing roughly $25,000 in opioid settlement funds for the project and lists eight proposed sites, including the YMCA on Haverhill Street, the Pelham Street car park, the Rail Trail lot on Railroad Street, the Gill Avenue Playground, MAN Inc on Tenney Street, the Adult Learning Center on Boylston Street, Milk Street Park, and CGS School on Howe Street.

TR-26-92, A Resolution Accepting a Gift of 9/11 Memorial Banners: Sponsored by Councilor Ryan DiZoglio.

Per the resolution, Councilor DiZoglio purchased banners displayed at the 9/11 Memorial Ceremony at the Methuen Central Fire Station and wants them donated to the city at no cost, for that ceremony and any other events the city sees fit. The council is being asked to formally accept the gift.

Ordinances

TO-26-21, An Ordinance Amending the Wage and Salary Classification Plan, Unaffiliated, to add the new position of Sealer of Weights and Measurers

This adds the Sealer of Weights and Measures to the unaffiliated wage and salary plan within the Department of Health, Human Services and Inspections, at $32.00 an hour, effective upon passage. The sealer conducts the weights and measures inspections that Massachusetts General Law requires, which is the person who checks that scales and pumps are accurate. The CAFO notes the duties were historically folded into other HHSI roles, the new position is expected to average about 15 hours a week for the rest of the fiscal year, and it has been approved for part time funding of $20,000 for FY27. The next time a deli scale looks suspicious, there will be someone to call.

17. Any Other Business for the Good and Welfare of the Community

The council will vote on entering Executive Session under Exemption 7, M.G.L. c. 30A § 23(b). If it does, members will discuss and vote on the acceptance or disclosure of executive session meeting minutes for these dates: July 1, 2024, September 16, 2024, February 6, 2025, July 6, 2026, August 13, 2026, and September 8, 2026. After the Executive Session, the council will adjourn and will not reconvene in open session.

Sign-off

The Methuen City Council meets Monday, October 5, 2026 at 7:00 P.M. in the Great Hall, Searles Building, 41 Pleasant Street, third floor. You can watch on Channel 8 (Comcast), Channel 32 (Verizon), or at Methuen.gov/livestream, and the full agenda and backup are posted on the city’s website..

Watch live:

• methuen.gov/livestream

• Channel 8 (Comcast) or Channel 32 (Verizon)

• YouTube: youtube.com/@MethuenMeetings

Link to Official Press Release 

Moments ago, City Hall released the attached Press Release linked above which contains a letter the Mayor and Councilor Simard are asking the Council to sign on to on Monday night.

The resolution asks the council to do something simple: sign a letter asking federal prosecutors to take another look at what happened in the Methuen Police Department.

Let's remember, the facts are not in dispute.

A former chief has pleaded guilty to 17 counts.

A former councilor posed as a police officer, made more than 40 arrests, and testified in a murder trial.

The city's own investigators found falsified credentials.

A federal case that was reportedly ready for a grand jury was shut down without explanation.

Against that record, the letter asks for very little. It doesn't demand indictments or name guilty parties beyond those already convicted. It says plainly that the U.S. Attorney alone decides what comes next. It just asks for a fresh look, and it promises the city's full cooperation.

So the question for every councilor is why anyone would say no.

Delay and amendments won't answer it. The issue has been public for years. A councilor who needs weeks to decide whether to support a review has told residents something about their priorities.

This vote doesn't convict anyone. It asks whether Methuen wants the whole story or only the parts already in court. Every councilor will answer that question on Monday, on the record.

Will they serve the City or themselves? Only time tell… .

In a public statement posted on Facebook early evening on September 22nd, Valley writes that she voted good faith when she put her yes vote to work. Valley wrote that she once believed FLOCK cameras would be “a useful tool” deployed with “proper safeguards” and “transparency.” Her words. Her vote. Her statement is copied below word for word.

Lawrence Police wasted no time correcting the bold and imflammatory statements made by Valley. They issued their own press release, copied below, stating that her license plate was searched once, on May 14, 2025, in connection with a hit-and-run investigation which is lawful use of the tool she approved and she knew that because they told her… twice.

Suddenly, Valley discovers her plate was run using a Flock camera in Lawrence through a public website and becomes an activist calling for FLOCK removal overnight. The timing is not coincidental. Given the full story, the motivation is transparent.

This is what happens when elected officials vote on policy issues without doing basic homework.

FLOCK Wasn’t a Secret

Let’s be clear: FLOCK’s surveillance implications weren’t breaking news when she voted to support their installation in Methuen. The system has faced scrutiny nationally for years. Civil liberties organizations have documented concerns about:

• Lack of safeguards

• Minimal oversight

• Mission creep and expanded use

• Privacy implications

This is a classic case of the leopard ate my face. A councilor approving surveillance technology should know this before voting. Valley either didn’t research the tool she was approving, or she didn’t care enough to until it affected her personally.

Both are damning.

The Self-Serving Narrative

What’s particularly galling is how Valley framed her reversal:

“A personal experience involving the Lawrence Police Department has caused me to look at this technology very differently.“

Translation: “This didn’t matter until it happened to me.”

She didn’t oppose FLOCK when it was surveilling other residents of Methuen. She didn’t raise concerns when the community could have benefited from her skepticism before the cameras were installed. She waited until her own vehicle appeared in the system.

That’s not civic leadership. That’s self-interest dressed up as principle.

The Hypocrisy Is Staggering

Valley now wants to remove FLOCK and invest instead in “training, judgment, and investigative abilities of our police officers.”

Those resources existed when she voted yes. The need for police training existed then too. Why didn’t she propose that alternative before approving the cameras? Because it wasn’t personal then.

This is the exact kind of leadership that erodes public trust: elected officials who don’t do their due diligence, vote for policies, and then grandstand when those policies affect them directly.

What This Says About Her Judgment

Councilor Valley is now touring radio stations and podcasts, positioning herself as a victim and privacy advocate. But the real story is worse: she approved something she apparently didn’t understand, investigate, or care enough about to scrutinize in advance.

When it came time to use her platform and research to protect Methuen residents, she didn’t. When it came time to oppose a questionable surveillance tool, she voted for it.

Only when her own license plate showed up did she suddenly become a voice for civil liberties.

The Standard We Should Hold

Elected officials should:

1. Research policy before voting

2. Acknowledge concerns raised by civil liberties groups before deployment, not after

3. Make decisions based on principle, not personal impact

4. Own their votes instead of reversing course when affected

Valley failed on all counts.

She approved FLOCK without adequate scrutiny. She ignored known concerns about the technology. She said nothing until her own vehicle appeared in the system. Then she launched a public campaign for removal, complete with radio interviews and media statements.

That’s not leadership. That’s opportunism wrapped in a victim narrative.

Methuen residents deserve elected officials who think before they vote, not ones who campaign against decisions they made when it becomes convenient.

The Real Scandal

Here’s what makes this worse than simple incompetence or negligence.

The Lawrence Police Department gave Councilor Valley accurate information, twice. Once by phone. Once in writing via email. They told her clearly that the “359” number represented one officer’s total FLOCK searches over two years, not 359 searches of her license plate. They explained that her vehicle was searched once, lawfully, in connection with a hit-and-run investigation.

She received this correction on September 22, 2026, at approximately 11:25 a.m.

Then, at approximately 2:00 p.m. that same day, she issued a public statement claiming she had been searched 359 times.

That’s not a misunderstanding. That’s a choice.

After being given the facts, twice, Valley decided the false narrative was more useful than the truth. A councilor who votes to approve surveillance technology, gets caught in that system, is corrected by law enforcement, and then still goes public with the wrong information… that’s not confusion. That’s strategy.

What’s the benefit of the false claim? Attention. Outrage. A compelling victim narrative for radio tours and podcasts. A news cycle that makes her a civil liberties crusader instead of a councilor who voted for something without understanding it that has been routinely used across the country to target minorities and assist in ICE raids.

The 359 claim is designed to go viral. The truth that she was lawfully searched once in a legitimate investigation doesn’t sell as well. So she used the false number anyway, knowing it was wrong.

And it worked. She got the attention she wanted.

The actual scandal isn’t that FLOCK exists or that Valley was searched. The scandal is that a sitting councilor was corrected on the facts, rejected those corrections, and deliberately spread misinformation to build her political brand. That’s not accountability. That’s calculated dishonesty.

This wasn’t a misunderstanding. It was a strategic move to get something, anything, to put on next year’s campaign materials. “I fought FLOCK” plays better than “I voted for something I didn’t understand and later learned it could be used against me.”

If Valley had done her research before voting yes, she wouldn’t need to manufacture false narratives now. Instead, she’s building her next campaign on a lie.

If Valley had done her research before that vote, she might have asked the harder questions about safeguards, oversight, and transparency that actually matter.

Instead, she’s asking them now butonly for herself.

That’s not the kind of leadership Methuen needs.

I’m a little late watching and recapping the full day our illustrious Council had on the 21st as they powered through three separate meetings, but better late than never, right!

Best moment of the night: Valley asking the solicitor a direct question about whether a contract amendment could be handled internally, the solicitor saying no, and Valley immediately contradicting him anyway. It was real peak city council energy.

Here’s everything, in order.

GLTS (Greater Lawrence Technical School) Meeting

The meeting started with a technical fumble: Pesce was absent, Valley was in a CoChair meeting, and the GLTS superintendent’s microphone either wasn’t on or was broken. Soto clarified that people could actually hear him, spoiler alert, they couldn’t, so the superintendent kept going, inaudible, until someone got it fixed. Not the vibe you want when you’re trying to reset a relationship.

Once the mic worked, the superintendent came in genuinely trying to move past years of tension. He laid out what he believes the council’s asks are, walked through their program offerings and revenue models, and led with the one piece of good news: student enrollment is up to 1,900 and 21 of those new students coming from Methuen, which means the city’s GLTS allocation is going up.

Soto pushed for visits and exploration of what GLTS can offer to be offered in 7th grade instead of 8th. The superintendent offered to present directly to 7th or even 6th graders to help them understand their options. Drew went further, asking whether the city could pitch in as a co-op provider for vocational skills, plumbing, electrical, etc. The Mayor mentioned he’s meeting with the superintendent soon to discuss having GLTS students help with projects at Searles Estate.

Then DiZoglio asked the question that always comes up: how come Methuen pays so much more than other communities? He called out the salaries. The superintendent defended the position but didn’t really answer the root tension… which is that GLTS costs keep rising and Methuen keeps footing an outsized bill.

[My take]: This olive branch might actually stick, but only if Methuen sees concrete wins, either lower costs, more visible programs, or students coming back with actual job skills to help offset costs in town. One nice meeting doesn’t fix years of sticker shock.

Soto, who acknowledged that roll call had never been formally taken, ran it at the end along with a vote to close. Meeting adjourned.

National Grid Pole Installation Meeting

Valley called roll. Pesce still absent. National Grid was present to answer questions about their work.

National Grid gave a brief description of the jobs: installing utility poles. Drew asked the key questions… have abutters been notified? Will there be street disruption? National Grid said both poles were going in grass, so no disruption to the street or abutters.

No public participation. That was it. Meeting closed.

Regular City Council Meeting

Roll Call / Agenda

8 present. Pesce absent due to a conflict.

Simard moved acceptance of the agenda; Valley seconded. Drew moved to amend the agenda to include a presentation by Friends of Searles Estate at line 9. Passes 8-0. (Soto acknowledged it was her oversight to leave it off.) Amended agenda passes 8-0.

Pledge of Allegiance / Invocation / Moment of Silence

Yet another invocation loaded with catholic guilt as Santos weaves in “Heavenly Father” and “In the Name of the Father.” I hit this every two weeks. City Hall is no place for religion but apparently I am the only one who feels this way. Two residents who recently passed were acknowledged in the moment of silence.

Public Participation

Mike Hamel spoke about the Echo Lane project, walking through its history back to 2017 and advocating for it to finally move forward.

Tom Gioroso also spoke in support of Echo Lane, echoing the sentiment that it’s past time to get it done.

Brad Jones, a GLTS school board member, spoke on Searles Estate. He suggested converting the nursing home facilities into senior housing, which he said could yield a good number of one-bedroom units with a little work. He also mentioned potential for shows and other uses. On a smaller note, he called out that the weights and measures stickers at Haffner’s were outdated, representing missed revenue to the city.

[My take]: Brad Jones just quietly identified a revenue stream everyone else missed. City government runs on these kinds of small wins. The Searles Estate conversion is the big dream, but fixing the weights-and-measures stuff? That’s the kind of thing that actually happens.

Minutes

Minutes from Tuesday, September 8, 2026 Regular Meeting passed 8-0, no discussion.

Proclamations / Correspondence

None.

Consideration of Appointments

None.

Presentations / Projects / Department Updates

Friends of the Searles Estate presented on their work to increase awareness and activity. They’ve brought in volunteers to clean up the grounds and keep facilities ready. They’ve secured grants to fund improvements. Their stated goal is to augment the city’s efforts, not replace them.

It was actually a great presentation and worth going to watch if you have any interest in the Estate.

Mayor’s Report

The Mayor opened by recapping the Solomon situation stating the city will pursue recovery of the approximately $1 million in pension already paid to him. He noted, pointedly, that “despite what his supporters say on social media,” Solomon pleaded guilty admitting he did the awful things he was accused of doing. He and Simard will work to ensure the federal charges against Solomon and his co-conspirators are prosecuted.

Schools: High school open house is this week; Friday is a half day. Grammar school libraries are looking for volunteers.

Paving is ongoing and “very ambitious.” He’s working with Soto on a home rule petition to fund unaccepted ways paving. Trash and recycling contract is coming this fall… he called it a “hard reset.”

He’s pursuing wage and salary classification (coming next meeting) to bring back weights and measures. City solar project is on track; additional savings expected in early 2027. GIC is on track for 1/1/27.

He urged the council, while acknowledging it’s “not his lane”, not to release any executive session minutes to unindicted co-conspirator Greg Gallant. This is the root cause of the executive session looking to have minutes released.

Updates on upcoming events, some rescheduled due to weather.

[My take]: When the Mayor has to publicly ask the council not to leak confidential session minutes to someone involved in criminal conspiracy, you’re in weird territory. The fact that this had to be said at all tells you something about the temperature and loyalties in the room.

CAFO Report

Searles Estate Expenses & Revenues (Requested by Soto)

$4.1 million in expenses, including purchase and utilities.

Outstanding Back Taxes Status & Recovery (Requested by Drew)

Progress is being made, but as items roll off the collection list, new ones are added, so the total amount owed is actually rising. Drew asked how the city fixes this. The CAFO said that before she arrived, this situation just sat. They now have an attorney working it and have collected millions over the last few years.

DiZoglio wanted to move faster and use the $7 million to do things like hire teachers and fix schools. The Mayor explained it’s not that simple. Valley asked and the solicitor confirmed that tax titles are in place for all properties. DiZoglio pressed the point: he’s not trying to force people out of their homes, but for folks who haven’t paid in years and clearly aren’t trying, the city should be foreclosing. Santos asked if the city could be more aggressive. The CAFO explained that there are legal limits, and the attorneys are being aggressive within the law.

Soto called for a review of equity-theft laws and asked the solicitor to review whether a new resolution is needed to auction off homes the city owns due to tax takings.

[My take]: DiZoglio is right that $7 million sitting on the books is ridiculous. But he’s also running into the wall that city government always hits: the law. The city can’t just seize people’s homes faster because it would be convenient. You need to hate the problem and respect the limits at the same time.

Requests of Councilors

Methuen Housing Authority Trash Collection Cost Breakdown (Soto)

Soto asked the Mayor for “the number”… a cost breakdown and tonnage for trash collection services through the city’s municipal trash contract. The Mayor said he’s working with Harvey and will have a memo by week’s end.

Unaccepted Ways Website Roadmap (Valley)

Valley requested that the City Solicitor and DPW develop a dedicated website section with a step-by-step roadmap for the acceptance of unaccepted ways, including process overview, online forms, eligibility, fees, timelines, and contact info. Soto said this might be moot due to the home rule petition (see above) a few weeks back. The Mayor said it’s still an issue and the project should go forward anyway.

Echo Lane Sewer Connection in 2027 CIP (Valley)

The Mayor said Echo Lane will be in the Capital Improvement Plan and is bonded. The question is whether the city can front the money. That needs legal confirmation. Valley asked about cost and betterment. The CAFO said it’s $450,000.

Buildings Audit RFP Status (Drew)

The Mayor said the building maintenance superintendent position is in transition. Once the new person starts, this will be back on track. Drew took issue as he wants a clear roadmap to ensure the city is doing what’s needed. He cited Milk Street as an example: “Last week we were surveying Milk Street and now we are paving.” There was more back-and-forth, but the underlying point was that the Mayor has been “drinking from the fire hose” and this just hasn’t been a priority. Drew insisted the city needs this tool to plan.

City Employee Email Signature Standardization (Drew)

The Mayor has adopted it and so have others. The issue, as the Mayor pointed out, is that the graphic in the signature doesn’t work well in Mobile biew. Drew said they can work together with IT to solve the graphic issues in the signature.

HHSI Permit Fees Review & Update (Drew)

These are being voted on. Drew asked how long. The Mayor projects October.

Barrel Fees Update (DiZoglio)

This is more of the same DiZoglio show. The Mayor explained how OpenGov is used for permitting. He said no, the city doesn’t have staff sitting there sending emails and making follow-up calls. They have a plan for barrel fee renewals. DiZoglio was intensely focused on barrel fees and again brings up wanting to refund fees paid because other people haven’t paid theirs… essentially wanting equity through across-the-board refunds. He “rants” and the Mayor lets him “blow off steam.”

Water Department & Treasurer’s Office Billing Issues (DiZoglio & Soto)

Residents have had issues with bills not showing a carry-forward. The Mayor agreed and will work with IT to update the billing software.

Department Check-Acceptance Inconsistencies (DiZoglio)

Some departments accept checks; some don’t. Public Safety won’t accept them due to security issues.

Public Service

Grants

P.S. Grant #31193015 – Pleasant Street, National Grid JO Pole Installation

VIEW NATIONAL GRID LETTER

Moved by Drew; seconded by Marsan. Passes 8-0.

P.S. Grant #31194501 – Jackson Street, National Grid JO Pole Installation

VIEW NATIONAL GRID LETTER

Moved by Drew; seconded by Valley. Passes 8-0.

Contracts

C-27-29 – Amendment of Employment Contract, Scott J. McNamara (Removed from Table)

This came off the table unanimously. Drew read a letter from McNamara, the former police chief, laying out his view of the events that led to this amendment. Soto voiced concerns that this is being brought up now that McNamara is gone. She believed the Mayor should be able to figure this out without a council vote since it’s under his contract limit. The Mayor agreed this was for transparency: “it’s not Watergate.”

The solicitor said no as an employment contract absolutely needs to be amended by the council. Valley contradicted the solicitor, saying she believed this could be done internally. Soto doubled down, arguing there should be a separate mechanism to pay the chief. Everyone agreed he needs to be paid but how to do it seems beyond them until the solicitor later solves the problem. The solicitor was clear that an appropriation will be needed.

Drew asked if there’s precedent for amending a contract like this. The solicitor confirmed there is. DiZoglio asked the solicitor to confirm what he’d just said… ”this contract is still active?” He confirmed.

There was more conversation, but it was repetitive. The solicitor spent considerable time restating his position. He offered to write new language. The motion passed to bring this back for a Zoom meeting to be scheduled.

[My take]: The McNamara thing is a mess because of timing. It was handled poorly by the Mayor as it should have been brought up when it was agreed. A former chief’s contract amendment shouldn’t be this confusing. The fact that the solicitor and a councilor are disagreeing on basic procedure tells you something is either badly drafted in the first place or poorly explained now. Get it in writing. Use the Zoom meeting to actually resolve it.

C-27-30 – CARE SOLACE, Inc., Mental Health Care Coordination Service – $66,250.00

Moved by Drew; seconded by Santos. Drew asked if there’s an earmark. The Mayor said there isn’t one anymore. Drew asked about the 32% increase from the last contract. The Mayor explained this is the full amount, not the earmarked-reduced balance from last year. Passes 8-1. (Vote breakdown not specified; assuming one no vote.)

C-27-31 – Seal Coating, Inc. (DBA Indus), Pavement Crack Sealing – $114,585.00

Moved by Santos; seconded by Drew. No discussion. Passes 8-0.

C-27-32 – TEC, Inc., Phase 2 Pelham Street/Salem Street Roadway Improvements – $255,000.00

Moved by Santos; seconded by Valley. Valley asked Garcia to clarify payment terms—lump sum or monthly invoices for percentage completion. Garcia went quiet and wasn’t sure. The Mayor also corrected the amount on the cover sheet. A motion was made and passed to amend the agenda to correct the total to $225,000. Main motion passes 8-0.

C-27-33 – TEC, Inc., Phase 2, Brook Street over Unnamed Water Body Culvert Replacement – $30,000.00

Moved by DiZoglio; seconded by Santos. Drew asked why this was needed. Garcia explained it was new work they didn’t know about until they dug it up. Passes 8-0.

Other Officers and Committee Reports

None.

Unfinished Business

TR-26-83 – FY27 Budget True Up (Removed from Table)

VIEW SOURCES & USES | VIEW SUMMARY | VIEW SUMMARY REV & EP

Removed from the table. The Mayor recapped that this reallocates new money to prevent layoffs and furloughs. The solicitor reminded everyone that they’d need to vote on each line. Drew asked questions to ensure this wasn’t one-time money and the city wasn’t setting itself up for failure in future years.

TR-26-84 – Resolution: Transfer from Health Insurance & Veteran Benefits Lines

Moved by Santos; seconded by Valley. Drew asked about admin in the Veterans Service Office. The Mayor confirmed the VSO is covering and comfortable with the workload. Passes 8-0.

TR-26-85 – Resolution: Transfer from Health Insurance to Personal Services Lines – $1,181,649

Moved by Santos; seconded by Simard. Drew asked if line-by-line votes are needed. The CAFO explained this is a transfer, not an addition that changes the bottom line. Passes 8-0.

TR-26-86 – Complete Streets Grant Acceptance Resolution – Methuen High School

Moved by Santos; seconded by DiZoglio. No discussion. Passes 8-0.

TR-26-87 – Castle Fund Resolution – First Church, Methuen

Moved by Santos; seconded by DiZoglio. Soto explained the fund approved an additional $500. The solicitor suggested an amendment. Motion made and passed 8-0. No further discussion. Main motion passes 8-0.

TO-26-20 (As Amended) – Ordinance: Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers

Moved by DiZoglio; seconded by Drew. Drew asked if there’s any actual threat of a data center coming to Methuen. The Mayor said he’s only aware of some interest on LinkedIn but no active conversations. The moratorium is for one year. The solicitor said this needs to wait until it comes back from the zoning board’s public hearing. Tabled.

New Business

None.

Any Other Business for the Good and Welfare of the Community

A motion to enter Executive Session (Exemption 7, to discuss acceptance/disclosure of executive session minutes from various dates: 5/4/2020, 11/7/2022, 1/17/2023, 4/3/2023, 5/1/2023, 6/13/2023, 7/10/2023, 10/16/2023) failed. The council did not go into executive session.

That’s a wrap on September 21, 2026. The full agenda is available at the City of Methuen website and meetings are archived at MethuenTV. Have a tip, a correction, or something you want covered? Reach out.

After more than 20 years of running Methuen like his own personal piggy bank, five years of scandal, cover-ups, and a police department in freefall, Methuen finally got the outcome residents have been demanding: former Police Chief Joseph Solomon has agreed to plead guilty to all 17 felony and misdemeanor charges against him, including perjury, procurement fraud, and civil service violations. He will serve jail time, lose his city pension, his firearms license, and his private investigator's license.

Mayor D.J. Beauregard didn't mince words, calling it the end of the “city's long nightmare” and crediting the late Mayor Neil Perry, former Chief Scott McNamara, and the prosecutors who refused to let the matter die. The deal is also expected to save the city roughly $3.7 million in pension liability over the next 20 years, and the city says it will pursue recovering close to $1 million already paid out to Solomon since his 2020 retirement.

Read the mayor's full statement here: https://cvcpl.us/9kOoZyw

This is a win five years in the making m for a community that watched a trusted institution get hollowed out from the inside, this is vindication. While it may not seem that way to many seeing as how Solomon will only see a maximum of 30 days in jail, this is a far better outcome then many predicted over the last few years.

So far, we have official statements from the mayor, the DA, and the AG but not a peep from Solomon's friends at the City Council table. It's funny because this is a group of people that love to post for the constituents after every event they attend (even if they weren't invited and nobody wanted them there) … they're silent thus far on the Solomon issue. The one standout being Councilor Simard who has been a driving force in this since his first term on the council back in 2019.

While the mayor's office, the DA, and the Attorney General's office did the work of holding Solomon accountable, the Council has had remarkably little to say… not during the indictment, not during the years of delays, and not now, as the case reaches its conclusion. Residents who lived through this scandal deserve to know whether their elected councilors were paying attention at all, or whether they were content to let the mayor's office carry the weight alone.

For me, I can't help but wonder why a man like Solomon would roll over and play dead like this.

Did he plead guilty here because it was the right thing to do? Well, I have serious doubts that all of a sudden is conscience developed and this is his way of making right by all the people he's wronged.

Or, the more likely scenario in my eyes, he plead guilty to protect those behind him who are accused in the Stirm report of helping him in this fraud like DA Paul Tucker, many at POST, and other officials.

Which one for you think is more likely?

And the case isn't fully dead yet….

Federal charges against Solomon remain pending, which raises a legitimate question worth asking out loud:

For now, Methuen has its justice.

Monday is a marathon, not a meeting. The City Council has three separate sessions stacked back to back starting at 6pm, and by the time the regular meeting gaveled in at 7 pm there was already a workshop and a public hearing in the rearview mirror.

The headline items are a data center moratorium ordinance up for a vote, a mental health coordination contract worth over sixty thousand dollars, and a batch of executive session minutes going all the way back to 2020 that the Council may finally vote to release or keep sealed.

There is also a fair amount of the usual Methuen bread and butter in here: utility pole grants, pavement crack sealing, and a long list of councilor requests ranging from barrel fees to billing software complaints.

Let’s get into it.

I’ll be honest, three agendas in one night from one council is a lot even by Methuen standards. The night starts in the Great Hall with a workshop between the full Council and representatives from the Greater Lawrence Technical School, then rolls straight into a public hearing about a couple of utility poles, and only then does the regular business of the city actually begin. If you’re tuning in on Channel 8 or the livestream, budget your evening accordingly.

City Council and GLTS Workshop, 6:00 PM

This workshop to discuss how GLTS can better serve Methuen students is likely going to be must-watch TV. Every time the GLTS Superintendent comes in front of the Council it is always a pissing contest. There is a lot of resentment over what Methuen pays to the school versus other member communities and the salary the Superintendent gets paid yearly which is Solomon like is size.

Why it matters: This is a joint sit down between the full Council and representatives from the Greater Lawrence Technical School, and the agenda item itself is deliberately broad, a workshop to talk about how GLTS can better serve Methuen kids. No specific proposal is attached, so expect a conversation rather than a vote, but it is worth watching for what direction the Council wants to push GLTS in going forward.

Public Hearing, 6:45 PM

P.S. Grant #31193015, Pleasant Street

National Grid wants to install one jointly owned pole on Pleasant Street, beginning at a point approximately 40 feet north of the centerline of the intersection of Pleasant Street and Independence Drive.

Why it matters: Utility pole grants like this one are routine, but they still require a public hearing before the Council can sign off, since the pole sits in the public way. Nothing controversial here, just the process working as it should.

P.S. Grant #31194501, Jackson Street

National Grid also wants to install one jointly owned pole on Jackson Street and Pleasant Street, continuing approximately 360 feet in a south direction.

Why it matters: Same deal as above, a second pole grant for the same general area of Pleasant Street. Both hearings feed directly into the Public Service grants item later on the regular meeting agenda, where the Council actually votes on them.

Regular Meeting, 7:00 PM

On to the big show.

1. Roll Call

The usual head count to make sure the Council has a quorum before anything else happens.

2. Acceptance of the Agenda

This simple procedural vote to formally accept the night’s agenda isn’t alway so simple. This part is always fun to see if anyone gets preferential treatment and is voted worthy of skipping the line.

3. Pledge of Allegiance, Invocation, Moment of Silence

The big watch here is how the council chooses to proceed with the invocation. More often than not, this becomes a religious invocation instead of general words meant to be uplifting and motivational. The council floor is no place for anyone to be invoking any god.

4. Public Participation

This is the time for you to attend and speak.

5. Organizational Business

No specific items are listed under this heading on the posted agenda.

6. Reading and Acceptance of Minutes from Previous Meetings

● Tuesday, September 8, 2026 Regular Meeting

7. Proclamations, Correspondence

No specific proclamations or correspondence are listed on the posted agenda.

8. Consideration of Appointments

None.

9. Presentations, Projects, Department Updates

No specific presentations or updates are listed on the posted agenda.

10. Mayor’s Report

No specific items are listed under the Mayor’s Report on the posted agenda, this is typically a verbal update.

11. CAFO Report

● Request for Update on Searles Estate Expenses & Revenues (Req. of Clr. Soto): Chair Soto wants a rundown of what the city has spent and taken in from the Searles Estate.

● Status on outstanding back taxes and recovery to date (Req. of Clr. Drew): This was asked at the beginning of the year, and Councilor Drew wants to know what progress has been made in collecting.

12. Requests of Councilors

● Cost breakdown and tonnage for the Methuen Housing Authority trash collection services through the city’s municipal trash contract (Req. of Chair Soto): Chair Soto wants to know exactly what the city is paying to haul trash for the Housing Authority.

This is a continuation driven by Soto on her revenge tour following a resident of Housing calling for her resignation along with two other Councilors.

● Request to the City Solicitor and the DPW to develop a dedicated section on the City’s website providing residents with a clear, step by step roadmap for the acceptance of unaccepted ways (Req. of Clr. Valley): Councilor Valley wants an overview of the whole process, an online application or petition form, eligibility requirements, fees and betterment assessments, estimated timelines, and contact information, all in one place for residents.

This request was already acknowledged and should be in the queue with the City. Not sure why is remains here in its original form.

● Whether the Echo Lane sewer connection will be included in the 2027 Capital Improvement Plan (Req. of Clr. Valley): A direct ask about whether that project is getting funded next year.

● Buildings Audit RFP Status update (Req. of Clr. Drew): A check in on where the buildings audit request for proposals stands.

● City employee email signature standardization (Req. of Clr. Drew): Councilor Drew wants city staff emails to look consistent.

I’m not sure why this lingers. This is something easy that IT could format and standardize on the backend within Outlook. This could have been an easy win.

● HHSI permit fees review and update status, discussed during the FY2027 Budget Workshop (Req. of Clr. Drew): Following up on a fee review that came up during budget season.

● Update on barrel fees, whether anyone is sending emails out and if there is no response whether the city is following up with a phone call (Req. of Clr. DiZoglio): Councilor DiZoglio wants to know if the barrel fee collection effort has any teeth to it.

This is still DiZoglio’s pet project. While he isn’t wrong - the City botched this big time - his approach hasn’t been working and blaming residents and labeling 1,000+ households as essentially deadbeats is not a good way to build a solution. The sticker approach was logical. Let’s hope that gains traction.

● Residents dealing with issues receiving their bills and the billing software in the Water Department and the Treasurer’s Office (Req. of Clr. DiZoglio & Chair Soto): A shared concern about billing problems residents have reported.

● Issues with some departments accepting checks and some not (Req. of Clr. DiZoglio): A basic consistency question about which city offices will take a check.

13. Public Service

A. Grants

● P.S. Grant #31193015, Pleasant Street: National Grid to install one jointly owned pole on Pleasant Street, beginning approximately 40 feet north of the centerline of the intersection of Pleasant Street and Independence Drive. This is the same grant covered in the 6:45 public hearing. View National Grid letter

● P.S. Grant #31194501, Jackson Street: National Grid to install one jointly owned pole on Jackson Street and Pleasant Street, continuing approximately 360 feet in a south direction. Also covered in the public hearing. View National Grid letter

B. Licenses

None.

C. Contract(s)

● C-27-29: Amendment of Employment Contract By and Between the City of Methuen and Scott J McNamara. This one is being removed from the table, meaning it is not moving forward at this meeting. View C-27-29

With the Mayor back in the building tonight, this should see some discussion. This will be a worth hearing to see if they kick in the extra 4 weeks.

● C-27-30: CARE SOLACE, Inc., 120 Birmingham Drive, Cardiff, CA 92007, for Mental Health Care Coordination Service, at $66,250.00. View C-27-30

● C-27-31: Seal Coating, Inc., DBA Indus, 825 Granite Street, Braintree, MA 02184, for Pavement Crack Sealing, High Performance, at $114,585.00. View C-27-31

● C-27-32: TEC, Inc., Phase 2 Pelham Street/Salem Street Roadway Improvements, in the amount of $255,000.00. View C-27-32

● C-27-33: TEC, Inc., Phase 2, Brook Street over Unnamed Water Body Culvert Replacement, in the amount of $30,000.00. View C-27-33

14. Other Officers and Committee Reports

No specific reports are listed on the posted agenda.

15. Unfinished Business

Resolution(s)

All of these are second reads. I don’t anticipate there being much discussion or any big surprises here.

TR-26-83: FY27 Budget True Up, an Order Concerning Appropriations for the Fiscal Year Beginning July 1, 2026. Effective upon passage is requested, and it was requested by the Mayor and the CAFO. This item is being removed from the table for a vote. View TR-26-83 | View Sources & Uses | View Summary | View Summary Rev & EP

TR-26-84: A Resolution Authorizing a Transfer of $456,055 from FY27 General Fund Employee Benefits Health Insurance and $40,000 from FY27 General Fund Veteran Benefits Personal Services to various FY27 General Fund Other Expenses lines. Effective upon passage is requested, and it was requested by the Mayor and the CAFO. View TR-26-84

TR-26-85: A Resolution Authorizing a Transfer of $1,181,649 from FY27 General Fund Employee Benefits Health Insurance to various FY27 General Fund Personal Services lines. Effective upon passage is requested, and it was requested by the Mayor and the CAFO. View TR-26-85

TR-26-86: Complete Streets grant acceptance resolution for Methuen High School. View TR-26-86

TR-26-87: Castle Fund Resolution for First Church, Methuen. View TR-26-87

Ordinance(s)

TO-26-20 AS AMENDED: An Ordinance Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers in the City of Methuen, requested by Mayor Beauregard. View TO-26-20 as amended

This is the ordinance to watch this week. A temporary moratorium would pump the brakes on any new data center projects in Methuen while the city figures out how it wants to handle them, and the fact that it’s back on the agenda as amended suggests there has already been some negotiating over the language.

16. New Business

Resolution(s): none listed.

Ordinance(s): none listed.

You read that right. Nothing new on the agenda. How do we even get to a point where there is nothing new.

The Council will vote on whether to enter Executive Session under Exemption 7 of M.G.L. c. 30A § 23(b). If the Council votes to go into Executive Session, it will discuss and vote on whether to accept and disclose the executive session meeting minutes from a stack of past dates: 5/4/2020, 11/7/2022, 1/17/2023, 4/3/2023, 5/1/2023, 6/13/2023, 7/10/2023, and 10/16/2023.

That is a five year old batch of minutes finally coming up for a release decision, which is worth watching for what it says about what has been sitting sealed since 2020. Per the agenda, following the conclusion of the Executive Session the Council will adjourn and not reconvene in open session, so do not expect any final votes read into the public record afterward.

Watch live:

• methuen.gov/livestream

• Channel 8 (Comcast) or Channel 32 (Verizon)

• YouTube: youtube.com/@MethuenMeetings

The City Council was down a member and up a headache Tuesday night, with Santos on vacation and the Mayor absent for most of the meeting … which meant an entire slate of councilor requests got bumped without so much as a hearing.

Still, plenty happened. The Chief Administrative/Financial Officer got grilled on tonnage data that apparently doesn’t exist. And a police chief’s retirement payout, 14 weeks of accrued time against a contract that caps it at 10, turned into a meditation on trust, precedent, and whether anyone actually reads these contracts before they’re signed.

Here’s everything, in order.

Roll Call / Agenda

Santos was out on vacation. Drew joined remotely at first, then arrived in person later in the meeting. DiZoglio was late. The agenda was accepted with no changes.

Pledge / Invocation / Moment of Silence

Standard invocation, nothing notable this time. A moment of silence was held for a Methuen resident who recently passed.

Public Participation

Diane Moore plugged this Saturday’s tours of the Searles Estate.

MaryBeth Donovan, a School Committee member, spoke in support of the Methuen Literacy Partnership, a kindergarten reading initiative she brought to the city along with Rep. Hamilton, and asked the Council to approve funding for it later that night.

A resident named Christina spoke in favor of the data center moratorium, as did Jack Boadin.

Another resident complained that there had been no notification about the meeting, and also voiced support for the moratorium.

Minutes

The August 10 regular meeting minutes were approved unanimously, moved by Pesce and seconded by DiZoglio. The August 13 special meeting minutes also passed, with Pesce voting “present” since she wasn’t at that meeting.

Consideration of Appointments — Matteo Zingales (Zoning Board of Appeals)

Zingales, currently an alternate on the ZBA, was up for full appointment. Moved by Pesce, seconded by Valley. Zingales, an architect who runs the well-known Zingales Real Estate Company, may have conflicts but according to Marsan if he had a conflict and would recuse himself. Pesce pushed back, saying a real conflict requires recusal under the law. Marsan said the city needs more people on these boards and vouched for Zingales personally. Valley clarified Zingales isn’t a licensed agent, just runs the business. It also came out that Zingales listed Soto as a reference on his application and that Soto originally recommended him for the board in the first place. The appointment passed unanimously, with Soto voting present.

Mayor’s Report

The Mayor’s report was submitted as a written memorandum; no live discussion was noted.

CAFO Report

Soto had asked for an update on Searles Estate expenses and revenues to which the CAFO said there’s been no real change, just utility costs. Drew had asked back in the beginning of the year for a status update on outstanding back taxes; the CAFO said the original ask wasn’t clear enough to act on and suggested it should’ve been sorted out before the meeting. Drew reminded everyone that commercial arrears stood at $10 million last time this came up and asked where things stand now. The CAFO promised an update for the next meeting.

Two other items surfaced: a new fee schedule for buildings is in the works, and ARPA funds need to be spent by the end of the year or the city loses them. A breakdown was provided, and the city expects to return roughly half of 1% to the state due to minor project scope changes.

Then came barrel fees. DiZoglio asked for a tonnage and fee-collection update … nothing new to report. He recapped how this request has been sitting unanswered and pressed for real numbers. Chief of Staff McCarty said the Mayor is aware residents are unhappy and is looking at a new plan involving colored stickers. DiZoglio wanted the city to call every household with a barrel, that’s over 1,300 people, to collect. McCarty said that’s not a good use of staff time. DiZoglio suggested a robocall instead, said he was tired of “throwing away the rest of the year,” and floated refunding people who already paid if the city’s giving up on enforcement. “This is just more money out the window,” he said.

[My take]: DiZoglio’s not wrong that this has dragged on with nothing to show for it, but “robocall 1,300 households” isn’t exactly a fully-formed policy either. Somewhere between “do nothing” and “cold-call the whole city” there’s an actual plan, and at this point, it’d be nice to see one.

Requests of Councilors (Skipped)

With the Mayor absent, this entire section was pushed … meaning a long list of pending asks got no airtime, including trash-tonnage costs for the Housing Authority (Soto), a step-by-step roadmap for accepting unaccepted ways (Valley), a Buildings Audit RFP status check (Drew), email signature standardization (Drew), HHSI permit fee review (Drew), the ongoing barrel-fee saga (DiZoglio), water and treasurer billing complaints (DiZoglio and Soto), inconsistent check-acceptance policies across departments (DiZoglio), and a 9/11 Memorial Service update (DiZoglio). All of it rolls to a future meeting.

However, all of it was addressed in the written statement the Mayor had attached to the agenda.

Vehicle for Hire License — Juan Lopez (Juan 89), 17 Woodland Street

Moved by Pesce, seconded by Drew. Marsan flagged that the building commissioner never signed off on the application. The CAFO said the City Clerk had approved it. Passed unanimously.

Licenses

Vehicle for Hire License — BFRANA, LLC, 131 Lowell Street #3

Moved by Drew, seconded by MacLaren. Drew noted the business certification was missing a notary seal and signature, and said without it she couldn’t verify who signed the document. The CAFO explained the City Clerk had signed it, so notarization wasn’t required. Passed unanimously.

Contracts

C-27-27: Catalis Tax & CAMA, Inc. — CAMA/SAAS AP-5 Subscription & Permit Module Maintenance, $83,572.36 over 3 years (FY27: $26,250.90 / FY28: $27,825.95 / FY29: $29,495.91)

Moved by Pesce, seconded by Valley. The CAFO explained this is a software renewal for the assessment tool, housed under IT. Soto asked which department owns it, then went on a tangent about the vendor marketing an AI product. Apparently, as stated, she’d tried the system over the weekend and called it “old school,” saying she prefers a competitor, Visions. The CAFO said the city evaluated options and prefers this one, but didn’t have an answer on the AI features. Drew caught a 40-cent discrepancy in the math, and a motion to amend the figures passed. The main motion then passed unanimously.

C-27-28: A/D Instrument Repair, Inc. — Equipment Maintenance, not to exceed $63,000 over 3 years (Year 1: $18,000 at $1,500/day; Year 2: $21,000 at $1,750/day; Year 3: $2,400/day)

Moved by Valley, seconded by Marsan. Drew asked for clarification, and the CAFO confirmed this is a do-not-exceed ceiling which means the city may end up spending less. The motion passed unanimously.

C-27-29: Amendment of Employment Contract — Scott J. McNamara

Moved by Simard, seconded by Pesce. This one got messy. Drew questioned the timeline, noting McNamara gave plenty of notice before retiring. The CAFO explained accrued time is normally paid out two pay cycles after retirement, but the Chief had banked more time than expected even though his contract caps payout at 10 weeks, and he’d accumulated 14. Legal reviewed and drafted an amendment pending a vote.

Marsan said he didn’t understand why McNamara hadn’t just taken the time off instead, and asked point-blank whether this was some kind of deal cut by the Mayor. Simard said the council should stick to the contract as written and vouched for the Chief’s integrity. Pesce suggested tabling until the council knew whether an actual side deal existed and what its terms were. Soto asked why there were no hard numbers in the proposal, dug into how the Chief’s 2023 contract eliminated a two-week buyback provision, and cited a DLS opinion suggesting this could amount to an impermissible gratuity of public funds. The City Solicitor disagreed, saying this is time McNamara actually earned … no gratuity issue. MacLaren said she was uncomfortable approving anything retroactively without more information. DiZoglio noted either the Chief or the Mayor could have flagged this to the council earlier, and worried about the precedent. Valley asked the Solicitor how legal it is to amend a retired employee’s contract after the fact; the answer was that it’s been done before and is legal. Pesce moved to table. Passed unanimously.

Committee Reports

MacLaren gave an update on the AV Committee’s work on the Great Hall. MCS Director Hayden said experts have been consulted on redoing the room, with a bigger presentation planned for October.

Unfinished Business: Resolution

TR-26-79: Resolution Declaring Surplus Equipment and Authorizing Auction (Sponsored by Mayor and CAFO)

Moved by Drew, seconded by Marsan. Passed unanimously.

TR-26-81: Resolution Accepting Gift of a Polish American Veterans Monument from the Julian J. Stopyra Veterans Post

Moved by Drew, seconded by Pesce. Passed unanimously.

TR-26-82: Resolution Transferring $1,000 from City Council Personal Services to City Council Other Expenses (Req. of Clr. Soto)

Moved by Drew, seconded by Valley. Passed unanimously.

Unfinished Business: Ordiance(s)

TO-26-19: Ordinance Amending Chapter 8 to Eliminate Certain Fees for New Business Registrations (Requested by Mayor Beauregard and Chair Soto)

Moved by Drew, seconded by Valley. Passed unanimously.

New Business: Resolutions

TR-26-83: FY27 Budget True-Up (EPA Requested)

Moved by Drew, seconded by Simard. The CAFO walked through a handout showing how new money would move to fund this and the next two resolutions. DiZoglio flagged that some of the funding is one-time money that won’t be there next year; the CAFO said only the Islamic Academy funds are one-time and everything else is part of a real plan. The Solicitor noted each budget increase needs its own vote. Drew asked whether the money was actual and recognized or just forecasted. CAFO said recognized then Drew questioned the rush. The CAFO said the city needs lead time if the council doesn’t approve now. Drew also said she didn’t believe the EPA piece had actually been approved yet. Drew moved to table, seconded by Valley. Tabled, 8-1, with Simard voting no.

TR-26-84: Resolution Transferring $456,055 from FY27 Health Insurance and $40,000 from FY27 Veteran Benefits Personal Services to Various FY27 Other Expenses Lines (EPA Requested)

Moved by Simard, seconded by DiZoglio. Drew pointed out this involves removing a secretary position from the VSO office. The underlying transfer passed unanimously, but the associated EPA request failed 3-5, with DiZoglio, Pesce, Simard, Drew, and Marsan voting no.

TR-26-85: Resolution Transferring $1,181,649 from FY27 Health Insurance to Various FY27 Personal Services Lines (EPA Requested)

Moved by Simard, seconded by Valley. Drew asked whether tabling the previous item meant this one needed to be tabled too. The CAFO clarified this is stop-loss funding being redirected to cover furloughs. The transfer passed unanimously; the accompanying EPA request failed for lack of a motion.

TR-26-86: Complete Streets Grant Acceptance — Methuen High School

Moved by Marsan, seconded by DiZoglio. No discussion. Passed unanimously.

TR-26-87: Castle Fund Resolution — First Church, Methuen

Moved by Marsan, seconded by Drew. Soto asked if this was for a dinner; the Clerk clarified it’s a concert. Passed unanimously.

New Business: Ordiance(s)

TO-26-20: Ordinance Establishing a Temporary Moratorium on Data Centers (Requested by Mayor Beauregard)

Moved by Marsan, seconded by Simard. Pesce read a letter of support from Senator Payano into the record (technically should’ve come during public participation). Marsan moved to strike a section requiring a public hearing to amend the zoning laws; Drew seconded, and it passed without discussion. MacLaren voiced support and listed concerns tied to data centers generally. Drew asked the Chief of Staff what prompted the ordinance; he confirmed there are no current proposals on the table, just social media chatter, and framed this as a proactive, one-year stoppage. Passed unanimously.

Executive Session

The Council also planned to vote on entering executive session to review an Open Meeting Law complaint filed by Gregory Gallant against the Council, and to act on the release of a long backlog of executive session minutes dating back to 2018. No open-session discussion followed; the Council was set to adjourn from executive session without reconvening.

That’s a wrap on September 8, 2026. The full agenda is available at the City of Methuen website and meetings are archived at MethuenTV.

Have a tip, a correction, or something you want covered? Reach out.

More information to follow after the press release from the City.

Let’s get the boring part out of the way first: 6,268 Methuen residents voted in Tuesday’s state primary out of 42,359 who are registered.

That’s 14.8 percent.

That is pretty wild when you consider the fact that most races were uncontested.

Of those ballots, 1,945 people asked for a Republican ballot and 4,323 asked for a Democratic one. Here’s every race, broken down, with the ones that were never actually contests called out so you don’t waste time wondering why a “race” had one name on it.

The Republican Ballot

Deaton beat Angelina for Senate, 1,666 to 5. Not a typo, five votes. Minogue beat Shortsleeve for Governor, 1,528 to 400. Oliver beat Martin for Lieutenant Governor, 1,494 to 56. Those three were the only real contests on the entire Republican ballot with more than one name in the ring.

Everything else? Either nobody ran, or exactly one person did.

Walsh ran alone for Attorney General and picked up 1,653 votes because that’s what happens when you’re the only option. Dionne did the same for Treasurer, 1,561 votes. Grossi ran unopposed for Congress in the Third District, 1,490 votes.

Then it gets fun. Nine, count them, nine races on the Republican ballot had no candidate on the printed ballot at all. Secretary of State, Auditor, Councillor, Senator in General Court, all three State House districts, District Attorney, and Register of Probate were decided entirely by whoever residents felt like scribbling in.

Anne Brensley led the write-in pack for Secretary of State with 119 votes. A write-in effort for sitting State Auditor Diana DiZoglio, a Democrat, somehow picked up 23 votes on the Republican ballot, because apparently some Methuen Republicans just really like her. District Attorney and Register of Probate didn’t even have a leading write-in name worth reporting, just piles of scattered votes and thousands of blanks.

Which brings me to the Fourth Essex District.

Ken Willette wrote himself in for State Representative and got 24 other votes. Twenty five, total. Out of 456 total ballots cast in that district. Three hundred and forty seven of those same voters looked at the ballot, saw no candidate, and just left it blank rather than write his name down. If you’ve heard Ken talk about this race, you’d think he was running a juggernaut operation. The numbers say otherwise and look as bad as the AI-generated videos he made of himself speaking Spanish during the campaign.

For comparison, next door in the Fifteenth Essex District, Ronald L. Heiseler III wrote himself in too and pulled 839 votes out of 1,152 ballots. That’s what an actual write-in effort looks like when people know your name and show up for you. Anna Levy managed 9 votes out of 337 ballots in the Sixteenth Essex District, so at least Ken’s not in last place.

The Democratic Ballot

Markey beat Moulton for Senate, 2,763 to 1,509. That one was real. Everyone knew it was real. Everything else on this ballot was a coronation.

Healey for Governor, Driscoll for Lieutenant Governor, Campbell for Attorney General, Galvin for Secretary of State, Goldberg for Treasurer, DiZoglio for Auditor, Trahan for Congress, Zeigler for Council, Payano for State Senate, Hamilton for State Rep in the Fifteenth, Reyes for State Rep in the Fourth, Tucker for District Attorney, and O’Brien for Register of Probate. All thirteen ran completely unopposed. Nobody so much as showed up to lose to them.

The one exception, the only other real race on the whole Democratic ballot, was the Sixteenth Essex District State Rep race, where Francisco E. Paulino beat Celina A. Reyes, 408 votes to 307.

Small side note on that Fourth Essex District seat: Estela Reyes ran unopposed on the Democratic side and took 1,096 votes without breaking a sweat. She’ll presumably face off in November against whoever the Republican write-in effort actually nominates, which, again, currently stands at Ken Willette and his 25 votes.

The Scoreboard

Fifteen races on the Republican ballot. Three were real contests. Three had a single unopposed name on the ballot. Nine had nobody on the ballot at all and were decided by write-ins, several of which barely cleared double digits.

Fifteen races on the Democratic ballot. Two were real contests. Thirteen were unopposed coronations.

So if you’re wondering why turnout was under 15 percent, maybe start there.

Source: Official Results Page on the City Website

The City Council meets Tuesday, September 8, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Great Hall of the Searles Building, 41 Pleasant Street since Monday is a holiday. Using the agenda that was amended on 9-3-2026, here is a full rundown of what’s on it and what it means in practice.

1. Roll Call

The meeting opens with roll call. This is the last “summer meeting” before we get back to our regularly scheduled business.

2. Acceptance of the Agenda

The council will formally accept the agenda as presented, including any amendments. This part can get interesting when you see who gets moved up in the list and why.

3. Pledge of Allegiance/Invocation/Moment of Silence

The meeting continues with the Pledge of Allegiance, an invocation, and a moment of silence.

We’ve seen over the last few months that the invocation has leaned heavily on explicitly religious language more often than not. It is worth asking, gently, whether a body that represents every resident, regardless of faith or lack of one, needs a standing prayer line on its weekly to do list right between the Pledge and public comment. A moment of silence covers the same ground and asks nothing of anyone. Beyond that, it’s a public government meeting; religion has no place here.

4. Public Participation

Time is set aside for members of the public to address the council.

5. Organizational Business

No specific items are listed under this heading on the agenda.

6. Reading and Acceptance of Minutes from Previous Meetings

The council will read and accept minutes from the Monday, August 10, 2026 Regular Meeting and the Thursday, August 13, 2026 Special Meeting.

7. Proclamations/Correspondence

No specific items are listed under this heading on the agenda… but this has never stopped them before.

8. Consideration of Appointments

The council will consider the appointment of Matteo Zingales to the Zoning Board of Appeals. He currently serves on the board as an alternate.

I anticipate this passes with little discussion. Zingales is a known name in the City and in the Real Estate world where some of our Councilors spend their days.

9. Presentations/Projects/Department Updates

No specific items are listed under this heading on the agenda.

10. Mayor’s Report

Unfortunately for us, we won’t have the Mayor on hand due to a prior standing Tuesday night conflict but we will have a written Mayor’s report.

11. CAFO Report

Two items are listed under the Chief Administrative and Financial Officer’s report. The first is a request for an update on Searles Estate expenses and revenues, requested by Soto. The second is a request for a status update on outstanding back taxes and the recovery made to date, an item first raised earlier in the year, requested by Drew.

Looking past the Searles Estate as an old and ongoing issue, the back taxes is new. You may have seen the press release of the recent filings for back taxes, some of which were under $100… more on that in a different article. This will be interesting to see evolve.

12. Requests of Councilors

Several councilor requests are on the agenda.

• Soto is requesting a cost breakdown and tonnage figures for the Methuen Housing Authority’s trash collection under the city’s municipal trash contract.

  This is part of the ongoing retribution against the residents of Housing for telling her and others to resign. This is far from over.

• Valley is requesting that the City Solicitor and the DPW build a dedicated section of the city’s website walking residents through the process of getting an unaccepted way accepted, including an application or petition form, eligibility requirements, fees, betterment assessments, timelines, and contact information.

  This was disccused at the last meeting. It was agreed upon. This is possibly a holdover or the City isn’t moving fast enough for her liking.

• Drew is requesting a status update on the Buildings Audit RFP, a request for city employee email signature standardization, and an update on the review of HHSI permit fees discussed during the FY2027 budget workshop.

  All standing issues. I suspect Drew doesn’t get the answers he wants today.

• DiZoglio is requesting an update on barrel fee outreach and whether unanswered emails are being followed up with phone calls, and separately, with

  DiZoglio continues with his insistence that most of Methuen is purposely withholding barrel fees. This one is comical because we have no idea who has barrels so how can we bill them?

• Soto is raising concerns about residents having trouble receiving bills through the Water Department’s and Treasurer’s Office’s billing software.

• DiZoglio is also raising an issue with some departments not accepting checks, and is requesting an update on the Methuen 9/11/01 Memorial Service.

13. Public Service

This section of the agenda covers grants, licenses, and contracts.

A. Grants

No specific items are listed under this heading on the agenda.

B. Licenses

Two vehicle for hire company license applications are listed. One is from Juan Lopez for Juan 89, located at 17 Woodland Street (view backup). The other is from BFRANA, LLC, located at 131 Lowell Street, Apartment 3 (view backup).

C. Contract(s)

C-27-27 is with CATALIS TAX & CAMA, Inc. of Alpharetta, Georgia, for a CAMA SAAS AP-5 annual subscription and CAMA SAAS AP-5 permit module maintenance, totaling $83,572.36 over a three year contract. The breakdown is $26,250.90 in FY2027, $27,825.95 in FY2028, and $29,495.91 in FY2029.

C-27-28 is with A/D Instrument Repair, Inc. of Hampstead, New Hampshire, for yearly maintenance only, totaling $63,000 over three years. Year 1 (FY’27) is $18,000 ($1,500 per day), Year 2 (FY’28) is $21,000 ($1,750 per day), and Year 3 (FY’29) is listed at $2,400 per day.

C-27-29 is an amendment of the employment contract between the City of Methuen and Scott J. McNamara. The amendment would now allow McNamara to sell back 14 weeks of unused vacation time.

14. Other Officers and Committee Reports

No specific items are listed under this heading on the agenda.

15. Unfinished Business

Resolution(s)

TR-26-79 is a resolution declaring surplus equipment and authorizing the auctioning of that equipment, sponsored by the mayor and CAFO.

TR-26-81 is a resolution accepting the gift of a Polish American Veterans Monument from the Julian J. Stopyra Veterans Post, requested by Mayor Beauregard.

TR-26-82 is a resolution requesting a transfer of $1,000 from City Council Personal Services to City Council Other Expenses, requested by Clr. Soto.

This is a second read so it will likely pass without much discussion. However, it’s ridicolous of Soto to ask to move $1,000 to an account for food for the Council when we cut so much from everywhere else/

Ordinance(s)

TO-26-19 would amend Chapter 8 of the Methuen Municipal Code to eliminate certain fees for new business registrations, requested by Mayor Beauregard and Chair Soto.

16. New Business

Resolution(s)

TR-26-83 is the FY27 Budget True Up, an order concerning appropriations for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2026. It is listed as EPA requested and brought forward by the mayor and CAFO.

TR-26-84 is a resolution authorizing a transfer of $456,055 from FY27 General Fund Employee Benefits Health Insurance and $40,000 from FY27 General Fund Veteran Benefits Personal Services to various FY27 General Fund Other Expenses lines. It is listed as EPA requested and brought forward by the mayor and CAFO.

TR-26-85 is a resolution authorizing a transfer of $1,181,649 from FY27 General Fund Employee Benefits Health Insurance to various FY27 General Fund Personal Services lines. It is also listed as EPA requested and brought forward by the mayor and CAFO.

The two items above move “new” money into accounts reduced during the budget cycle that stops the furloughs.

TR-26-86 is a Complete Streets grant acceptance resolution for Methuen High School. This is $150,000 for design work for the High School Transportation entrance.

TR-26-87 is a Castle Fund resolution for First Church, Methuen. This is for $3,200 to the First Church Congregational Methuen for a concert to celebrate the 300th anniversary of Methuen and educate attendees about Methuen's history

Ordinance(s)

TO-26-20 would establish a temporary moratorium on data centers in the City of Methuen, requested by Mayor Beauregard. Why it matters: moratoriums like this typically pause new permitting or siting activity for a set period while the city studies or drafts longer term zoning rules for a particular use.

17. Any Other Business for the Good and Welfare of the Community

Time is set aside for any additional matters councilors wish to raise.

Executive Session

The council will vote on entering executive session under Exemption 7 of M.G.L. c. 30A, §21(a)(7). If the council votes to enter executive session, it will review and act on an Open Meeting Law complaint filed by Gregory Gallant against the Methuen City Council under M.G.L. c. 30A § 23(b). The council will also discuss and vote, under M.G.L. c. 30A § 22, on the acceptance and disclosure of executive session meeting minutes from the following dates:

2018: 7/26/2018, 7/30/2018, 10/16/2018

2019: 7/20/2019

2020: 5/4/2020, 5/23/2020, 12/14/2020

2021: 1/27/2021, 6/23/2021, 7/6/2021

2022: 1/20/2022, 3/4/2022, 3/16/2022, 3/22/2022, 5/17/2022, 8/1/2022, 11/2/2022, 11/7/2022, 11/21/2022

Following the conclusion of the executive session, the council will adjourn and not reconvene in open session.

How to Watch

The Methuen City Council meets Tuesday, September 8, 2026, at 7:00 p.m. in the Great Hall, Searles Building, 3rd Floor, 41 Pleasant Street, Methuen, MA 01844.

Residents can watch live on Channel 8 (Comcast) or Channel 32 (Verizon), or stream it online at Methuen.gov/livestream. The meeting will be archived and available on demand within one to three business days at Methuen TV Cablecast.

The full agenda is available at the City of Methuen’s Agenda Center.

Anyone needing an access accommodation to participate in City of Methuen programs or services should contact Sandy Almonte, ADA/DEI Coordinator, at 978-382-2123 or salmonte@ci.methuen.ma.us at least two weeks in advance, or two business days before any board or commission meeting. This notice is available in alternative formats upon request.

For those of you who don’t get the Eagle Tribune and didn’t see the article, last Tuesday (8/18), the School Committee held a meeting of the School Finance Committee. It was held in the Superintendent’s office and was overall unremarkable for the first 30 minutes. Then the CAFO dropped a bomb and the Mayor backed her.

You can watch the meeting here. This happened around the 30-minute mark.

Chief Administrative and Financial Officer Maggie Duprey told the room she would recommend against any raise in the first year of every new municipal contract negotiated this fiscal year. Police, secretaries, building inspectors, and school nurses are all set to expire before the end of next summer.

Mayor Beauregard didn’t let her carry that alone.

He backed her up in the room, saying it would be irresponsible to even consider anything beyond a zero in year one.

Do you understand how impactful this is?

That is not a normal thing for an elected official to say out loud, especially about union contracts, especially with elections coming next November which is not long after these contracts would need to be signed.

The biggest issue with this statement… they are right.

Methuen didn't arrive at this moment overnight. Years of contracts that outpaced revenue, spending that didn't always get the scrutiny it should have.. or any at all…, and projects that got started and then quietly forgotten or completely ignored all added up. Some of those same contracts were approved back when Beauregard was still on the council, which makes this moment a little more complicated for him personally. But even under the most optimistic revenue projections at the time, those deals negotiated by Mayor Perry were never going to hold up against a 2.5 percent levy cap forever. Someone was eventually going to have to say so and that is like signing your own death certificate.

Reality is, Massachusetts law caps how much a city can grow its total tax levy each year at 2.5 percent, override votes aside. Methuen has been handing out raises closer to 3 percent in recent contracts. Add in the rising cost of special education, transportation and insurance, and you get exactly what the city has been living through for years, a budget that never quite balances and reserves that keep getting drained to cover the gap. Beauregard put it plainly. The city is overextended.

None of this is a knock on the employees asking for more. Plenty of them have earned it, and plenty of them need it. That is what makes this hard. Nobody wants to be the person telling teachers, dispatchers and secretaries that this isn’t the year. It would have been so much easier for the mayor to let the finance officer be the bad news and stay quiet himself. He didn’t do that. He stood next to her and owned it. Kudos to them both!

It is worth being clear about the statement the Mayor and CAFO made during this meeting… this is about the Cost of Living Adjustments (COLA) that the unions get in addition to their step increases. Step increases are the yearly increases that come from just surviving and making it to the next year. Those steps are all different percentage increases based on a table that has long existed and does get updated from time to time during collective bargaining. The Unions also get COLA’s on top of that increase. We usually hear "it’s only 3/3/3” which would mean it's a 3-year deal giving a 3% raise each year. However, that is never truly the case.

It also helps to understand why a contract that looks like 3 percent, 3 percent, 3 percent on paper never actually costs the city just 3 percent a year. That number is only the cost of living piece. Layer step increases on top of it for every employee who isn’t already at the top of the scale, and the real year-over-year growth in payroll is higher than the headline number suggests. Then add everything that rides along with a union contract beyond salary, health insurance premiums that the city mostly covers and that climb every year on their own, longevity pay, overtime rates calculated off the new higher base, sick and vacation buyback, pension contributions tied to salary. For some unions, they get loads of special stipends to get accreditations, and clean their uniforms, and wear a body camera, and so many other things. A 3 percent raise on the surface can easily translate into a much bigger real increase in what the city has to budget for that same group of employees. That is the part that rarely makes it into the conversation, and it is a big reason why a levy cap of 2.5 percent and a raise pattern of 3 percent were never going to coexist for long.

Beauregard also isn’t pretending the city can fix this alone. He pointed to Beacon Hill, noting that Governor Healey’s push for a hundred million dollars in supplemental school funding is exactly the kind of help cities like Methuen need, even though he isn’t optimistic the legislature will come through. That is a mayor doing both jobs at once, making the unpopular call at home while still asking the state to do its part.

None of this comes free, politically.

Municipal unions turn out voters. They organize, they endorse, and they remember who stood with them and who didn’t. Telling them this far out, before negotiations have even really started, that this isn’t their year is exactly the kind of thing that gets brought up at every doorstep and every union hall until the election results post. Beauregard knew that when he said it. He said it anyway.

That is worth noticing, because most elected officials in his position wouldn’t.

The easier path is well worn. Let the finance officer deliver the bad news. Stay vague in public. Let the actual numbers come out quietly during negotiations, away from cameras, so there’s no soundbite to run against later. Plenty of mayors have managed entire careers that way, saying just enough to sound responsible without ever putting themselves on the record in a way a union could use.

That is performative politics and what Methuen has far too much of these days.

Beauregard didn’t take that path.

He stood with Duprey and said the number out loud, in a public meeting, months before any contract negotiations actually even started. That is not the move of someone protecting his own reelection. It is the move of someone who decided the city’s finances mattered more than his own political comfort right now.

Methuen has spent years avoiding this conversation because it was easier not to have it. Same goes for the insurance issues Beauregard just settled. Every year that went by without anyone saying it plainly just meant a bigger problem for whoever finally did. Now someone finally had it, in public, knowing exactly what it might cost him.

That is not the kind of thing that should end a political career. It is the kind of thing that should be rewarded. If Methuen wants more honesty out of the people who run it, this is what that honesty actually looks like when it shows up. It rarely arrives at a convenient time, and it never arrives without a cost to the person saying it.