The Land Use and Urban Redevelopment Committee met on April 23, 2026 (noted in the transcript as April 22, but corrected to the official date). Co-Chair Price presided with members Gardner, Boudreau, Field, Weinberg, and Finkel present. Representative Politia and Beckham were excused. The committee addressed two items: the acceptance of Pembroke Drive as a city street and a contract amendment for the integrated land records and vital statistics recording system.
All right. So it is 7.02. And I'm going to call to order the meeting of the land use and urban redevelopment committee. And it is April 21st and 702 p.m. 22nd. I don't think that it is, yeah. 22. 22nd. Oh, whoops. Wrong day. It's Wednesday, April 22nd. With us, we have Co-Chair Price. Representative Gardner, Representative Boudreau, Representative Field, Representative Weinberg, and Representative Finkel. Excused is Representative Politia as well as Representative Beckham. We do have a quorum. And so the first item on our agenda today is item one LU dot 32.006. This is the resolution accepting Pembroke Pembroke Drive as a city street by property owners pending the certification by the city engineer that Pembroke Drive meets the qualifications for acceptance. Yes, motion to take it up. Second. Thank you. Representative Weinberg, would you like to give us an update on this item? Yeah, sure. I got an email last night that uh from the uh point the person who's serving as point person uh for uh for the property owners on Pembroke tribe. They have not uh put uh they have not pulled together the the uh the documentation that um you know that attorney toma has has advised need need to be presented to the committee. They hope to have it next month. So since I'm only ex officio, I can't make a motion to recommit. Um but I um encourage to the uh the committee to do so. Um that's that's about all I've got to say right now. But motion to recommit. Uh one moment. Uh Representative Boudreau, you have your hand raised. Um this is I'm not sure if this is quite a point of order or not, but um rather than a motion to recommit, would it be more appropriate to take a motion to postpone uh so that it doesn't need to go through steering again and we automatically take it up on our uh agenda next month? Either approach would work fine. Um uh uh parliament parliamentarian McCown discovered this motion to postpone that um that I don't believe was ever used on the 31st board, so I was kind of unfamiliar with it, but I'm I'm cool either way. Okay, I guess I'll make that motion to postpone to next month. Oh uh uh all right. I see that uh co-chair price's hand is down. Uh do I hear a second to that motion? Seconded, second second. Uh okay. I'm gonna do a voice vote. All in favor of postponing uh resolution LU 32.006. Uh yeah, I'm gonna I'm gonna stay in on that. Oh, because I think we I think the only way to postpone it, you spell, I mean you're supposed to send it back to the committee and get um resigned. So I'm gonna stay in on that. I've never seen anybody postpon anything when you pull spawn, I think you kill it. Uh isn't is an amendment appropriate to postpone it to the next meeting so that it's not a dead issue. I I don't think it'd be an issue if you just um um recommitted to Stamaran and it'll come back on the same way it has been coming for the last few months. I never seen anybody use uh pull spawn the next month. Yeah, I mean uh you know, is that representative Adams has been on the board a lot longer than I have.