Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Stadium Host Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and Council Question Stadium Plans, Council Holds Community‑benefits Review and Refers Execution Timing to Mayor
Summary
Residents urged the Everett City Council to put a proposed Lower Broadway professional soccer stadium before voters and to delay signing any community benefits agreement until after municipal elections, while councilors sought more detail on transit and public infrastructure funding.
Public commenters and councilors debated the proposed professional soccer stadium on Lower Broadway and the associated community benefits and host‑agreement terms.
During public participation, resident Peggy Sereno said, “The people don't want a soccer stadium, and it should be voted on,” and urged the council to pursue a binding ballot question. Another resident, Paula Storidi, said she supports placing a binding stadium question on the ballot and raised specific public‑fund concerns tied to transit and cleanup costs, citing figures she attributed to the MBTA and studies: “$50,000,000 for the footbridge, a $10,000,000 for the Silver Line, $22,000,000 to create dedicated bus lanes on Lower Broadway,” plus other infrastructure items.
Council deliberations split along procedural and substantive lines. Councilor VanCampen moved to accept the committee report and hold a formal review in committee; the council voted to accept the committee report and hold the matter in committee for additional work on community benefits. Separately, Councilor Petrantonio introduced a resolution asking the city to defer execution of a community benefits agreement with the development group until after the upcoming municipal election; the council referred that request to the mayor’s office for consideration.
Administration staff and the chief of staff later discussed transit and the MBTA’s role, telling the council there is “no definitive stop” committed by the MBTA for the site and noting language in previous host community agreements that could be used to fund transit components. The chief of staff said the mayor has advocated for two stops in the area (including consideration of the Chelsea commuter rail line) but emphasized the MBTA has made no commitment to a specific location.
Actions: the council accepted a committee report on placing a question about a stadium before voters and held further work in committee; the council also voted to refer a sponsor request that the city delay executing any community benefits agreement to the mayor’s office. Councilors asked the administration for detailed host‑agreement language and to clarify what public infrastructure funds the MBTA or the state would be expected to provide.
Councilors and residents said they want explicit descriptions of what the city would receive from any host agreement, whether and how public funds would be used, and how transit and parking demands would be met before the council or the public commits to final agreements.
