Everett committee presses engineering on inconsistent contractor notices, refers resolution back to sponsor

Everett City Council’s Committee on Government Operations and Public Safety on Oct. 7 questioned the city’s handling of resident notification and contractor oversight for large infrastructure projects, after councilors said residents and small businesses received inconsistent notices and experienced disruptive, unscheduled work.

Councilor Garcia told the committee that neighbors on Broadway received a National Grid letter stating only that work would continue “approximately until November 29th” and that crews had shown up at unpredictable times, including a reported Sunday at 2 a.m. “We need a better timeline given to residents that they can plan accordingly,” Garcia said, adding that businesses and people who work outside the home are affected by uncertain schedules.

The committee invited Eric Swanson, the city’s Director of Engineering, to respond. Swanson said the city generally restricts permitted work hours and that emergency repairs can occur outside those hours; he told the committee he had spoken with National Grid staff and would coordinate more closely with the utility to improve scheduling communication. “We at City Engineering are to work closely with National Grid for the upcoming work in the spring to better communicate schedules and expectations,” Swanson said.

Councilors pressed Swanson on two recurring themes: who is responsible for notifying homeowners and what enforcement tools the city has when contractors fail to follow notification requirements. Swanson said planned-work notifications typically come from the contractor or utility and that contractors must obtain permits through Engineering; where the notification process has gaps, Engineering will try to supplement notification and follow up on complaints. He also emphasized boundary limits on the city’s authority when contracts are held by state agencies or private parties, noting that some large projects are contracted to MassDOT and the state rather than the city.

“You said that the contract is held with the state, not the municipality,” Swanson said, describing the city’s role as advisory when work is governed by state agreements. Several councilors urged “tighter supervision” and asked whether the city could delay payment to contractors until the city is shown that notification requirements were met; Swanson said departments and procurement rules limit such levers and that mid-construction changes to large projects can be difficult, but signaled Engineering would meet with constituents and continue pursuing supplemental contract conditions where feasible.

The committee also raised a public-safety concern after councilors reported that street lights on Ferry Street had been inoperable for weeks during ongoing sidewalk and roadway work. Swanson said the city will “fast track and hyper coordinate all the electrical work” and hold weekly electrical coordination meetings involving the prime contractor, subcontractors, inspectors and National Grid.

After the administration described steps it planned to take and said it would incorporate resident examples into ongoing projects for reference, the committee voted to refer the resolution back to the sponsor, Councilor de Pero. The referral was approved by voice vote.

Next steps: the sponsor will receive the resolution back for further action; Engineering told the committee it will follow up on specific constituent complaints and work with utilities and contractors to improve notification and site management.