Revere City Council sets hearing on public property naming ordinance

By Barbara Taormina

The City Council scheduled a public hearing on a new ordinance to establish a consistent and transparent approach to naming the city’s public property. Rose Burns, an aide to Mayor Patrick Keefe, introduced a draft of the ordinance to the council. Burns explained that the new regulations are meant to ensure that names of city property are thoughtful, community-informed and aligned with the district’s values. The policy applies to all district-owned or leased buildings, facilities and designated areas within them.

According to the draft ordinance, city-owned property may only be named or renamed via a motion introduced by the City Council or a communication from the mayor. All names require approval from the City Council and Mayor. Burns said the ordinance mirrors the school department’s policy for naming buildings, but the ordinance will not apply to public school buildings, parts of public-school buildings or areas located on public school grounds. The School Committee retains sole discretion to name, rename or change the name of any building or facility, or to dedicate a specific area.

If property is to be named after an individual person, the person must have made a significant contribution to the city, and the person for whom property may be named shall have been deceased for at least 10 years so that their contribution to the city will have stood the test of time. If property is not proposed to be named for an individual person, it shall be named based on the property’s relationship to any of the following: the neighborhood or geographic location of the property; the property’s purpose; a natural or geological feature relevant to the property; or a historical event or structure relevant to the property’s location. Portions of property, such as an interior room, entryway or hall within a structure, may be named for an individual, alive or deceased, who has made a significant contribution to the city.

The only difference between the draft ordinance and the school department’s policy is that the school department emphasizes the value of community input.

Several councillors questioned the requirement that a person for whom a property is named must be dead for 10 years. Ward 1 Councillor James Mercurio suggested that five years is an adequate length of time to determine if an individual’s contribution to the city stands the test of time.

Ward 2 Councillor Ira Novoselsky disagreed with making the school department exempt from the ordinance. “This should apply to every single city building taxpayers are responsible for, period,” said Novoselsky.

Burns said the new ordinance was the city’s way of doing the exact same thing as the school department. The only difference is the school committee, not the city council, has the authority to name and rename school property.

Councillors were reminded that the ordinance is heading for a public hearing where details can be hammered out.