[Richard Caraviello]: American Mass, February 14th, 2017. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo. Present. Councilor Falco. Present. Councilor Nance. Councilor Laura Kern.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Present.
[Clerk]: Vice President Marx. Present. Councilor Scarpelli. Present. President Caraviello. Present. Please.
[Richard Caraviello]: I want to wish everybody a happy Valentine's Day, and we'll do our best to get everybody home to be with their wives and husbands. 17072, offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, be it resolved that in light of the recent accidents, speeding and heavy trucking on Winthrop Street, that the City of Medford Increase enforcement in that area. Be it further resolved that a list be created with regard to the locations of our new speed monitor signs need to be placed and that Winthrop Street should be the first on the list once the monitors are received. Councilor Undercurrent.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. It's nice we have the department here to maybe help us out on this one, but I've been getting complaints with regards to, and concerns with regards to the speeding on Winthrop Street. We always, you know, get a call or once a week or once a month with a different area. We have, you know, like every other town, city, we have people that speed, heavy trucking that shouldn't be going down certain streets. And the last concerns that I've got were on Winthrop Street. There was an accident, I think a week ago, two weeks ago, where a car went into a home. I know there's an issue with regards to people trying to pass on that road. And we did approve money last week for two speed limit monitoring signs. I believe that was about $25,000. Two of them hopefully will be coming in, I believe they said in June. So I would ask if maybe we can get our chief of police to maybe come up and just comment on this. Let the citizens speak and voice their concerns. They're the ones with children that live in the neighborhood. And when a car goes into a home, it is a traumatic event for the whole neighborhood. If we could get those monitors out as soon as we get them and put one on Winthrop Street, hopefully to deter some speeding. I know we have our sergeant here of traffic and I'm not sure if we can just pick up the enforcement in the area as well. I think that would be greatly appreciated by the residents, especially in light of the recent accidents.
[Leo Sacco]: Thank you. Name and address for the record, please. Leroy Sacco, Jr., Police Chief, City of Medford, 227 Elm Street, Medford. Winthrop Street's probably one of our more heavily enforced streets. I get a lot of complaints from the Winchester residents who get stopped coming over the line into Medford, complaining about it to the point that we've had to move the officers around a little bit more, and we'll put them right back on Winsor Street. Actually, a lot of it is self-directed. They go to where the crashes are, and then they perform the enforcement that's necessary. So that'll be done. The speed monitors, as soon as they come in, we will put them out, and we will provide a list. What we did initially when we had the first radar monitor, people called and asked to be placed on the list for their street, and we'd just check them off and move them a week or two, and just move it around. Now if we have two, we'll be able to cover twice as much area. Thank you, Chief.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: While I have you through the chair, the speed monitor signs that are stationary on Elm Street, for example, Are those City of Medford property, I think you said, are those DCI?
[Leo Sacco]: It's a DCI road. City of Medford bought those signs because of Rights Pond. Okay. And on any state road, we have concurrent jurisdiction, we can perform enforcement as well.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If I could just amend my resolve, and for those stationary signs, if we could get the speed limit posted either above the move of traffic or below so that people know, speed limit's 30. And I'm going 50, got to slow down. I think that would be very helpful because when you're coming down Elm, 30 isn't posted for another several blocks. So just right on the pole, if we could get a small sign.
[Leo Sacco]: It would be nice if we could get the state to lower that to 25 like the rest of the city streets. Correct.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: 25, yes. That would be even better. I think we have a few citizens that want to.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Dayton. Chief Sacco actually just took the words right out of my mouth. I was just going to ask if the city had jurisdiction over Elm Street relative to the recent ordinance that, I mean the recent change that the traffic commission put in place with thickly settled areas and their speed limits. I was wondering if that would apply there, but it's a state controlled roadway, so I don't think it would.
[Leo Sacco]: State controlled roadway, we can't do it, but we do have concomitant jurisdiction for enforcement. So whether it's 25 or 30, we can still cite for the violation. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Chief.
[Leo Sacco]: Any further discussion?
[SPEAKER_13]: Name and address of the record, please. Hi. Daniel O'Reilly, 707 Winthrop Street in Medford. I ended up voicing my concern to the council last week or the week before. I forgot. I've been busy. But Brianna and George both responded to me. And it made me feel better. I know Chief Sacco and the rest of the police department are doing what they can with the amounts of police officers that they have. It is a big issue. Other than this accident, we know the mailboxes at the corner of Winford Way and Winthrop Street have been hit several times. Now there are bollards on the sidewalk, so you've got to walk around the bollards to get onto the sidewalk. But particularly last week, as I was pulling into my driveway, taking a right, a vehicle was behind me, tailgating me, and tried to surpass me on the right. a weekly occurrence or a monthly occurrence, it's a daily occurrence. And the speeding is a lot, and to the point where I don't want to take my little girls outside and go for a walk. So it's a street like any other in Medford. Yes, it is heavily used, but I would like to see a little care towards it. And I would help however I can if there's anything I can do. But thank you very much.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. And I know the chief has had the radar gunned down on many different occasions to slow that down. On the motion by Councilor Alango-Kern. Come forward please. Name and address of the record, please.
[Sharon Wentworth]: Sharon Wentworth, 694 Winthrop Street. Like he said that you can't turn into your driveway. I've lived here many years and it's just increasing. You can't sleep at night. The trucks are so heavy coming by. There's another house where the bushes were all torn down from a car hitting it. The buses, I brought this up before, between Playstead and Winthrop, you can't see. Somebody's going to get hit there. There's a bus here, there's a bus here, and there's a bus here. You can't pull out. Like I said, I brought this up last year.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. OK.
[Joe Viglione]: Name and address of the record, please. Joe Villione, 59 Garfield Ave, Medford, Mass. I don't know why we have paid a park when we need to put enforcement on the roads. Now, I've seen a number of accidents on Salem. So it's all over Medford. It's not just Winsor Street. It's not just Playstead Road. Salem Street, they come at you in the crosswalk. They don't care. I have photos. I sent them to Chief Sacco. I have photos of people just dodging and going on the right of cars to try to pace them on the right. completely out of control, we need to have some enforcement. That's what we need.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Roll call vote has been requested. Second by Councilor Knight. Roll call has been requested, Mr. Clerk.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo. Yes. Councilor Falco. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Yes. Vice President Marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. President Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes, six in the affirmative, one absent. Motion passes. 17-073, petition for sign denial reversal by Daniel O'Rourke, insurance 429 High Street, Medford, OCD application 2017-1A exceeds allowable Number of signs, ban of signs are not allowed. Vice President Marks, Chairman of the Sign Committee.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, is the petitioner present?
[Richard Caraviello]: If you could come to the podium, please.
[SPEAKER_17]: Name and address of the record, please. Andrew La Fuente, 429 High Street. My address is 137 Sycamore in Somerville. As I was saying, I got diagnosed with a muscle disease, so I have to hold my neck. I apologize.
[Unidentified]: OK.
[Michael Marks]: Councilman. If you could just give us a brief synopsis on what the request is.
[SPEAKER_17]: Of course. So I'm asking for four banners and brackets projecting off of the building in addition to an awning on the side. I think it's important to understand the signage that he has now. It's just a hard sign projecting off the building, but it's old. He actually asked me to take it off. The problem is that folks are having trouble because he's on the second floor, the second level, even finding his business. The reason I'm proposing a projecting sign is because it's so high up and cars move relatively quickly there. There's not a light to stop or anything. So even if he did a flat sign, folks would drive by it without even recognizing the sign. And his business has actually dipped a little bit, obviously with the internet now and online businesses, he's seen a little bit of a decline as well, which is why I'm proposing it this way. So how far do they project off the building itself? So the brackets themselves, it's 36 inches. The banners will be 30 inches. So three inches in on either side to allow for the threaded bolts to tighten the banners.
[Michael Marks]: And you plan on removing the awnings? Is that going to?
[SPEAKER_17]: So there's a blue awning on the right side that goes up. That's coming down. And a new one is going up that just says Entrance with his logo and 429 High Street, just to identify it for people to know to go in that way. because the front of the building has two warnings that belong to the preschool.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, based on the information we received tonight and this particular location, I find no problem with the approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. On the second of Councilor Marks' approval. Second of Councilor Marks' approval.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you, President Caraviello. What's the width of the building? It looks like you're looking for four? Correct. The sign, so five total? Correct. So what's the width of the building? You think you need all four?
[SPEAKER_17]: Yes. So initially when I spoke to Chris, the owner, he actually asked for six, and I thought six was too much. The reason I'm proposing four is because of the way the windows are set up. you can keep it so it comes in 12 feet on either side with nothing. And then it's one, two, three, four. If you did less, it would look foolish because I believe the width of the building is like 58 or 59 feet wide. So it's pretty big. And the spacing between each of the banners, I believe is around 12 or 13 feet. So, so it gives proper visibility.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Okay. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Marks second Councilor Dela Rosa.
[Fred Dello Russo]: The design that's been presented to us, Mr. President, has a proportionality that seems seemly for that building. With the lack of anybody here in opposition to this, from the most active and organized business district in the city, I second approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: Second by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Aye.
[Richard Caraviello]: All those in favor? I mean all those opposed? None. Congratulations. Thank you. 17-074, petition by Gene Martin, 10 Cumming Street, Method Mass, to address the council about two specialized police officers. Name and address for the record, please.
[Jeanne Martin]: Gene Martin, 10 Cumming Street. Thank you. In light of the fact that we have the fire department here, And the police department, I'd just like to say that these are people that don't toot their own horns. And both of them are needed and necessary by the city. And the fire department does a whole lot of things that we don't really give notice to until we need them. I worked in nursing homes, and when a patient was too heavy, fell out of the bed, we called the fire department because the aides couldn't pick him up and put him in the bed. They rolled him on a stretcher and lifted him up, four people, into the bed. A flood in their basement, a little old lady friend of mine called me. I went over there and I called the fire department and instantly they knew how to cut off the water. They do a whole lot of things that we need to appreciate. So I just want to say that. Okay. So I first need to acknowledge the great victory of the council on behalf of the people. We were instrumental in locking up the built out of the new police station, this council. This was no small accomplishment and the city will be much better off for it and with it. I would also like to thank the mayor for acknowledging the importance of this new station. I am sure that this was not an easy political sell and shows strength on her part. I would also like to thank the newcomers and the more liberal establishment in this city who met the majority of the city halfway. I know that that some of their expectations for city resources have been delayed. I thank you for your sacrifice. The police officers have just gotten a moral boost, morale boost, that will help them do their jobs better for you. And to the police officers, I now hold you more accountable to do the right thing. And when you are wrong, I expect better from you now. For the last five years, I have fought on behalf of this On behalf of you, from this podium and beyond, and I expect you to thank me by doing right by the people of this city. And finally, I thank the whole city for backing our police officers. Now for a more sensitive, but necessary request of the city. Since September 11th, 2001, we have been in a continuous war with a perverse version of Islam. And even more importantly, we have been hit here at home by jihadist-inspired lone wolves. While we need to continue our fight against this scourge, we must also be acutely aware of the innocent Muslims that have been and are caught up in the crossfire. As recently as January 29, 2017, a mosque in Quebec, Canada, was attacked by a hate-filled white man who equated Muslim with terrorist. Alex Bissonette murdered six innocent victims and injured another eight others while they were worshiping God. Quebec is only five hours away from here. An equivalency would be Boston to New York. Quebec borders Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. If you think this could not happen here, you are mistaken. We as a city have an obligation to defend our Muslim population from this misdirected violence. The problem we now we need to solve as a city is the misinterpretation or the misperception that all Muslims are guilty by association, which by definition is profiling. We have two objectives, to protect this religious minority from physical harm and to engage young Muslims in a way that prevents them from growing alienated, leaving them susceptible to radicalization. While it is easier for most of us to place Muslims in a box, it is not only unfair to them, it is unsafe for us. Many Muslim men and women have risked their lives in our war on terror and are living in the States because of that sacrifice. Quebec never saw it coming. I don't want Medford to miss the signs of religious hostility which can translate into violence. Just because we do not hear about the resentment doesn't mean it isn't there. I am therefore recommending the following, that we hire three new female police officers who will specialize in all racial harassment with an emphasis on Muslim sensitivity. I would prefer four for this task force, but I will take what I can get. Why women? This role will require trust in order to be effective, and men are less likely to gain it. Intuition is women's other long suit and irreplaceable skill. Women are also less likely to be called a racist, which male officers often fear being called this career-ending name. Women can also reach women and children in the community in ways that male officers are unable to. I believe at least one female officer who is also a mother would be another asset to this role. I am recommending at least two black women to work side by side with one white woman because, frankly, white women wouldn't be seen by a Muslim woman as having anywhere near the same experience as them. The department must also have access to a Muslim female contact who is considered an expert in their culture. This expert would be hired as an independent contractor when needed. These three women officers will be first and foremost sworn officers and will be counted in the total number of rank and file police personnel. but with a side specialty. I recommend them as new hires because, as you know, we are understaffed and, quite frankly, I don't want to take any more testosterone off the streets. If we were fully staffed, I might have suggested just switching them out. For those who would like to see women veterans hired, I applaud that recommendation. And if the city finds it in their budget to complete a proper search, I agree that this is the best route to go. Finding only two women on the Eastern Seaboard search is very achievable. Before you argue that this does not conform to the civil service exam process, I don't want to hear it. This country is at war, and local police departments are now faced with frontline combat responsibilities. The military discriminates all the time. An applicant can be too short for the Marines, too tall for the Navy, too fat for the Army, and too dumb for the Air Force. It is time for the civilian police departments to catch up with that reality. Ignore me, and innocent people get hurt. Without this new tool for a new era, our police department can't protect this religious minority, who, given the current climate, is reasonably at risk of receiving threats of harm, if not harm itself. It is our duty as a city to provide this protection with this new technique. And also, I'd just like to say that the Marines have also reinstituted their female engagement teams, which was very successful in Iraq and Afghanistan. Um, they were, they reinstituted that program in 2015 and 2015 because it was so successful. So thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. What should my councilor Falco, the receiving place and file. All those in favor? Second by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Communications from the Mayor. 17-075. To Council President Caraviello and members of the Methodist City Council, from Stephanie M. Burke, Mayor. I read, loan order, Architectural Services, New Police Station. Dear Mr. Presidents and City Councilors, I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable body approve the following loan order. City of Medford, Massachusetts, loan order. Architectural services, new police station. Be it ordered by the city that the sum of two million dollars be hereby is appropriate to pay for the cost of architectural services for a new police station and for the payment of costs incidental or related thereto and that to meet said appropriation, the treasurer with the approval of the mayor is authorized to borrow such amounts under and pursuant to chapter 44, section 7-7 of the general laws as amended or pursuant to any other enabling authority and to issue bonds or notes of the city therefore. Any premium received by the city upon the sale of any bonds or notes approved by this vote lest any such premium applied to the payment of the cost of such issuance of bonds or notes may be applied to the payment of costs approved by this vote in accordance with chapter 44, section 20 of the general laws, thereby reducing the amount authorized to be borrowed to pay such costs by a like amount and further ordered. That the city treasurer is authorized to file an application with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Municipal Finance Oversight Board to qualify under Chapter 44A of the General Laws in all bonds and notes of the city authorized by this vote or pursuant to any other vote of the city in the connection therein to provide such information and execute such documents as the Municipal Finance Oversight Board of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts may require. Stephanie M. Burke, Mayor. Do we have a presentation by the city?
[Mark Rumley]: Good evening, Mr. President, members of the council. My name is Mark Rumley. I'm the city solicitor and I reside at 50 Woodrow Avenue in Medford. What's before you tonight, similar to other papers in terms of form is a loan order and it's a loan order for $2 million. The purpose of which would be to provide architectural services for a new police station. And of course, it also says, for any costs which are incidental or related thereto. The authorization is based on, under municipal finance, Massachusetts General Laws chapter 44, section 7, subparagraph 7, which allows a municipality to bond for architectural services, for plans for a project, for a period of up to five years. Now, if the project ultimately was going forward to be constructed, then that would roll into another period of time, which deals with the construction of a project, which would be 30 years. What's before you this evening is a request for the first reading. Like so many different papers that come before this council, it requires three readings. The first would be your approval this evening. That would require, at minimum, four votes of the council. The next reading would be advertisement in a newspaper. by the city clerk, and that usually happens about two, sometimes three weeks later, depending upon circumstances. And then it comes back before the council no earlier than 10 days after the last publication for the final vote of the council, and that would require five votes in order for it to pass. So what's occurring tonight is the first part of a step towards the architectural services to design a new police department. As was stated last week by the mayor, both at a press conference and also during the State of the City address, she has determined that the appropriate site for the construction of a new police station would be on the plot of land where the police station is right now, over in the area to the northern part of that lot, which would allow ultimately for the police station as it presently exists to be taken down. But this would be the first step. But I think the best way to describe this paper tonight is the only determination that has been made is location. This is, not that it's the best imagery to give by way of analysis, but this is a launching pad. It's not a landing spot. This is the beginning of many different steps which would be necessary in order to actually see the construction of a police department. So that is the paper that's before you tonight. uh, Mr. President and members of the council. And I have colleagues with me this evening, including the chief of police to answer any questions you may have.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you. Councilor.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. President Caraviello. If we could maybe educate the public on our meeting. We did meet on this from six to seven. If we could go over maybe what's.
[Richard Caraviello]: We did have a meeting of the council of the whole earlier for about an hour and 15 minutes. That was because that's why you had a delay in the council meeting starting late. Uh, we've heard from both the police and the firemen in regards to their concerns, uh, in regards to this project. And, uh, I think they were all duly noted. Um, and let's say it was, and we, and the committee, uh, will report it out this evening, am I correct? We will adopt the committee report sometime this evening. But as I said, I think everyone had a chance to air their concerns, and again, this is a point if anyone else has concerns, this is an opportunity to air them again.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And I think we spoke about it last week with regards to trying to get all boards and commissions and meetings publicized, because it would be nice if we could read over the 10 concerns and questions we had, that can just be a starting point, because I know the council probably, you can't.
[Richard Caraviello]: We'd have to report it out. We have not reported it out of the committee.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'll yield.
[2hZdDePQb_Y_SPEAKER_24]: Name and address for the record, please. Bill O'Brien, president of local 1032, office of 340 Salem Street. I know we had a lot of discussion earlier. I just want to inform the public at large that we're here to support the building of a police station, but We're here to also address, more importantly, our concerns about what's going to happen to our training facility, our storage area, so on and so forth. So I know we're not going to have much of a discussion, but I just want to reiterate that. Thank you, councils, for looking into this, and hopefully we can go forward and come up with a better master plan that's currently being discussed.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. O'Brien. Councilor Langlois-Cray.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'd like to report the committee notes out so that we can further discuss any questions that we had. Councilor Mayne.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And I think Councilor Lungo-Koehn took the words right out of my mouth in terms of attempting to report the committee report out. However, procedurally, it's gonna be very difficult because we have this paper before us. Ultimately, the committee report included a number of items, one of which would be to include retrofitting the existing structure to expand for the allowance of fire service expansion. Um, the next item would be a cost breakdown, um, as to the whole entire cost of the total project. Um, a breakdown of our bonded indebtedness at this point in time going out, I believe 15 years Councilor, is that correct? Whatever the life of the box or 30 years, I believe, um, discuss and look at the feasibility of a combined police and fire department in the creation of a construction of a new one. Um, a listing of all the locations that were examined to establish the selected location for where this structure is going to be built, when the fire department and the fire chief knew, and that the administration established a working group requiring that members of the fire service division and members of the administration work to address some of the concerns with the training academy, and also that the training academy is an important and vital asset that we have here in the community, and that that's something that we'd like to see continue as we move on. I believe that is reflective of the issues that were brought up in the committee report, Mr. President, just for an informational purpose.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: If I'm leaving anything out.
[Richard Caraviello]: Point of information, Councilor De La Russa.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Knight had made a two-point intervention into our Committee of the Whole meeting's proceedings. I believe one was to establish a working group and the second was to recommend an examination, if I'm remembering this correctly, an examination into maintaining a portion of the existing building in the architectural drawings to maintain the training tower. Did I understand through the chair, the councilor correctly?
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Yes, you did, former Mr. President, and also discussion about pursuing grant funding for the construction of a new training academy underneath the- The federal grant- Urban Area Securities Initiative grant program that the federal government- Yes, hopefully the previous administration didn't, in their dispersal of tens of millions of dollars in the final days of their administration, hopefully some of that money wasn't sent to the Middle East.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Dello Russo. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: I just wanted to take an opportunity to go over the points that were brought up in the committee report, Mr. President, because procedurally we weren't able to adopt that report at this point in time.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Any other discussion?
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President?
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. And I can appreciate the fact that some members of this council uh, would be interested in retrofitting, uh, the fire station, uh, if we do move forward with the police side. And I just want to call to the council's attention the, uh, report that was commissioned by this city back in January, 2013. It's entitled, uh, method, police and fire station feasibility study. It was prepared by Donovan Sweeney, uh, architects. And I won't go through the hundreds of pages of this report, but I will go to the conclusion and recommendation. And this was commissioned, I believe the study was $100,000 to see what we should do with our police and fire stations. And the conclusion and recommendation, Mr. President, states, based on our analysis, evaluation of the existing facilities, amount space needed by the departments, and weighing the cost and code implications of renovation, it is our recommendation that all buildings should be replaced with new construction. Our recommendation is based on the information above, but the following factors are most prominent. And then it goes on to state, Mr. President, and this is to address the retrofit. It says building a separate police department where the academy building now stands may appear on face to be the best alternative to building entirely new facilities, given the cost savings between the two. However, the savings would not be sufficient to renovate the fire station to meet code in the future. Thus, the total cost to the city for the combined work at both stations over time would be far greater than any of the options presented in this study. Plus, this option would result in poorly utilized space for the fire department in the interim. So the report that we commissioned, and maybe the mayor doesn't like to look at reports that the city spends hundreds of thousands of dollars on, states quite clearly, Mr. President, that a retrofit of the fire department, which I'm hearing now, is not cost effective. And in the long term, would be cheaper to build brand new facility. And that is the report. Anyone can go look, it's online. There should be a copy, I assume, within the city website. But that's Donovan Sweeney that we contracted with in January 2013. So as was recommended by this council and the committee of the whole meeting is that we also view, Mr. President, the fact that we want a combined center. And I think that's extremely important to discuss it now. If for whatever reason it's cost prohibitive, for whatever reason it doesn't pan out, at least we have the discussion. At least we offered it. I remember in the past when we went through with different bonding issues, we'd get four or five different recommendations. And the council would sit down, in particular I'm talking about the schools when we went through, the science spending for the schools, the pool, some of the larger cost items in the community, we had three or four items that we'd have to pick from. Say this is option one, this is option two, this is option three. Tonight we're being presented with option mayor. That's the mayor's option. And we're hearing tonight that, you know what, Let's get the ball rolling. This is $2 million. And as far as I'm concerned, Mr. President, if we waited a few more weeks to sit down and have discussion about a combined center that addresses both police and fire, that building was built in 1962. The conditions on both sides are no different, although I agree the fire probably because of their own upkeep has kept the building up a little different than the police department. But both buildings are used seven days a week, 24 hours a day, Mr. President, and we got a lot of use out of them for the past 50-something years. A lot of use with very little spending in these buildings. Now's the time to rebuild. Now's the time to do it. You have the support, and I'm not gonna speak for members of this council, you have support of this council, Mr. President, to move forward, I believe, with the combined facility that benefits both police and fire, as well as the community. So I'm hoping tonight, Mr. President, that we're able to at least put this off for a few weeks so we can have discussion with the administration about some of the things we brought up tonight, whether it's the training academy, whether it's what's going to take place with the old station, if we build a new station at the training academy. These are the things I think we need answered, Mr. President, before we hastily move forward. And I know people aren't going to like hastily, but guess what? We got this last Wednesday. It's been six days and we got nothing last Wednesday. We were presented with a fact sheet tonight that you read off. So we have not received anything until today really on this. So I don't see anything hastily about waiting a few weeks, going over, seeing what our options are about including the fire department in this discussion. It makes fiscal sense, Mr. President. It makes sense from a standpoint of public safety in this community. And that would be my recommendation tonight. So I hope we can all get together and not divide us, but say, you know what, we want a meeting with the administration. I'm very disappointed the mayor's not here tonight. We invited her, as you know, you invited her to the Committee of the Whole meeting. And I'm very disappointed in a potential a bonding of over $22 million that the mayor didn't see fit to come to our meeting to discuss her proposal. This is not the city solicitor's proposal. It's not a chief of staff proposal. And it's not a treasurer's proposal. It's the mayor's proposal. So that would be my recommendation, Mr. President. I'd like to hear what people in the audience have to say and members of this council. But my recommendation would be a full and thorough explanation why we can't move forward on a combined center, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Marks.
[Robert Penta]: Name and address for the record, please. Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Robert Penter, former member of the Zargas Party, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass. I'd like to go over some points that were brought up. Unfortunately, the whole meeting wasn't televised. But it was probably a misreading on your part, Mr. President. It's not a 3,500 square foot building. It's a 35,000 square foot building. That's number one. Number two, in the report, it states it's going to be three stories. And our good friend, the city solicitor has been quoted by saying that the mayor said she has decided where the building is going to go. The sad part about this whole commentary is the mayor is proposing an excess of a 22 and a half million. And we don't even know what the contingencies might be. proposal here for the city of Medford. This present city council, this will be the largest financial bonding that you folks are going to be doing. And because of that, and because of that, I agree with Councilor Marks, the mayor should be here tonight. This is her proposal. Because when she announced when she was campaigning, it would be seven to eight years. How it got sped up to this point, I don't know. But thankfully because of the police department going out there and having their demonstrations and speaking up and folks coming forward saying it's about time. But there are some issues. Councilor Lungo-Koehn is correct. You don't have any report in front of you that talks about dates, places, people that you met with, whoever it might be. And if some of the landowners that were supposed to have met with the city did not want their names mentioned, you could go into an executive session and that would protect it. At least you would have an idea who they were, where the locations might have been. There wasn't one police union representative on this committee. So what does that tell you there? Where was their involvement on this particular location for whatever it might be? The other part about it is the city council, you folks had no involvement at all. You're hearing about it for the first time last week and at 10 o'clock last week, you get a phone call or an email saying there's a press announcement the next day. That's great for transparency. This administration was going to be so transparent. It's about as transparent as this rug on the floor. More importantly, going forward, the fire chief not being involved, not even being consulted. I can't answer for the chief of police, because I did speak with him last Tuesday night at the council meeting, and there was going to be an announcement the next day. Whether he knew what the announcement was or not, I don't know. We didn't get to the finality of it. But if the fire department, like they are here tonight, have a particular purpose to this thing, then it should be brought into play. Now let's talk about the bonding. because if you get into the Dun and Sweeney report, which is dated January of 2013, as Councilor Marks has alluded to. There is a funding mechanism here that needs to be addressed. And the funding mechanism that needs to be addressed is that if you leave that fire department alone, the way it is right now, and just go with a police department, you have a bonding situation for which this city council is going to be paying for whatever the rate's gonna be to bond the police station. But over the next 20 years in the life of the bond, that Medford Fire Department and its headquarters are not going to be up to code. mechanically, electrically, and whatever else is needed by the standards as we go further in time. So to take into consideration the possibility of having a police and a fire department put together, or mixing the two together, how these two buildings can merge themselves together, how you can add or subtract to it, that should be the discussion before you say the final, the police department, that's it. Isn't it best to sit down and discuss these things? rather than she made the decision. Who is she to make the decision with the taxpayer's money and then she puts you guys in a corner and girls in a corner, boxing you in like a rubber stamp. If you don't vote for it, that means you're against it. That's not true. What's true is you should be a part of it. We're all part of this. whether we're a taxpaying citizen, an elected official, the mayor, whoever we're being. But more importantly, you have fire and police out here. And to some degree, they are divided. Because you know something? The fire department is starting to realize things that they need. Just because there's a $2,500,000 inclusion in the capital improvement program, what does that say? Where is that going? How does that affect them on their side of the building? You just gave over $300,000 a few weeks ago for their turnout gear, but they've only got one set of washing machines. 6, 3, and 2, if I understand those bond houses, 6, 3, and 2 would like to have washing machines that are very expensive. Well, why wasn't that brought up as a subject matter? Is that gonna be something that's gonna be a challenge? Well, I would hope not. You pay for one thing, but you don't pay for another. Another thing is there is absolutely no detailed analysis. The city treasurer is here. She has not presented, neither has the mayor presented you a detailed analysis of bonds that are going to be terminating. And by those bonds terminating, the city can just transfer themselves over to paying the same amount that those bonds were paying that would pay for this project. I want to see that. As a taxpayer and as an elected official, you need to see that. Because is the city saying your taxes won't go up? Your rates won't go up because of this? And where is all the grants from the federal government and the state? The city of Malden got $9 million in grants before they started their project to build an $18 million building. Where is the one grant from the federal government or the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? Has anyone received one? Have you become aware of it? You don't even know if they've even applied for it. It would have nice to know that if you had a sense of conversation. And if you, Mr. President, being the leader of this body, had the mayor invited you in at least at minimum to have a conversation about this, you could at least bring some information back. But she shut you out too, which is wrong. You can't do it by yourself, your own way. You know, You get elected to do a job. You talk about being transparent. You talk about being independent voices. How can you be an independent voice if you shut out, if you're not part of the situation, you're not part of the process? You know, we spent $110,000 for a Denham and Sweeney's report in January of 2013 that was presented to the council in 2014. You had a Committee of the Whole meeting where there were a lot of issues that were brought up. And I don't think any one fireman or any one police woman or lady, police man or lady, excuse me, or a fire lady and a fireman, I don't think they want to see any division between and amongst themselves, because I certainly don't want it, and I don't think the city needs it. But this is crunch time right now. You're talking about a subject matter that's now involving both fire and police. And unless the city administration says that the fire department is not going to be involved in this, this is just a police issue, a police building issue, and a police department issue, then I think you have a problem, because the problem is now presenting itself before you. The report talks about a merger of the buildings. It talks about the irregular space that you have over there. It also talks about having a minimum of three and a half acres to have a modern, up-to-date fire and police department that can take you into the next generation. You're only dealing with more than two and a half acres of land. So your space requirements are already confined. And to build a three and a half story building, who made that determination? Where's the parking facility going to go? And if you're going to have a schematic design? You talk about something that's going to take place over the next six to eight months. Six to eight months are going to prove to be what? You're going to go out there for a design. But to get to the six to eight months, you guys have to make a decision. You're going to have to agree and disagree on things. And you're going to have to move forward. And you're going to have to have people input, your input. Taxpayers' input, it's their money. It's the taxpayers' money. And I can guarantee that every single police officer and every single fireperson can come up to this podium and say that they need what they need to do their job. They should not be denied, but they should have the option of knowing that every conceivable option was presented and discussed and voted upon. It wasn't squirreled into a particular corner, a particular group, on a particular day, and then we'll talk about the next issue on another day. The stupidest way to waste money is to spend it recklessly. And right now, I think you would be doing that before you sit down and take into consideration all the needs that are out there. Why would the capital improvement program have a $2.5 million inclusion for the fire department? without you folks knowing about it, but you're dealing with a $2 million requirement to go out there and have a schematic design, and then a $20 million to build a building, and how do you know if that building, in effect, is gonna have any effect at all on the fire department, or vice versa? You don't know. You know, we live in a great city. We have a great group of people in here, and we all wanna do the right thing, the best thing for our community. But we need to be smart, and we need to be inclusive, and we need to be, understanding that we all can't think the same way. But if you can't think the same way without having an opportunity to talk about it, you'll never be able to accomplish anything. Today is Valentine's Day, and I wish you all a happy Valentine's Day. But with the white Christmas lights outside, I'm a little bit confused, okay? Thank you. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I'll try not to repeat myself. I know we had a lengthy 6 to 7 p.m. meeting, but I am going to just reiterate probably a couple of things, so forgive me. I think it's a really terrible situation that we've been put in tonight, that our two departments have been put in tonight. And I think that flows from the lack of transparency in the closed door meetings with regards to this proposal. When we met with the mayor in the spring, we went over a draft capital plan. We were told that the preliminary studies weren't going to be done for new police station until 2018. I think the fire department 2 million were for later in that 2019, 2020. I don't know if you have the plan in front of you. We thought we were going to have ample opportunity to sit down and discuss it as a council with the community where every issue, every concern would be vetted properly before any decisions were made. We did push for it to happen far sooner than 2018. So on one hand, I'm very happy that the administration wants to move forward on a police station. or anything at all with regards to spending of that sort, I am happy and that's something that our men and women do deserve. But to be told through text message last Tuesday night after a council meeting that there was a press conference, we weren't told what it was about, I couldn't make it, I think I was in court on Wednesday, I found out Wednesday afternoon that we have a new police station and I found out the location. No idea of any details until tonight. questions that we have that need to be answered before we take this vote. And that's something that we could have asked, these questions we could have asked back in January. I went back and just read some of the highlights from the state of the city address and some of the quotes. We are here as one city because we are strong and believe in writing this chapter together. Working in collaboration with elected officials in a high level dialogue to renew and improve our city. I felt sick. I was going to go back and read some campaign promises, but I really would have got sick. You have a police station that needs to be redone, but we also have a building just as old from the fire department. We haven't, I said it in the committee of the whole meeting, we haven't toured that facility. We toured the DPW yard in 2011. We toured the police station. I toured the police station in August, ran out of there, felt filthy. So I know it needs to be redone. But whether it's a couple weeks or a month, we need to do it the right way. The fire department and the chief of fire has to come back from Florida to be able to sit with the mayor and voice his concerns. The whole process is done wrong, and we're left in a position where we're going to look like big jerks for not voting for it, or heroes. I mean, either way, we're going to lose tonight. But the bottom line is, we haven't been given any information. And this is a $2 million that is going to be spent on architecture for a police station. If we have the commitment of the administration, and they really want to do a new police station, and we ask them to do a dual facility, or at least explore the option, then we need to take a week and do it. We can get some quotes. I've been in Malden's police facility, and it's amazing. We can get some quotes from surrounding towns. We can't put this on the books and delay new fire updates fire department station one for 20 years. It just can't happen. We're going to have the fire department picketing in two, three years. I think it's really lousy way to run a business, let alone a city. Lack of transparency, closed, I think it was stated, closet telephone booth discussions. I loved that quote. I used it in a different context, but I loved it because that's what happened. And it's wrong, and I think we need to explore all options, and we need to take a week or two to do it. We've delayed this years, like it was said before. We can sit and meet next week and discuss it, have the mayor come to the table. We asked her to come tonight, and she wasn't present, and we couldn't even get some answers because certain department heads weren't here. So I ask, too, that we just get the figures of doing a dual, I have the police and fire study from 2013 in front of me too, very clear that that site, if we're gonna keep it on that site, it should be done together as a dual station, police and fire. It's gonna...
[Mark Rumley]: Yes, Mr. President, my name is Mark Rumley. I'm the city solicitor. I reside at 50 Woodrow Avenue in Medford I was the one who used the expression closet and telephone booth discussions and I used that in the context of saying that that is not what occurred Administrations of every city and township throughout the Commonwealth throughout the country When the chief executive of a city or town makes a decision on how to proceed, they have to do so by way of checking things out. And they don't check things out by going into the newspaper and saying, this afternoon I'm going here, next week I'm going here, next month I'm going here. He or she who operates as an executive goes out with their administration and they check out different sites. It was represented to this council earlier that that's indeed what Mayor Burke did. And she went to many different sites and talked to many different people. I was involved in many of those discussions also. Some of those owners said, we will talk with you, but only if this is kept on a confidential basis. But not all of them did. Some of the locations that you've alluded to, yes, we talked about those places. But most of them had one particular deficiency. and that was acquisition cost. At least that and maybe other deficiencies. And it was millions of dollars for acquisition cost. One of the great positives about the location which has been chosen by Mayor Burke is this, the acquisition cost is absolute zero. And that puts the city so far ahead as far as financing this project that it cannot be denied, it cannot be overlooked by anyone who's going to be prudent with taxpayer money and the city's budgetary needs. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Solicitor.
[Richard Caraviello]: Name and address for the record, please.
[Leo Sacco]: Leo A. Sacco, Jr., 227 Elm Street, Medford, Chief of Police. Again, once again, I'm here to ask you to vote in favor of this tonight to move it forward. I don't know the process in its entirety, The way I understand it is that it would take a few weeks for it to be posted if it were passed tonight.
[Richard Caraviello]: The process would be Chief, four votes would give it a first reading, five votes would pass the bonds.
[Leo Sacco]: The issue is that we've gotten to this point. Not saying that the blood is on your hands if something happens. I hear that all the time myself. If we don't pass a crosswalk or something like that, I get that. The idea is we have an opportunity to move forward. I think we're missing an opportunity. As the police chief and as a citizen that lives in the city and pays taxes, I think it's a good thing. I think it's something that should be done. Yes, do I benefit from it? Yes. It's been something I've been fighting for for about 20 years to get a new police station. But so have everyone that's been seated behind me tonight. They've been fighting for the same thing. Why things have happened in the way that they happened, I can't give you that answer, but you'll have plenty of time to get those answers. Why some of these things can't happen on a parallel track, I'm not sure. I would think that they could. But to delay this now at this point, I just think it's wrong. I think the bashing has to go and the leadership has to begin. It needs to begin right now, right here. Thank you. Thank you, Chief.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dello Russo. Move approval. On the motion of Councilor Dello Russo. Name and address for the record, please.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Hi, I'm Cheryl Rodriguez. I live at 281 Park Street. I must say that I think the biggest concern that I have is that when I showed up at this meeting, there were A lot of police and fire here who had questions that they wanted answers to. A lot of us had questions. I was here at the meeting last week and nobody knew anything about this announcement. It's pretty upsetting to hear that when I voted in November of 2015, I selected a mayoral candidate. I selected city councilors and I expected that they would all work together. Both mayoral candidates said that they wanted to run the city open and transparent. So either person who won should have been in a position to go to our city council and have these conversations about the police station. To hear that a text message was sent out that said, hey, show up at this place and I have a great announcement. It's pretty upsetting. That's not how the city is supposed to run. As a citizen, I don't expect to be apprised of everything happening in the city, but I do hope that my city council is involved in big decisions such as this. And to find out that the fire station, the fire department still doesn't know exactly what's going to happen for them with their training tower. And you're being asked to approve $2 million in funding for an architectural study, that the fire station also needs to be repaired. There's only so much money in the city. And if we're going to undertake a huge project on this site, then we need to make sure it's the best possible project for our city and for all of our public safety. I just think that If you don't have the answers to the questions, then this isn't the time to vote for it. You should definitely pursue a combination of police and fire and get the best that we can for all of these hardworking men and women who are keeping us safe. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Name and address for the record, please. Andrew Castagnetti, Cushing Street, Lexington, Massachusetts. As I said many times in the past, if you need something to, let's get it done in a smart, smart full way. Um, what I don't understand this, however, we have a building that's only 55 years old, made of brick and mortar and it's on, it's teetering on the being condemned as was the DPW yard. It seems like we have a problem, Houston, as far as maintenance in this city with our higher end tax money. And now you're talking, or someone's talking here about a $2 million cost to do an architectural study of some sort. I bet back in 62 when I visited that station, when it was brand spank, I knew it probably didn't cost $2 million. However, just for inflation, I understand I'm behind the times. But over 10,000 wood frame homes are in the city. And they seem to be in fine order, even though I don't have $160 million budget every year to take care of my two families. The old high school, built in 1830-something, I believe. And my old high school will still be there, and these new schools will long be gone. I'm concerned. Our children can afford to live in this city today at 2017 prices, if they can. And that's debatable. What are they going to be paying for another station if it transpires next year? In 55 years, mind you, because the city's not taking care of our taxpayer property. If the police need a decent building to take care of police business, so be it. Let's get it done. but it has to be done smart. I kind of understand how come the middle class keeps getting raked over the coals. Don't people care to take care of us? Because without a middle class, we're not going to have a society worth a damn. And then again, I repeat, we may have our second revolution. Please take care of our hard-earned investments. Please. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo.
[2hZdDePQb_Y_SPEAKER_24]: Do we have a second?
[Richard Caraviello]: Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: I thought at this particular point that we were going to go through the different recommendations made in the committee of the whole.
[Richard Caraviello]: We have not reported the paper out of committee yet.
[Michael Marks]: So we're going to vote on the $2 million without reporting our recommendations from the previous meeting?
[Richard Caraviello]: We have to vote the paper out of committee first.
[Michael Marks]: Well, let's do that. I think it was asked for by Councilor Longo-Curran that we vote that out of... Do we have a motion to vote the paper out of committee?
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have a paper before us that needs to be acted on. You've got to table this first.
[Richard Caraviello]: So if we motion to table this while we report the other one out of committee. Motion by Councilor Langevin to table this while we take the committee paper. I'm sorry?
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, all we need to do is call for a suspension of the rules to take the committee report. That's all we need to do. We don't need to table any particular paper. Suspension of the rules to take up the committee report.
[Richard Caraviello]: Suspension of the rules been called by Councilor Marks. All those in favor? To take up the committee report, Mr. President. Take up the committee report. All those in favor? Aye.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'm opposed, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dello Russo is opposed. My call is opposed. Councilor Knight. You are the aligner. Just to make a point of procedure relative to... We have a motion to take... We have a paper... We have a motion, we have suspended the rules to take the committee, to adopt the committee paper and read it out. Do we have...
[Adam Knight]: That's correct.
[Richard Caraviello]: That's where we're at. We're going to adopt, we're going to read the committee report. So do we have a motion to bring the committee report up? All those in favor? We've already suspended the rules.
[Fred Dello Russo]: What is the committee report?
[Richard Caraviello]: The committee of the whole report that we had earlier this evening, Councilor Dello Russo. No. All those in favor? Aye. Take the paper out of the committee and read it on the floor. All those in favor?
[Michael Marks]: Aye.
[Richard Caraviello]: Aye. The chair seems to be in doubt here. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Mr. Solison?
[Mark Rumley]: Would you leave? On matters of procedure, if I understand what's going on, which I'm not sure I do, there was the paper which was in the committee of the whole. So in order for the paper in the committee of the whole to get to the council, it's gotta go from there to here. That's correct. Now, the other motion which preceded that, at least in terms of time, was Councilor Dello Russo moving approval of a paper, but the paper wasn't before you. That's correct. Okay. Well, the chair is gonna have to rule on that.
[Clerk]: Yeah.
[Richard Caraviello]: So we move suspension of the rules so we can take the paper out of the committee to read out. to make the recommendations, Mr. Solicitor. Thank you. Mr. DelRusso, would you rescind your question so we can take the paper off the table?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. DelRusso.
[Richard Caraviello]: He's withdrawing his motion. Okay, so under suspension of the rules, we will now move to take the paper. Committee report. Committee report and read it out. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. All opposed? Motion has it. Mr. Clerk, could you please read the committee report? The recommendations that we had in the committee.
[Clerk]: This is committee report. earlier this evening, Tuesday, February 14th, in regards to funding proposals, funding mechanisms for the police station. The recommendations out of committee were, one, the RFP includes retrofitting of the current fire station to accommodate the needs of the fire department. What is the cost to put in a new training facility? feasibility of grant funding on the municipal training facility, a breakdown of all city bonds and debtors, breakdown of all financial aspects of the loan order. I look at a combined police and police and fire facility, a listing of all locations that were viewed and proposed. When was the chief, when was the fire chief apprised of the proposal? and an administration put together a working group with fire to deliberate on the existing fire stations, training facility, and with the, with the demolition of the existing facility, the city council support a new training, a training facility to be replaced.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. Motion to accept that point of information. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: I believe we said executive session to go over those sites. Because there was confidential issues?
[Mark Rumley]: That would be wise, Madam President. Mr. President.
[Clerk]: Yes. There's something you've got to take up. Yeah, coach.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Just if we could add.
[Clerk]: Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Long. OK. Just add possible grant funding. Yes. He has it in there. Councilor Marks. Judge Alena. Councilman Kern, you have your letter.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: That's just grant funding for a potential dual facility.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion to accept the paper. All in favor? Aye. Motion to accept the paper. With the committee report. Motion by Councilor Knight to revert back to regular business.
[Fred Dello Russo]: We have a motion. Yes. Return my motion to the floor for approval of 17-075 loan order. City of Medford. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Move for approval, Mr. President. Vice President Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I think at this point, I don't think anyone behind the reel wants to walk away tonight with, uh, you know, not a deal in hand. But it's difficult to negotiate when you have members of the council willing to discuss and we don't have the other party at the table. It's very difficult, Mr. President. And what I would ask is for maybe a two-week, three-week, whatever grace period we need, under your leadership, to sit down with the mayor and discuss these nine or 10 issues that we brought up on behalf of this council, behalf of both departments, and behalf of the citizens, and discuss them with the mayor. Now if we come to an impasse or we're unable to move forward, then it'll be up to this council to come back again and decide what they want to do, if they want to give it a thumbs up or a thumbs down the station. But that's do our due diligence now, Mr. President. That's wait the two weeks, whatever that week. I'm willing to meet tomorrow, Mr. President. It doesn't matter to me. That's do our homework and our due diligence, get these questions answered. If the mayor's adamantly opposed to building one combined public safety facility, then we have our answer. Then we have our answer, Mr. President. It'll be up to this council whether they want to move forward or not. But right now, we don't have the answer. And I personally think that's the best answer. I think it's the best answer for all parties, and I think it's one we can afford, Mr. President, in this community. We haven't spent anything on public safety. We have to beg, borrow, and steal to get new cars, new apparatus. We're not spending anything on public safety in this community. That would be my recommendation, Mr. President, that within the next two weeks that you call for a meeting with the mayor, and we sit down and go over these particular items, and if we aren't able to come to a resolve, then the paper's right before us again. The paper's not going anywhere with the police department. It's right before us again, Mr. President, and we'll take a vote on it. I'm prepared to do that. I'm prepared to do that. Give the process a little time. We've had no time. We've had no process. Admittedly, even some of the representatives from the mayor's office, I think admittedly have said the process has been lax. There hasn't really been a process. They may be working behind the scenes, Mr. President, but surely it hasn't involved us as a council or other city employees that have the largest impact on Mr. President. So that would be my recommendation, Mr. President. Councilor Dello Russo does have a motion on the floor. That's great. He can have all the motions he want. He sat on the subcommittee that recommended something else. Now he's sitting, he's going with the mayor. That's fine, Mr. President. I want to do the right thing on behalf of the employees in this city and in the taxpayers of this community, Mr. President. And there's no rush to judgment over the next two weeks to sit down with the mayor. We haven't sat down with her once since she offered this proposal. Not once. We're not spending $20, it's $2 million for a study.
[Mark Rumley]: Mr. President, Mark Rumley, there is not one item on that list that cannot be discussed, whether it's this week, next week, or the week after, which would be prohibited if this paper took its first reading tonight. Not one issue on that paper which came out of committee would be prohibited from being discussed.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, with all due respect... Mr. President, I'm confused. The gentleman here is acting on behalf of the mayor, as the mayor's spokesperson. I object, I'm on behalf of the city. This is not a court, you can't object to this. Yes I can, I'll object to you today, tomorrow, or the next day. Mr. President, if I could finish my comment. I'm very confused. Very confused is an apt description. Thank you. Mr. President, the gentleman comes up here as the mayor's spokesperson, Then he's coming up here based on legal maneuvers that we're doing as a council and voting on issues to give his opinion on that. I don't know what he's acting as. City solicitor, the mayor's spokesperson. I can't understand, Mr. President. Well, I'll make it clear to you, Councilor. I don't understand, Mr. President. I'm the city solicitor. You should act as the city solicitor, not the mayor's spokesperson.
[Mark Rumley]: And as to procedure, perhaps the council should get its act together on procedure. Well, you can't be both. You're wearing two hats tonight. No, I will be a spokesperson and a city solicitor, and I will not be insulted in this fashion.
[Michael Marks]: And you should not be.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor, Mr. Solicitor, please. The colonel, please. Thank you.
[Michael Marks]: So that would be my recommendation, Mr. President. And happy Valentine's Day, Mr. Solicitor. Thank you. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that this council in 2014, 2015, 2016, now 2017, has made it adamantly clear that uh, a new police station is a priority. The number one priority for this body. Um, however, we also did just adopt a committee report that asked questions. And I think if we're going to be making a prudent expenditure of the taxpayer dollar and we have questions, we need to have those questions answered. Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Knight.
[Robert Penta]: Name and address for the record please. Robert Penta, Zero Summit Road, Bedford, Mass, former member of this board. You know, this is the problem that's happening here. Councilor Knight just hit it right in the head. You have questions to be asked. You've waited some 15, 20 years. The chief says it's been some 20 years looking for a new police station. It's not gonna happen overnight. You're gonna have to take six to eight months before you even get the groundwork going. Let me make an offering here that maybe you folks through the presidency, go to the mayor tomorrow morning, because I saw her walking out of the building tonight. Apparently she decided not to come to the meeting. This is her baby. This is not your baby, it's her baby. She's the one that made the presentation. You tell her that you wanna sit down and talk with her, You have all the questions you wanna ask. It would be nice, maybe the first time in some, what, 16 months, that you had an opportunity for all of you to sit down, break some bread in our office, and just saying, hey, these are the questions we're going, let's do this all together, and maybe you can come to some sense of resolution. I don't think a week or two is gonna make any difference right now. I don't think a first reading is gonna make any difference. Because the fact of the matter is, you don't have your questions answered. And until those questions are answered, you're not gonna be able to go anywhere. You know, Councilor Falco, you had a concern over the tower, okay? You know, you don't have that answer yet, but we can get into all the minutia of the questions that need to be asked. So why don't you just reverse it? Call her up tomorrow morning. 8.30 when she comes to work, like everybody else at City Hall, 8.30 in the morning, go knocking on her door and just saying, we're having a meeting with you, Madam Mayor and the City Council. She needs you. You don't need her. Remember that. You're her breadstrings. You're her lifeline. And if you don't hold her feet to the fire, she'll just use you each and every time she wants something done for her, to make her look politically good, and to embarrass you folks. And right now, that's the position you're in, an embarrassing position, but you don't need to be. Now's the time to turn around, put your big boy suits on, and your shoes, and your girl, and your high heels, and go knock on that door, and say, we're here to do business. If you wanna do business, we're ready to do it. If not, we're shutting down. That's what I would do.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Neistat. I don't support a government shutdown, Mr. President, just for the record.
[Richard Caraviello]: We have a motion by Councilor Dello Russo.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor Marks, Vice President Marks. I would respectfully ask my colleague to withdraw his motion so we can compromise. All we're asking is for two weeks and then we'll take a vote. Either way, it's gonna be a guaranteed vote so we can iron out some of the issues. That could be a commitment by this council. There's seven of us here, and I think we're all on the same page. As Councilor Knight just said, let's get some answers, we'll come back to the table. That's a guarantee. This is not gonna go, this issue is not going away by any stretch. So no one's gonna leave here tonight saying we're not gonna get a station or whatever. There's gonna be a guaranteed cement answer within two weeks. I would respectfully ask my colleague in the suggestion to compromise.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I think that In the spirit of compromise, Councilor Marks raises a very good point, number one. Number two, I think it's very important that if, in fact, we are going to sit down and discuss this, that there is a date certain that we come back to further discuss this debate in this forum. So if we can't get our questions answered, then we should have a date certain that we're going to come back and actually vote on the paper.
[Richard Caraviello]: So I certainly appreciate that.
[Adam Knight]: I think that that's an excellent suggestion.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Councilor Lococo. I was just going to say, we just want questions answered too. Just sitting in meeting. It goes both ways. Yeah. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dello Russo, your colleague has asked that you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I acknowledge that my colleague has asked the question. My motion stands, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion. Councilor Dello Russo's motion has made a motion. Do we have a second on Councilor Dello Russo's motion?
[Michael Marks]: So, Mr. President, just so I understand, If we vote against Councilor Dello Russo's motion, is it true the paper cannot come back to us, the police station paper, for six months, Mr. President, after a denial of his counsel?
[Richard Caraviello]: I think it's 90 days. Three months? Mr. Solicitor, could you- I'll ask it for two weeks. Mr. Solicitor, would that be correct?
[Michael Marks]: This paper will be laid up for three months under the councilor's recommendation, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President. Mr. President. this ample opportunity within the intervening weeks after the first reading to have conversation about the matters that are presented tonight, in my estimation.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I have a motion for approval.
[Fred Dello Russo]: If somebody feels that they can get their questions answered in that time.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I just think people at home and people in the audience should know that if Councilor Dello Russo's motion does not prevail, we cannot discuss that for another 90 days. So just want you to know that, that people will be disposed of. So what I'm asking is a two-week compromise to be back at this table in two weeks for a vote.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I think that's a win-win. Mr. President, the two weeks intervening is ample opportunity, and this is not a final vote on the matter. The logic doesn't follow, Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, if I could. The vote is to move forward on a paper that solely looks at the architectural design for a police station. That's correct. Now, if we include a fire station, I'm sure whoever's going to do this design is going to say, you're not getting it for $2 million. It's going to cost you, City of Method, $2.3 million. The paper does not ask for a fire station. That's right. So what I'm saying is, by moving forward on a paper that doesn't address the issues, doesn't make sense. You're putting the cart before the horse. Let's get this ironed out, and then we'll know the exact dollar amount we need to move forward. It might be a combined center, or it might just be the police department. Who knows? But that vote will come in two weeks, Mr. President. So I respectfully ask my colleague again to withdraw his motion, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor De La Rosa? On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo, do we have a second? I'm not seconding that. We do not have a second, Councilor Dello Russo.
[Michael Marks]: I ask that my motion be taken, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Motion to postpone the matter 14 days. I'm getting there. I'm getting there. I'm trying. I'm practicing, all right? Motion to postpone for 14 days. And in the interim, have a meeting with the administration to discuss some of the questions that were raised this evening. On the motion by Councilor Knight to postpone the meeting
[Richard Caraviello]: You guys, you can make it a joint motion. It can be yours, I withdraw it. I withdraw it. On the motion by Councilor Naive and Councilor Marks. Imitation to sign a flattery. To postpone this for 14 days, all those in favor. Mr. Clerk, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. to meet with the mayor and to discuss the issues. Which is essentially your table.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? No. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Leopold? Yes. Vice President Marx? Yes. Councilor Scott Daly? Yes. President Gabriela.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. One in the affirmative, six in the negative. Six in the affirmative, one in the negative. Motion is tabled for 14 days. And we have a five minute recess. 17-070, report of the Subcommittee on Zoning and Audiences held on February 6, 2017 to review and discuss all papers assigned to the Subcommittee on Zoning and Audiences.
[Adam Knight]: That's me. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. The Subcommittee on Zoning and Ordinances asks that you call a committee of the whole to go over the following paper. We did adopt a committee report. The committee report is rather extensive. For a brief synopsis, I will tell you that the council addressed paper 16771, the wage theft ordinance. The committee also addressed council paper 15-749, an ordinance regulating replica firearms. These two matters were reported out of the committee favorably in motion to refer to the committee of the whole, Mr. President. Uh, we also called a meeting relative to paper one six seven zero five, a short term rental ordinance paper one six five five five related to demolition delay that was scheduled for two 1317 at 6pm, which was yesterday, Mr. President, but city hall was closed. So, uh, we canceled the meeting. So that did not occur. Um, We took up paper one, two, three, nine, five, satellites antennas receivers ordinance. Uh, we voted to receive it and place it on file, but give notice to the building commissioner. The measure was introduced at his request and the paper has been in subcommittee for an extended period of time. We requested that if the building commissioner feels as though it's still an issue that he can reintroduce the paper. Uh, we looked at paper one, four, seven, zero, eight regulating e-cigarettes in an ordinance. We received it in place on file with a notice to the sponsor that the matter is currently governed by board of health regulation. We also looked at paper 1660, amending the graffiti ordinance 62-94 to authorize fines to property owners for the non-removal of graffiti on private property. We voted, Mr. President, to keep this matter in committee and reconvene on 2-2017, as well as invite a representative from the building department to appear before us. On paper 16626, notice of all zoning board of appeal hearings to all residents within 300 feet of the applicant. We voted to keep this matter in committee, Mr. President. We requested a legal opinion from the city solicitor. Does state law govern notice requirements? Is this proposal outside the scope of local control? Paper 16-666, moratoriums on building smart development. We voted to keep this paper in committee. We requested a legal opinion from the solicitor as to whether or not this is within our scope and purview. Paper 16359, an amendment to the Zoning Act to authorize front yard parking. The committee voted to keep that in committee as well. In paper 16338, paper to hire a zoning consultant, we voted to keep that paper in committee as well. Motion was made by Councilor Dello Russo to report the paper out of committee favorably. It was seconded by Councilor Falco. The meeting adjourned at 6.58 p.m. Mr. President, in attendance were myself as the chairman, Councilor Dello Russo, and Councilor Falco as members. We were also very lucky to have two members of our council here, Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Scarpelli were in attendance as citizens and not as members of the subcommittee or city councilors, because that would have posed some issues, Mr. President. Also in attendance was Mr. DeVito and Ms. Rodriguez, and I want to thank them both for coming. So as such, Mr. President, we'd ask that the subcommittee report be adopted and that a committee of the whole be set up to go over the two pieces of legislation that are included therein.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Nathan, as seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Aye.
[Adam Knight]: Aye.
[Richard Caraviello]: The chair seems to be in question. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Unfinished business. 17-022B. Committee report from January 10th for revised vehicle for hire. It has passed its first reading, it has been advertised, it is now eligible for its third reading this evening.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I move for approval on the paper. This was a matter that was debated in subcommittee for an extended period of time, reported out of subcommittee to committee of the whole, reviewed by the Traffic Division. Recommendations were made. Recommendations were adopted. First reading has occurred. Second reading has occurred. Mr. President, with the passage of this paper this evening, it will become ordinance. Motion to approve.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor?
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Aye.
[Richard Caraviello]: Third reading roll call is required. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dela Ruccio? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Mayne?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Lungo-Koehnan? Yes. Vice President Barnes? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Caraviello?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, nine in the negative. Motion passes. The ordinance has been adopted.
[Adam Knight]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk. Offered by Councilor Knight, Councilor Scarpelli, and Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council request that the MBTA address the idling of buses at the corner of Winthrop and Playstead as those buses are creating visibility issues for motorists, pedestrians, cyclists traversing the area. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think that you, Councilor Scarpelli, and myself all had the same idea. when Ms. Wentworth came up here this evening and I've had discussions with the MBTA about it. I know Councilor Scarpelli has it as well. Councilor Scarpelli has it as well. Ultimately, Mr. President. Excuse me, Councilor Knight.
[Richard Caraviello]: In the back, it's hard enough to hear as it is here. I'm sorry, Councilor Knight.
[SPEAKER_07]: Thank you, Mr. President. I think I can proceed.
[Richard Caraviello]: Council rule, there's no cell phones in the room. Thank you, Councilor Knight. I apologize.
[Adam Knight]: Where was I? Mr. President, so, Ms. Wentworth appeared before the council earlier this evening to discuss the situation that she's having getting in and out of her driveway on Winthrop Street. It's a problem that's not exclusive to Ms. Wentworth with the number of buses that queue up on Winthrop Street and along Placehead Road. It does pose a visibility issue. With the recent amount of snowfall that we received, these buses are a little further out in the street, causing a significant issue for motorists, pedestrians, and cyclists. the administration reach out to the MBTA and discuss potential solutions to the long-term idling of buses in that location and the public safety concerns that it poses.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion by Councilor Knight, Scott Pell, and Caraviello. Seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Motion passes 7-0. The records. Motion to suspend the rules.
[SPEAKER_20]: Good evening, I'm Ronald Paone, I live at 314 Winthrop Street in Medford, and I want to piggyback on what those two residents were talking about, about the speeding, but I'm on the other side, I'm towards the rotary, so I'm gonna get a little animated here, but if you could just give me about seven minutes of your time, and I'm just gonna read what happened. This incident occurred this morning at 2 a.m. And it had something to do with the snow. It also had something to do with speeding. It also had something to do with the road that is destroyed because of a water break that happened two months ago, okay? So at 2 a.m. this morning, I was awakened by a big bang, a pickup truck snowplow from the city of Medford. It was the city of Medford pickup truck. And he was moving up and down Winthrop Street with his blade lowered. His intention was to widen the road. I ran outside and he flew by me with his blade dropped. He was going over excessive. He was doing 50 miles an hour with his blade dropped. Not five, 15. I'm pretty accurate with this because I can see how fast he was going. He hit my snow bank before my driveway, shot snow throwing it all over my entrance to my driveway and my sidewalk. I got in my vehicle and I went to look for him. I didn't find him. I went down to the city yard, walked in, there was a gentleman behind the desk, he was sleeping, and before I continue, I just wanna say, I'm not disrespecting the municipality because I think they're one of the greatest municipalities in the state. I'm gonna reiterate that at the end of this, okay? I wake up the guy behind the desk, told him what happened, he said, I will report it. I went home, waited for about 10, 15 minutes, Nothing happened, so I picked up four big chunks of ice that weighed about 50 pounds, brought them over to the snowbank, put them back, then I cleared my driveway with a shovel and my sidewalk. Okay, so, after I was done with that, the same truck came speeding down the street, now I'm watching him as he's coming towards my house, and he's cascading and hitting every snowbank with a pickup truck, trying to widen the street, which is not gonna do it because it's iced. Everything is frozen. Same thing, and he's hitting it. I stepped out, he seen me, but his windshield was, on his passenger's side, was covered with snow. So he probably didn't really see me. Lifted his blade and he went around. Went over the double yellow line. Hit the speed bump, put his blade back down. What speed bump? Well, whatever, the hump that's in the middle of the street, raised from the water damage. Whatever you want to call it. Okay, now. He lifted his thing, all right? He probably would've, if he didn't see me, probably would've re-buried my driveway, all right? I'm not someone to complain. In fact, this is not the first time this incident has happened in my house. A snow blower truck, City of Medford, the big one, came by in the snow storms of 2015 and shot three feet of snow onto my sidewalk, okay? Which is about 25 feet long from neighbor to neighbor. Okay? I have a bobcat, okay? It's 52 years old, still runs. I had to remove that snow. Okay, so. My question is, who's in charge of these people? Who's supervising them? Okay, and I'm not knocking them again. And I'm gonna get to this. I'm probably not the only resident that this has happened to. Since the water break pipe two months ago, we've had this hump in the middle of the street across from side to side. So the plow drivers do not come close to the curb as they're plowing because they want to avoid the hump. So now the snow banks are extended about two and a half to five feet out from the curb. All right? Before it, which extended to the snow bank. Okay, so anyway, before my house, The snow bank is about four feet away from the curb, right before my driveway. Okay, and they keep continuing, it's not moving, all right? I decided that I was gonna move all the snow today, so I went 25 feet in front of my house, and I removed four feet of snow, 25 feet from my neighbor's to my driveway, picked up the snow, I got a little snow farm in the backyard now, okay? listen I'm getting kind of like tired of this so you know again I don't know who's not accountable for this stuff and again I try to do my part to help the city all right But the patient thing, especially when you're not feeling well and you try to work a little bit. And I understand some of the guys that are in the municipality are not really experienced, some of them might not be. They learn from being in the municipalities for years, I get that, okay? And a lot of them, they're tired, they're overworked, they just wanna get home, I get that too. I'm not disrespecting anybody, again. DPW method, it's not my intention here, but at my age, my patience with incompetence gets a little, You know what I mean? So I can do my part to respect the city. I would like a little respect back, you know what I mean? You know, the Method DDTW is one of the finest municipalities in the state. I know you guys know. But like I said, I just wanted to reiterate this, okay? I've seen and done some things, and I'm not perfect. I've been in this field of earth moving and snow removal for 35 years. So I've seen how it takes a storm, okay? But this is a safety matter, and I mean like, I like to do one job once and not have to do it again, and this kinda like peed me off a little bit, and I don't mean to use that phrase, but it kinda really did.
[Richard Caraviello]: I did receive some other calls, and... and I did make Brian Cairns aware of it, and we will send a letter to him from the clerk.
[SPEAKER_20]: I mean, I don't wanna hurt anybody's jobs.
[Richard Caraviello]: No one's looking to hurt anybody.
[SPEAKER_20]: I don't want anybody losing their jobs, I just know what I've seen and what I observed.
[Richard Caraviello]: You're not the only one that's complained about that.
[SPEAKER_20]: Now, the front of my house, 314 Winthrop Street, you go by there, anyone of you who's wanna take a picture, I cleared four feet of snow from the curb, now the curb is visible. So the next time around, if there's a snowstorm, you guys can come on in. But that bump has to be addressed.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. If you could send them to Commissioner Kerins. Yes, this is Rick, please.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Regards to what happened. If we could just get an update from DPW with regards to the incident that happened on Winthrop Street near 314, but you said, I think it sounded like it went all the way down the street a couple times. So we just can get a written update with regards to, you know, if he can make sure he knows who did it, if it was a contractor, if it was one of our personnel, and we make sure we do it right the next time.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[George Scarpelli]: And I believe the sinking.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And the sinking.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah, well, the sinkhole there from the leak, which probably won't get fixed till the spring. Thank you. Name and address of the wreckage.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Castaneri, Cushing Street, Methodist. I'm sorry sometimes that people are not satisfied with some of the work that's being done in the city. However, I'm not on either side of the party, so to speak. I must say, it seems to me that the DPW workers are overworked and understaffed, especially with these recent storms and stuff. Maybe some of this free cash should be spent to hire some key positions in DPW, because they work really hard, and they're very tired.
[Richard Caraviello]: That's what it is. Spent a tough few days with the DPW, and they've done a lot of work keeping up with the snow. Name and address of the record, please.
[Joe Viglione]: Good evening, Joe Villione, 59 Garfield Ave, Medford, Mass. Last week at the State of the City, Mrs. Burke finally let us know that she's gonna have an access TV station, No, I'm not the only one. Councilor Pente had to suffer that, too, from these ignorant people that are supposed to get paid $30,000 a year to be here. That being said, she said there would be a TV station in late spring. Now, I want you to hear the timeline. March 26th of last year at the school committee, Heidi Riccio said we'd have an access station in September. Mrs. Burke came up and disagreed with her and said October. I visited Roy Belson in November, and he said, Joe, we're going to have it in January. February 8th, we hear it's going to be late spring, which I take as June. Now, this causes irreparable harm to the election 2017. For all you people running again, if you are running again, irreparable harm. You don't have the access that we have in Somerville. Now, our esteemed city solicitor, who made it clear that I'm the city solicitor tonight, he had to emphasize that. I guess people don't know that. He told me that access is obsolete in his office. And I said, Mark, teaching children computers, teaching seniors computers, as they do in Stoneham. The E.D. brings the computers to the senior housing and the seniors learn computers. I said, that's obsolete. And he goes, oh, I guess you're right. Well, it's obsolete if you're Tom Brady and you're suspended by Roger Goodell for four weeks. Then Tom Brady's obsolete. That's the standard our city solicitor uses. It's self-serving. And it's censorship, it's pure censorship. Now what I propose, now that Mrs. Burke has said that the vocational school is getting the lion's share of the time for the access station, wait a minute, they already get the educational monies. Why should they also get the access monies? And access TV we'll have at night. At night, Mrs. Burke, would you send your mother, a senior citizen, up the ramp? at the vocational school at 7 o'clock at night, Mrs. Burke? Why would you do that to my grandmother or anyone in my family? Why would you do that, Mrs. Burke? We need what Mayor McGlynn's tribunal said, to have it in a central location. I proposed a van. We have 600 grand there. A van with two cameras that go over the cellular wires. This is very simple. You don't need cable anymore to do public access TV. You just need the cellular wires. Now, I'm very proud of our council president, Mr. Caraviello, who said the library. I agree with him wholeheartedly. And I talked to Barbara Kerr. We have some space for computers. Learn computers at the library, Mr. Rumley. That is what it was. bequeathed to the city for, for educational purposes. So we can put some computers up there, have a van, the van goes from the Chevalier to the library and roams around town. When Mr. Falco is speaking at a luncheon, we tape him. When Mr. Scarpelli is doing a sports event, we tape him. When Breonna Lungo-Koehn has something, a function, we tape our elected officials. That's what it's for. They have it in Somerville. So when I won an award on January 19th, Joe Kurtatone won an award and he said, you keep us politicians honest. That's from Joe Kurtatone. And he was right. And he got massive applause because he leaves us alone in Somerville. God bless him, he leaves us alone. Love him or hate him, he did the right thing. And then he said to us, I guess you people are looking for more funding, giving me the award. I'm paraphrasing him. Pretty funny, but he deserved it. He said the right thing. We're flourishing in Somerville, Mr. Rumley. We are flourishing in Malden, where I'm a music director, Mr. Rumley. So I'm a music director in Malden. I'm a music director in Somerville. I have these titles. I have these awards from Winchester and Somerville, Mr. Rumley, but our citizens, our seniors, our children do not have these awards. They do not have our football games. Malden has our Thanksgiving game. I've been here talking for, what, since 2005, 2004, about public access issues. It's 13 years. I think you know that I'm serious. So if I have to file a class action suit with a lawyer and with some citizens, I intend to. We're going to have access in the city, in the middle of town, if I have to build one, if I have to build a for-profit access center, and then we will fight for the agreement to put it over Channel 3 and whatever Channel Verizon gives us. We need this in this city. The children need it, the senior citizens need it, and you as elected officials need to talk to Mrs. Burke, if she'll talk to you, if she's not evading you, need to talk to her and say, two hours for public access with a million dollars a year, that's not fair, Mrs. Burke. The VOC has educational money, let them use the educational money, do not touch our access money, because Mrs. Burke, I will see you in court.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you. Motion by Councilor Falgo to receive and place on file. Ricketts. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, I just want to make it known that, uh, a long time, uh, part of this community, uh, the method Mercury is closing their door officially. Uh, I think the paper has been in circulation in the city for, some 40 or 50 years, or maybe even longer, Mr. President, and they were a good source of news for a number of years, and they are finally, due to some financial hardships and so forth, closing their doors, and I wanna wish the paper well, and thank them for their many years of reporting on the city of Medford, and I wish them well, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Marks, for bringing that up. Someone that I think that's kept so many highlights in our communities, especially the Malden-Medford rivalry, is Steve Frecker, someone, the editor, who kept things going for so long when things were so tough, and he hung in there. So I appreciate all his hard work and what he's done for Medford and Malden and the Mercury. So we wish him well. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Steve Frecker was a good man, and I go back to the days of Alfrezza. Alfrezza. Alfrezza. Al was the power guy in town.
[Adam Knight]: Records. Councilor Knight. I'm just hoping that Coach Nestor's at home watching and maybe Coach Freck's available to come over to Medford and help us out a little bit over here. So maybe we can... No, Steve's a great guy. Thank you. All right.
[Richard Caraviello]: The records. Tabled records of January 31st, 2017 were passed to Vice President Mox. Vice President Mox, how did you find those records? Thank you, Councilor Marks. Seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor, aye. The records. of meeting of February 7th, 2017, were passed to Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Scarpelli, how did you find those records?
[George Scarpelli]: I found the records in order.
[Richard Caraviello]: Second by Councilor.
|
total time: 22.83 minutes total words: 1173  |
total time: 8.88 minutes total words: 500  |
total time: 8.79 minutes total words: 607  |
total time: 14.31 minutes total words: 657  |
|
total time: 2.05 minutes total words: 133  |
total time: 11.52 minutes total words: 197  |
total time: 0.64 minutes total words: 63  |
|