[Joyce Paul]: No, I didn't approve the 15th and they're in there.
[Richard Caraviello]: 29th regular meeting of the Medford City Council, Medford, Massachusetts, September 26th, 2017. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Present. Councilor Falco? Present. Councilor Knight? Present. Councilor Locker? Present. Vice President Mox? Present. Councilor Scarpelli? Present. President Caraviello?
[Richard Caraviello]: Present. Please rise and salute the flag.
[Clerk]: I pledge allegiance
[Richard Caraviello]: All right. Mr. President, motion to suspend the rules to take some items from last week's meeting off the table. Motion by Councilor Knight to suspend the rules to take a paper that was tabled last week off the table. Seconded by? Councilor DelaRosa. Councilor DelaRosa. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. What are we taking off the table? Mr. President, the paper that I refer to would be 176454647. And 44? 44454647? Okay, you have the minutes Mr. Clark, from last week? So I can read it? Mr. President, if I may present these to you. I would appreciate it, Councilor Tarullo, sir. Thank you. Okay, 17-644 offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council be appraised of the past, present, and future planning that has been and will be taking place to evaluate the increase in residential units and the impact it is having on our public safety personnel. Be it further resolved that if there is a plan to increase our public safety personnel numbers and locations to accommodate the increase in population, it be provided to the City of Medford City Council If there is no plan, be it resolved that one be put in place. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. This is one of the three or four that I put on last week, and I think I have two additional resolutions this week that relate to the development in Medford. I just wanted to get some answers and see if the discussion has been started, and if not, get the discussion started, get the conversations started with regards to anything and everything that development in the community could be impacted by. And one of those areas is our public safety. We all know that our numbers are stable but low. We're able to provide services as best we can. We see the police and fire and DPW do and all that they can. But when you talk to a firefighter or a police officer, they do have questions with regards to when are levels gonna be increased. We seem to always be hiring additional personnel, but it almost seems like we're just filling retirement positions. And it seems like with the development that potentially has been approved or development that is potentially going to be approved certain areas within our city that are gonna be developed, I think we need to get a roundtable discussion, if it hasn't happened already, with the chief of police, the chief of fire, DPW commissioner, personnel in the mayor's department, the city council, and the community, and figure out what may be needed. I mean, I've heard that there's a ladder truck out of service as of this week. definitely heard rumblings that certain stations are not active with regards to the fire department. You always hear that public safety and the police department is understaffed and that we need more personnel. So what are we gonna do if we're gonna have 500 units plus at potentially multiple areas in this city? Are we going to expand and open more stations? Are we gonna try to increase our numbers police and fire and DPW so we can handle the load. And this is just one area that needs to just be discussed. I think that it's come to light other areas and people are starting the conversation, but I feel like we all need to be on board. We need to be privy to how we're going to handle it and make sure it's handled accordingly so that we can keep our residents current and future residents safe within our community.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you Mr. President. Thank you Councilor Lungo-Kurt for this wonderful resolution. I'd be particularly curious to see where our population is. Is it actually growing? or is the development just reflecting a spread in population and a diminishment in people per domicile? I'd also like to see how our present current public safety numbers and our other city service numbers as far as employees delivering services to the city, police, fire, DPW, reflects what we are now as a community of 56,000 as a comparison to when we were a community, I think, at our height in the 60s, 70s was 65, 68,000, I believe. So that would be a worthwhile consideration when we have this conversation, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On motion by Councilor Lococo to send this to the Mayor for her action. Seconded by?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dela Ruzzo.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dela Ruzzo, all in favor? Aye. Motion passes. 17-645 offered by Councilor Lococo to be resolved that the City Council be provided a copy of the report on enrollment and class size that was given to the school committee at the September 11, 2017 meeting. Councilor Lococo.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I believe since that resolution was put on two Fridays ago, last Tuesday we did receive a report from the superintendent with regards to enrollment and class size. That report, I believe, was from September 7th. I believe the numbers have increased some, but this too is along the lines of just making I don't have the resolution in front of me. I think I had two very similar. Yes, I was reading the committee minutes, or the, actually, I think it was the agenda, and I saw that this was on the agenda, so it's something that I always like to see in the fall, as well as when we have budget discussions in June. So we were provided this, so just move approval. Anybody that wants to comment can comment on it, but it seems like all the numbers are, close to if not what they were in June. The one issue that I did speak up about was resolved and I'm glad to see that we're able to keep our class sizes low and I hope we can continue that.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President? On this and related issues, I'd be eager to hear from the superintendent of schools and what he has to portend. Thank you.
[Roy Belson]: Name and address of the record, please. So I just want to comment a little bit that I think that the enrollment is good. And I think that between you and the school committee, it supported the schools very well. And I think we were able to maintain good class size. I gave you an updated report tonight, which reflected another week into the school year, which is usually the first time there's a bump from the previous numbers that I was able to give you. In that period of time, there were 94 more new students that came into the public schools, 56 in the elementary, 27 in the middle, and 11 at the high school, Volkin and Curtis, a total of 94 students. There's no significant change in class size. There's no significant change in space availability and the like. The distribution of the new numbers, the Brooks had 21, the Columbus had 13, the McGuinn had 10, and the Roberts had three in regular classes. Overall, the Brooks had 26, the Columbus had 13, the McGuinn Elementary had 10, and the Roberts had seven. Now, overall, I think we're in good shape. Obviously, I continuously watch things, pay attention, but it doesn't appear that the development that you're bringing into the city is actually having an impact on enrollment because of the nature of the units and because of the cost factors and other things involved. We'll continue to track it and pay attention to it, but it doesn't look like it's doing that. The bigger issues for us are obviously the intensity of services that are maybe required. Sometimes people come into the community with a tremendous need and sometimes that's caused by the fact that the city provides really good services. And I think that's something that, you know, it's a double-edged sword. It's sort of like a you know, conundrum in the sense you want to provide the best services possible, you want to provide good special needs services, good ELL services, but the better you do, the more likely you are to attract people who are looking for good services and they may not get them in some other communities. Another factor that we've got to pay attention to a little bit is obviously transportation, because as we move people around, Medford provides 18 buses at free transportation. We also provide a lot of small vehicles to bring people around to different schools. And when we move the young people from the Roberts this year in EL classes to the Brooks, we created a little extra transportation cost. So those are things we have to pay attention, take a look to. We also want to see if we can't redirect some students over to the Columbus because that's the lowest enrollment right now. But overall, we're in very good shape and we should continue to be in good shape and we'll continue to keep you updated. I think that's, you know, it's important that you know. It's also important that the public understands that development's going to be very important to the community because finances, whether you're talking about the federal government or the cutbacks coming through Washington, you're talking about the state government where there's continued a search for revenue, although September numbers look really good. But I don't know if it's sustainable. If we don't have development, we're not going to be able to sustain the level of services we want to provide to our young people, public safety, or any other activity that you want to do because it appears to be that there's not a real appetite for other kinds of revenue. around the state or in Washington. So those are the big concerns, and I think the development can go hand in hand without impacting the schools, but naturally we always pay attention. So I appreciate you listening. I'm happy to take any questions. Mr. President?
[Richard Caraviello]: If I could say, the biggest class we have in the city is 23 at the fifth grade in the Glen?
[Roy Belson]: I don't think it's 23 there, but I'll take a look. I don't think any class is that high.
[Richard Caraviello]: 21.5, but the biggest class in the city is 23 at the McGlynn in the fifth grade.
[Roy Belson]: I don't see that. If I look at the latest numbers, if you're looking at the actual number or you're looking at the numbers, that's by choice of the, of the principle principle might from time to time decide that certain classes should be a little larger because the youngsters in it are doing well. And there may be another class that wants to cut it down a little bit because there's a youngster or two that may be more of a challenge.
[Richard Caraviello]: I had an opportunity to, um, than the opening of the Modera today, which is 50% full right now. And it's the other 20%, 25% is already under agreement once it opens. And I asked them about children there, and two of the rental people didn't think there were any children at all in that building at the moment.
[Roy Belson]: I just think it's not the kind of developments that are going to-
[Richard Caraviello]: As I said, they couldn't recall of anybody being there.
[Roy Belson]: It's not the kind of developments that seem to be attracting young families that one can afford it, and two that might have sufficient space. It seems to be they're looking for other things. So that's a factor that we need to keep in mind.
[John Falco]: Mr. President. Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Superintendent. I just wanted to say as a former member of the school committee, I know that, you know, class size has always been a huge focus with regard to just keeping it low, especially in the younger grades where you really, you know, creating a sound foundation for education. And when I look at these numbers, this is really remarkable. To see this many classes that are in the high teens, 18, 19, 17, this is really remarkable. And it's across the district. I know when I was on the school committee, I'd go to the Massachusetts Association of School Committees forum, where they had the organizational meeting every year. And you talk to people from other school districts, and this is unheard of. I mean, to have class size this low, absolutely unheard of so I mean congratulations to you and to the school committee for their fine work if you're staying on top of this because this is really remarkable to see class numbers this I know in my years of the school committee when we first came on I know that you know there were some classes you saw are up around 25 26 27 and to see class size down at like 18 19 17 And I think in some instances maybe even smaller. There's one here at 15. I mean, that's remarkable. And it's great to see that there's a huge focus on class size and keeping it low. And I just think this is remarkable. And I just want to say great work to you and the school committee for making this a major priority. Thank you. Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Go ahead. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Superintendent, at what point is it a requirement that a teacher aid be put into a classroom?
[Roy Belson]: There's no requirement for regular ed, except if you get into the elementary school, up in the kindergarten, you'd have to be like 28, 29.
[Michael Marks]: Is that a contractual requirement?
[Roy Belson]: That's a contractual requirement. Actual class size typically is around, in the contract, 25 and up, in the contract. So there's no requirement for an aide until you get to like 29 in the elementary school system.
[Michael Marks]: So how many teacher aides currently do we have in the school system?
[Roy Belson]: Well, if you count special ed, we're pushing over 90. If you're talking about kindergarten, there's 16 kindergartens and there's 16 aides now. I believe, I'm gonna count them up, probably about 10 of them are full-time and the rest of them are not.
[Michael Marks]: And out of the teachers that are listed on the sheet that we were given tonight, how many are paraprofessionals?
[Roy Belson]: They're all teachers.
[Michael Marks]: They're all teachers, so there's no paraprofessionals?
[Roy Belson]: No paraprofessionals covering any classes.
[Michael Marks]: And how many paraprofessionals do we have throughout the system?
[Roy Belson]: As I indicated, most of them come from special ed, but I would say there's over 100 because ELL has some and some other areas have some.
[Michael Marks]: So, are you saying a teacher aid and a paraprofessional are one and the same?
[Roy Belson]: Pretty much, yeah. It just depends what they do. So, for example, you could have a person who's a tutor, you could have a person who's there assisting in a kindergarten classroom, you could have a person who's helping out in a special needs classroom on a one-to-one aid for a youngster who's physically disabled or has some other impairment.
[Michael Marks]: Right. And how many paraprofessionals are allowed under the contract? Do you know offhand?
[Roy Belson]: There's no limit to what it's allowed. It's really a need and budget-related thing. You know, it really depends. For example, today, we talked about a particular student who has real needs, and we added one. I mean, just it's a matter of trying to determine what the need is and dealing with it. And from time to time, I suggest to special ed and some of the others, is it necessary to keep an aide where they already are? Can we move somebody over? It's always a juggle, because obviously, everyone, once they get an aide, they want to keep it.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I want to thank the superintendent. I want to thank Councilor Lungo-Koehn for bringing this important issue up. You know, I think it's a sad commentary when, you know, you do hear that many of these developments that are coming into the community are not what I consider family friendly. And you're right, there are very few families that are moving into these developments in the community. And because affordability, number one, And secondly, that the target market is not families. And, you know, I as one member of the council think as a community we have to do a better job in promoting this community as a family-friendly community. And I'd hate to see the very fabric of a community that I love and grew up in that had many families throughout the neighborhoods and around the community change to one that families are not welcome anymore because they can't afford to live in this community, Mr. President. So, you know, when it comes time when the city council looks at zoning and other issues. I think that has to be a top priority that we remember that, uh, we want to invite everyone into the community, uh, according those that may be on the low income bracket. And according to those that may have families that can't afford, uh, to be into these high price developments, uh, Mr. President, that are pricing, uh, families out of our community. So I just want to put that out there, Mr. President. And I thank the superintendent for, uh, his information tonight. Councilor Lococo.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And thank you, President Caraviello. I also want to thank the superintendent for the documents that he provided to us. I'm glad I got a week to review them. Just a couple questions. With regards to the jump, I think it was eight days and we had an additional 94 students. On any given year, how many do we see fluctuate during the month of September?
[Roy Belson]: You might see another 50 students in the schools across the board. At least the way it's normally the pattern is. We started before September, pre-labor day, and that has an impact on some families. Some families just want to take the extra days. And some people don't get wound until they actually hit September. So that first week is sort of that thing. But the next week, according to the Parent Information Center, the movement into the schools this past week is not as heavy as it was the week before. It's much lighter.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And then when will it stabilize? I mean, is there a normal?
[Roy Belson]: The first big cut, a look at this thing is around October 1st. We take a look on October 1st. That's when we begin to file numbers with the state as to what our enrollment is. And that drives Chapter 70 funding and other things of that type. So we'd like to get a really good handle by October 1st because that tells us what funding we might be eligible for going forward.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If I could just request based on either the parent information center or the school brains database, if we could just get an update, as well as the school committee, mid-October, just when things finally do stabilize so we can just get a more accurate. accounting of the actual school year and how many children we will have in the city. I don't think it's going to change the numbers of class size. I'm not worried about it, I just want to have a baseline of where are we going. I also think the information you provided to us, Councilor Marks is right, I think you did a little research on the developments and it looked like out of a few developments there was only about 105 students. That on the other end is whether there's too many children and we have this overcrowding issue or there's not enough. This is going to show that the developments that are coming out, they're so, so expensive. I mean, families cannot afford to live in them. My concern, there has been a number of units that have come on. We also have Medford Square that we need to make a decision. Do we want to rezone Medford Square? you know, what is gonna happen with Mystic Ave, you have the Locust Street, you have a number of additional units that are coming on, and I just think these are questions that need to be discussed, we need to have a handle on them. We don't have, a couple schools have more space, but I know there are two schools that have somewhat of a space issue, and it's just something that I believe we have the right to ask questions about, and I'm very happy we have the answers to, and it's something we need to stay on top of. We're the ones that are gonna decide the budget in June, and whether it's us or other councilors down the line, what is gonna happen in two years, three years, four years? So to have some of these answers, I think, is beneficial. I don't know who discussed some of the answers, if it was just the superintendent or if the school committee actually did discuss it. If necessary, they'll consider redistricting to shift enrollment to the Columbus. the start of the conversation. If in five years we have an extra 500 students than we do now, or even 300, where are we gonna go? What are we gonna do? How are we gonna space it out? How are we gonna make sure class size stays low? And I think with the group effort, we can do that. And I just wanna make sure we are on top of it and planning accordingly.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Council on the current, the report back in and sometime in October motion to take this paper, receive it and place on file. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Second, second. Prove the motion to get an update in October.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Motion for approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion for approval. Motion approval on the on the amendment. All right. By Council seconded by Councilor Falco in favor. All right. And motion to receive the other paper in place on file.
[Clerk]: Second.
[Richard Caraviello]: Offered by Councilor Lennon, seconded by Councilor Layton. All those in favor? Motion passes. 17-647. Offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Be it resolved that the school department provide the administration and the city council with numbers as it relates to how many children in rental units within the city attend the Medford Public Schools. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think that also was discussed. We were given numbers of 105 from five or six different developments that are already station landing, Mystic Valley Parkway. It looks like Mystic Valley Parkway has the most children. River's Edge has less than I expected, but we did get the numbers. I really appreciate that, and I hope that once we have newer developments on the books, that we get an update, whether that be in the spring or even next fall, that we just keep track of it and know where we're going and where we're at.
[Richard Caraviello]: I'm sure the superintendent will keep us apprised of that.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. If I may, the issue of affordable housing in our community is one that's of paramount importance at this point in time. I think Councilor Marks hit the nail on the head when he said that families are being priced out. Families that have lived in this community for a long time that have helped make Medford the great place that it is to live now are being forced out. They're being faced with an option as to, you can't afford this, so what are you gonna do? And you're gonna move. And we're seeing that a lot. I'd like to amend the paper, Mr. President, and ask that our Office of Community Development and the Medford Housing Authority do an analysis in regards to Chapter 40R of the General Laws. And Chapter 40R of the General Laws, Mr. President, relates to affordable housing, but it also provides a two-thirds reimbursement on the per-pupil cost of students that live in those type of developments. So if we're really serious about making a commitment to increasing the stock of affordable housing in our community, and we have an opportunity to get a two-thirds reimbursement on our per-pupil cost to educate these students, It would only make sense that we examine that as we move forward. So I'd like to amend the paper and request that our Office of Community Development and the Medford Housing Authority analyze the possibilities and potential of creating a Chapter 40-odd district to increase the stock of affordable housing in our community, to make it family-friendly, and then to allow us an opportunity to capture some of the revenues from the state that will allow us to offset the cost of the per-pupil expense to educate a child by two-thirds, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Lockern, as amended by Councilor Knight, seconded by.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dello Russo.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dello Russo, all those in favor. Aye. Motion passes. Is there more in the suspension, Mr. Pruitt? We have one more, Councilor Knight. Now we get this, all right. Very good. I need 575. The past, present and future planning that has been and will be taking place to evaluate the increase in our student population as it's related to the space and needs within our schools. We have further resolved that if there has been no planning, the city creates a plan to make sure our schools are not overburdened within the next five, next year, five years and 10 years. Councilman Locario.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think that also, thank you President Caraviello, I think that also was discussed and there's a few lines that the superintendent gave us with regards to shifting and redistricting. So I appreciate that. In the future I hope that the school committee can really be involved and round table this and we can be involved as well with regards to planning down the line. So I move approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by council, I'll go occur and seconded by. I thought the dollar was all those in favor. I motion passes. Seventeen five, seven, five, seven, five. Petition by Robert M. Penta, zero summit road, never mass to address the council. to discuss a review of the Home Rule petition to amend Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 44, Sections 16A and B, inclusive with a local legislative and legislative option provision as it relates to the Community Preservation Act and the Community Preservation Act Trust Funds. Name and address of the record, please.
[Robert Penta]: Robert Penta, Zero Summit Road, Method Mass, former member of the Saugus Party. I present this to you, and I believe all of you got a copy of, that's a three-page document that was mailed out early this summer, pursuant to the request of Councilwoman McCurran to explain the rationale behind having a local option filing piece of legislation regarding Community Preservation Act. When this Community Preservation Act was being sold to the folks here in the city of Medford, they were passing out pieces of literature such as this, talked about the Community Preservation Act. And on the back it says, communities submit annual reports to the state before receiving matching funds to ensure funds are properly spent. Matching funds. In 2002, which was the first year of the Community Preservation Act, For the first six years, cities and towns got 100% of their monies. And at that point in time, there was 113 communities. Now, in 2015, when the city of Medford voted for it, there's 156 communities, and all we're getting back this year is approximately 14.5%. And it's up to 178 communities. The problem that's existing, speaking to these communities, and a lot of the folks, these legislators in these communities, are beginning to realize now that the tax, the CPA tax, the community preservation tax that people are paying for is not being matched by the Commonwealth of Mass. We voted for this in 2015. Its first year of payment is now coming to us in 2017, this November. That's approximately $180,000, and we, the committee, collected $1.2 million, $500,000 of taxpayers' money. The legislation that I'm proposing is not to abolish the CPA, but rather to make it fair and equitable for the folks who voted for it, and especially for the people of Medford who believed, when they voted for this, that the Commonwealth was going to match dollar for dollar through the trust fund. And how it's being proposed right now is when you go to the Registry of Deeds, and whether it's a municipal lien or a tax on your real estate deeds, it's $10 or $20. What they're thinking right now is doubling it, and that would constitute another tax on people who buy and sell property. But putting that aside, until that happens, It was 2013 when it was then Governor DeVal Patrick who took $20 million, I believe, $25 million from the surplus money of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts just to meet the bare bones minimum of monies to go back to cities and towns in 2013. it was approximately 52% of the monies went back to the cities and towns. We're down now to 14%. And the law says the state cannot go any lower than 5%, which is sort of like outrageous because you're gonna keep taxing taxpayers in this community for something that's not being met. People believed when they voted for the Community Preservation Act that the Commonwealth of Mass would match that dollar for dollar, it was advertised as such, and it was stated as such. The two exceptions that I'm asking you folks to consider, and if you don't wanna vote on it tonight, that's all right, but I would appreciate it at least going to the city solicitor for the purposes of the following. I'm asking that there be a hold on the city going further on collecting any monies from taxpayers under the CPA Community Preservation Act. Because right now, it's not fair. You're telling the taxpayer that they have being taxed at 1.5% of their real estate value minus the first $100,000. but at the same time they're not going to be getting that dollar amount from the trust fund, from the Commonwealth of Mass Bath. That's number one. Number two, the second part of the resolve is that this is a five-year commitment as you know, and it automatically renews itself after five years, unless there's a legislative question on the ballot not to renew it. This second option is to have it go on the ballot automatically to renew it. So it dies, it's like sunset legislation. It just dies at the end of five years. And if the community still wants to have it and they wanna go forward with it, they put it back on the ballot once again and the people can vote for it. I don't think it's anything that's detrimental to this community other than the fact you're gonna keep taxing rate payers in this community for something they're not getting their money's worth for and they're not getting the match for. And this greatly will impede This will greatly impede the concerns and the issues, whether it be for parks, historical pieces of property, low income housing, whatever the decision might be. Plus the fact, I believe, that they're paying somebody approximately $65,000. Mr. Pender, can I see that card? Thank you. I believe approximately right now somebody's getting paid, I believe if I understood when this came out a couple of months ago, somebody's gonna be paid approximately $65,000, $62,000, $149,000, okay? So we've collected $1,242,974. from the Medford taxpayers in this community. But all you're getting back from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts is approximately $180,000. That's not fair. That's not the way this was supposed to be going. And now with more people coming on board, there's now 176 people applying for these monies from the Commonwealth. and having to go to the Registry of Deeds to double increase the taxes for municipal liens and for deed stamps that goes on our recordings, that's not fair. Just to meet the bare bones minimum. This year it's only 14%. It was reported in the local press earlier this year. You call the state house, they'll tell you the same thing. And you call, for which I had a long extensive conversation with the people in Boston, is call the CPA, in Boston, their research people. This is not, this is not to say I or anyone opposed to this. What I'm opposed to is the inequity that this is now presented here within our community. And this inequity is not fair. Because people are believing. If you're only given $180,000 back on the $1.24 million, well, all we're asking to do is to put this on hold. Metro taxpayers do not have to pay for this until such time that the Commonwealth meets its obligation for the purposes of giving the reimbursement. That's what sold this program. That's what people voted for. And that's what they believed that they were getting, a match from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. And unfortunately, it's not existing, and it's not there. That should have been told, that should have been explained. And I think, Mr. Clerk, you can attest to the fact over 1,200 people never turned their ballot over in 2015 to vote yes or no on the question itself. So whether the people were not informed properly when they went to vote, or they just didn't want to vote, I don't know. But that's an awful lot. And I just think it takes into the serious consideration of today, hard times, people, water connectivity fee, water and sewer taxes, your tax rate keeps going up. new police station, new fire station, a library. Where is this money coming from? And it's the most unfair way to go out and tax somebody right now on this issue. This is a state issue for which people went on I believe that this would be one way to at least mitigate until the Commonwealth of Mass gets its act together, either they're going to give the 100 percent back or they're not. Why should you deal with the idea that we'll—we guarantee 5 percent because that's what the law says? Well, what's 5 percent? That's meaningless. That is stupid. I'm more than happy to answer any questions.
[Richard Caraviello]: If I could, I I did. I called the CPA on some of the questions that you'd ask in the answer that I was given that says there there is nothing in the CPA law nor on any state website or our website, nor in your local CPA ballot language that says that the state will match match will be 100 percent. In fact, all sources on the CPA are very clear on how the match works on the percentages from previous years.
[Robert Penta]: With all due respect, Rick, I have a folder here, and if you want to, I'll go over it with you, okay?
[Richard Caraviello]: I'll go over it with you.
[Robert Penta]: This first came across the city council in 1991, okay? And in 1991, when this came out, when it became part of its first proposal, I think the then-Method City Council did not want to entertain it at the time because they felt it was another tax on the people, unfairly hitting them without having a say. And you only can put it in those four particular areas. Right now, okay, the people voted for it. We accept that. I got no problem with that. But how do you continue to go forward and tax the people when you're not even getting the money back? You're not even getting 50% of it back. You're only getting 14.5% of the money back. It's totally unfair. And if you go to these other cities and towns and you talk to them like I have, a lot of them are not realizing it until you go in there and you start reading the information that they have there and how it's broken down. And I got volumes on this. I don't sit home and read this for my health. I'm concerned about it. I think it's an end run on Proposition 2.5. If you continue to tax the people, at the way you're going. This is an alternative. It's a legitimate alternative that a city and town can pose, and until such time. And this is only good for five years, remember that, because the first year that you voted for was 15 to 16, and you had to get those numbers together, so you're not getting that money until 17. So the city method's only gonna get it for four of the five years on the CPA. And then if it goes automatically after that, it'll be every year on and after that. But what I'm saying is at the end of the fifth year, Rick, the option would be that it ends, it becomes part of sunset legislation, and if the community wants to do it again, they put it on the ballot, like they did the first time, and the people can vote it up, or they can vote it down.
[Adam Knight]: Questions? Motion to receive and place on file, Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I, go ahead. Mr. President, if I could. Vice President Motz. Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with a lot of comments that Councilor Penter has made up there at the podium. When I talked to our own state delegation, many of them said that the program itself was a victim of its own success. When it originally started out, the match was much larger based on the number of communities that participated. And over time, when communities found out that this may be workable in their community, they got added and the pool of money got lesser and lesser and so forth. I personally would like to see an organized target of our state delegation and the state legislature to say, why you created this program. We didn't create the program. This was created by the state legislature. Why are you not matching the fund? Well, why are you not providing a decent match? Even if it's not 100%, maybe 80, 75, 60%. But to go down to, as the council mentioned, 14.5%, and if new communities are joining, it's going to be a point at some point, unless the state legislature acts, that there won't be a match at all. And I think people would have to revisit the issue again, because I vote with the will of the people. The people voted for this, and we have it in the community, and as far as I'm concerned, we have to work with it and move forward. That doesn't prevent us from a legislative body in the community, and I would offer that tonight to send to our state delegation that we ask that the CPA fund be fully funded based on the need and the amount of communities that are anticipating into this program. And so I would offer that tonight, Mr. President, that that be one approach that we send a letter as the Medford City Council.
[Richard Caraviello]: And that was the suggestion from the head of the CPA. CPA was to seek to change state law chapter 44B as applies to all cities and towns. And they suggest that the petitioner submit their idea to the state delegation.
[Robert Penta]: That's what I'm asking here. Motion to sever the papers, Mr. President. Mr. President, what are the motions before us?
[Richard Caraviello]: It's just a petition, just a petition. What petition? It's not a motion.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Because only a member of this body can make a motion, correct?
[Richard Caraviello]: That's correct. Thank you. But it's a petition, and they say it was the suggestion by the gentleman from the CPA.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. Chase, I believe.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah, no, I talked to Stewart. He was the head of it. He's the gentleman, right? Yeah, and he said that was the route to go through the state delegation.
[Robert Penta]: You could go through the state delegation, but you also could go through your local legislative body. That's why I said a local home will petition. I'd like to make one correction. I said 1991. It was 2001 when this first came up in the city of Medford. And from 2001, 2002, which was the first year, to 2007, the first five years, first six years, 100% went back to cities and towns. But they started off at 34, and then they went to 113 cities and towns. The next year, from 2008 going forward, you went from 127, now up to 176, and it's been downhill ever since. And again, we're just looking at equity, something that's fair to the Medford taxpayer, especially the one that doesn't realize they're not getting it, that the state is not matching the money, as they said, and that's the term that they used. They were in Brooklyn when they sent it out, way back when. It broke down all the cities and towns. And like I said, I would just be asking respectfully that the council either forward this to the city solicitor and ask him if this could be done, and if not, then we go to the second row asking our state legislature.
[Richard Caraviello]: If one of the councilors wants to make that motion?
[Michael Marks]: If the gentleman could just clarify if what can be done I know he According to if I could just finish If I know he mentioned by putting a hold on any collecting of monies in the community and also that the five-year commitment Once that ends that they go back on the ballot of those the two things that you want us to present to the city solicitor asking.
[Robert Penta]: Right in the letter it designates both sections of the law section to amend section 16a and section 16b of the sections 4 to 7 sections 3 to 7 of chapter 44 which this city accepted when they voted for the for the act in 2015.
[Michael Marks]: But the question to the city solicitor would be the legality of us.
[Robert Penta]: The legality of the law or if he would prepare legally a home rule petition that could be forwarded to our state legislators for the purposes of, again, this is not repealing it or getting rid of it, just to amend what's there until such time that the Commonwealth figures out how to give us the 100% back.
[Michael Marks]: Right, but you're also asking us to hold off on collections of any money.
[Robert Penta]: That's part of.
[Michael Marks]: Right, right, and honestly at this point I don't feel comfortable.
[Robert Penta]: No, no, that's part of the proposal, not now, not doing it right now. Filing the piece of legislation that would allow cities and towns through their local legislative body to hold back collecting until 100% and then the second part would be if this were to be accepted and voted upon.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. De La Rosa. Mr. President, a number of people in our community put great efforts into proposing and working on this Community Preservation Act. Under my aegis as President, Council Knight was appointed to lead a task force in developing implementation program and ordinance with the assistance of the consultation of the city solicitor and the primary people involved in the leadership of this effort. Mr. President, none of them are here to consult us on this. None of them are here to advise us. Quite frankly, I am have an expectation of expertise from them on these matters and questions, and they're not here to present to us. They've been duly appointed by this body, actually, to act as experts and leaders in matters regarding the Community Preservation Act in our community. And in fact, they're meeting tonight at the Department of Public Works Conference Room. Mr. President, at this time, the only action I'm able to take, given our lack of input on this matter, and the matter of timing of removing from the table of this matter, is to receive and place on file or to return it to the table.
[Richard Caraviello]: If you allow me to read the advice given to me by the head of the CPA. It says, the petitioner is seeking to change the state law chapter 44B. and have and have the change apply to all cities and towns who adopt the CPA. That's incorrect. This is not what let me finish. This is not what a home home rule petition does. According to the Massachusetts Municipal Associate, a home rule petition is the is the process by which individual localities may petition state legislation affecting only the locality. In fact, same article states that localities lack home rule power to regulate areas outside of municipalities, geographic limits. If the petitioner seeks to change the state law, they should submit their idea for legislation to the state representative center. All citizens have the right to ask legislators to file legislation. So that is the proper way for this person should put his idea before the state legislature. No city council action is required for a citizen to ask the legislator to file legislation to amend the state law. Since this is not a home petition, and since there is no action required by the city council, it may be appropriate to take the following action when you reach this item on the agenda. One, I explained the procedure to you. Two, I can, we can rule this out of order, or just place on file because, What you're requesting doesn't involve the city council, it involves the state legislator.
[Robert Penta]: If you read the last sentence of my paragraph, the intent of this home rule, local option petition. It's a local option petition filed if the city of Medford feels that they would like to go forward as a local option petition for which the people would have a chance to vote on it, so be it. If they don't have that option, than the local option, then we would take it to the legislature and have them file it for whatever the purposes might be. I'm presenting it because I really think it's sort of like unfair to tax these people, to tax our citizens. I said in 2013, $25 million was taken out of the surplus. In 2014, $11.4 million was taken out of the state surplus. And in 2015, $10 million was taken out of the state surplus. From 2016 forward, there's been no surplus and no money to be taken out, and all that's happening is people are being taxed. Unfairly being taxed for something that they're not getting their money back on. It's like you going to the store and buying a new suit, okay? And they said it's $199, you go there, it's $300 because they didn't tell you about all the other incidentals. It's not fair. All we're asking for is equity, fairness to this whole thing, and having an opportunity just to present it. Again, this is not to kill it, to squash it, or anything. It's just to bring equity until such time that the Commonwealth can prove, can prove. Councilor Marks, you just said it. You spoke to someone up there, and they said they created something, they can't control it. It's a monster that's out of control. But unfortunately, the ratepayers, the taxpayers, are paying for it. And that's not fair. I don't believe that that is fair.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President? Oh, it's so late. The ballot question passed. Citizens in this community have spoken. Uh, the city council met, created an ad hoc committee on the implementation of the community preservation act. Um, we crafted a very strong ordinance. We drafted a very strong ordinance, Mr. President. And just in recent months, this community preservation committee has been appointed and they're finally up and running and they're doing a really good job. And they're a very group of dedicated individuals that are really committed to the success of this program. And I don't think we need to take steps as a council to undermine the efforts in the work that they're doing. Mr. President, I certainly support asking the state delegation to fully fund the paper. I certainly support asking the state delegation to fully fund the CPA match. I think that's a no-brainer, Mr. President. We all want more money. We all want more free money to come into our community. There's no doubt about that. But right now, we have an opportunity to build upon the successes of the work that we put in place. It's a grassroots effort and a grassroots campaign that came and brought the Community Preservation Act to our table, Mr. President. It's something that was supported by the voters, that was passed by the voters. I'm not one that's going to stand in the way of that. But ultimately, if we listen to the conversations that we've had here at the city council meetings, affordable housing is a topic that we've talked about. I'm pretty sure councilor Scarpelli has talked about recreation in the past quite a bit. I know councilor Longo-Curran has talked about historic preservation. These are three priorities of this council. Three things that we've been very, very focused on Mr. President. And there are three things that the CPA directly provides for. So whether or not the match is 1%, 100%, 14.5%, I don't think we need to stand in the way of the success of our CPC. I think what we need to do is take a step back and let them do some of their work and let them see what the fruits of their labor is going to bear. So I, for one, Mr. President, would support receiving this paper and placing it on file, supporting a B paper to ask our state delegation to fully fund the Community Preservation Act.
[Michael Marks]: That was my motion, Mr. President. Just the B paper is my motion.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah, I'd absolutely support that. I'd absolutely support that. I'd second that.
[Robert Penta]: So is Councilor Knight saying it's okay to tax the people without getting the adjust? redemption for why they voted for this?
[Adam Knight]: I think that's what he's saying. Mr. President, if I may, actually, what I'm saying is I think that some things are being a little bit misrepresented and misconstrued in the presentation, Mr. President. What we need to do is take a step back and let the people that are appointed to do their job do their job and be successful at it and not stand in the way of it. and not interfere and impede the work that they're trying to do.
[Robert Penta]: Is Councilor Knight alleging that I'm spewing false information and that my statistics are wrong, that we're only getting 14%? Okay, 14.555%.
[Richard Caraviello]: I don't think Councilor Knight is saying that.
[Robert Penta]: Well, I think you go back and listen to what he said. Why don't you go back and listen to it?
[Richard Caraviello]: I don't think that's what Councilor Knight said.
[Robert Penta]: I just can't believe that a board would want to continuously tax people in this room, in this community, knowing that it's wrong because the Commonwealth is not at least meeting its obligation. They can't even get to 50%, never mind 15%. It's just wrong.
[Richard Caraviello]: Again, as was stated to me by the CPA, there was never anything in the law that says this will be matched at 100%.
[Robert Penta]: Rick, it's right there on the back of the card. It says matching funds.
[Richard Caraviello]: What's matching funds? It says matching funds. It doesn't say at what percent. And that's, I can give you- Read the history. I'm going to give you a right from the CPA. There's nothing here that says 100%. It's in its original documents. If you have something that says 100% please show it to me and I will be happy to submit that to the CPA.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think when this was voted in and you can correct me if I'm wrong Mr. Penta, I believe it was 18% when this was voted in and I don't believe That's what my was gonna be my question to you. What does the card say? Because when I had discussions with those advocating for the CPA, I was aware I was 18%. I think the bigger issue if you're gonna fight for or against it, it would be did people know it was on the back of the ballot? I mean, I knew it wasn't 100%, it was 18%, I believe, when we voted.
[Robert Penta]: 2015, we voted, it was 29%. 29%, oh gosh. Then I think it went down to 18, now it's 14, so. Yeah, it went down to 20, and now we're down to 14.5.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Maybe that's where, Councilman, it was just talking about the information, whether or not, what was on the card.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Mr. President, Mr. Vice President Max. I'm sorry, would you like to yield the, would you like to yield the floor to the people behind you?
[Joyce Paul]: Name and address of the record, please A couple of things that I've heard tonight are that the people voted for this and I have some disagreement with that the people I talked to didn't vote for it they didn't have any understanding of what was going on and I think I'm pretty much out there and And I would be embarrassed to admit that I didn't understand. So for people who voted for it, they maybe did understand. Maybe they're the people who end up with jobs and they think this is a good thing. But for people, I would say the average person, when you look at how few people actually did vote for it, not many people did, including me, who thinks that I know what I'm doing. So I also am very concerned about talk about affordable housing and bringing more people in and traffic and more people in the schools. And if you're going around anywhere around Wellington, it's like a nightmare. And when Wegmans comes in, it's going to be much worse. And the casino. And I have spoken to a few people in Boston who, because I said 1.5%, where's our 1.5%? And they said, very seriously, the state doesn't have the money and the state can't send it. And it's nothing to do with we don't like Medford. We simply don't have the money and we're simply not going to send the money. So I think it's quite reasonable to say we're not going to get the money. They can't send the money. We're only going to get a little bit of money. And I agree with Mr. Penta that you're taxing, I think, a few people who voted for this, and most people who didn't vote for this, and they're not very happy. I don't know exactly what the statistics are, who voted and who didn't vote, but I think most people didn't vote for it, and they're not very happy. I mean, Democrat, Republican, Independent, people don't like taxes. And then when you talk, More taxes, oh my God. So I think there are things we need to do, but everybody I know is very concerned about the police station, the fire station, the library, and the roads and sidewalks. I've been into the senior center and the seniors are always the sidewalks, the sidewalks. And when you're spending money on all these things, I mean, people just can't do it. They really just can't do it. They're very, very unhappy. So I support what Mr. Prentiss said. I think it's a reasonable solution. Now, one other thing, which is a totally different subject. I was trying to figure out where to go tonight, and I knew Tuesday was city council. So I called the mayor, and yes, this is city council. There's also a zoning meeting, And there's also a meeting at Hanes about money. And then on the website is the CPA at the DPW. And I know somebody who was gonna go there but is gonna go here. Then now, I called the mayor's office and they said that one isn't going to be, so I don't know whether it is. But I'm good, but I can't be in four places at once. And I can't also be in three places at once. And I don't feel like the mayor really cares about me. But you guys have power. And I was thinking you could send a little email to the mayor and say, you know, if Tuesday night is gonna be city council, then let's not have another meeting on Tuesday night. I think that would be a reasonable thing. And that's it for me, unless you have any questions.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Citizen Castagnetti wishes to address.
[Richard Caraviello]: Name and address of the record, please.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Andrew Castagnetti, 23 Cushing Street, former Medford City Council candidate. The lady brought up a good point. The city has a scheduling problem. We cannot be in more than one location at one time. I wanted to go to something about Hang Square.
[Richard Caraviello]: We are on the CPA.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Yeah, it would be nice to have meetings. We're on the CPA though. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: If you want to speak about scheduling, come back later in the evening. I'm just talking about scratch one.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: But there should not be a question. We're doing CPA first. Okay, about the CPA. My comprehension of past facts on the CPA vote, number one, in effect, it's an override of proposition two and a half. Number two, I believe approximately 5,555 people voted for the mayor in the past election, and about 5,000 voted for the runner-up. It came out to about 10,500. but approximately only 8,000 voted for the CPA tax, including renters were allowed, approximately, including the renters were allowed to vote for it, Mr. Finn. And it was passed by a narrow margin, I believe.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. Finn, do you have the margin that it passed by? Can we talk? 56% of 44%.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: So there's a narrow margin, in my opinion. Number three, why did they only require approximately 1,700 signatures to get the CPA question on the ballot? But we, the average people or person, we need 20% of the registered voters, which is about approximately 7,000 signatures to get something on the ballot. And also, I believe some people were involved with gathering the petitions, worked for City Hall. A director of a certain department, I noticed, was involved.
[Richard Caraviello]: We can't speak for that.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: I'm not sure if that was legal, but I'll be quiet about that right now. Number four, however, I'm not very upset at the extra $60 a year for my real estate tax bill. I'm more concerned I'm three real estate tax bills in arrears at the tune of $4,500, plus fine, plus 14% per annum juice interest, because some of us are struggling to pay our bills. Number five, also I'm most concerned where most of this money will be spent, meaning outside of the West Medford area, we have South Medford, East Medford, Fulton Heights, and I believe these other areas have greater need to improve our quality of life, period. And finally, number six, And of course, the so-called matching state funds was and is a fallacy, period, again. Thank you, if you're listening.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you. Mr. Hoyer, personal? Councilor Dello Russo. I just wanna thank the last speaker for his regular reference to East Medford. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: The letter that you wrote from the gentleman from the CPA incorrectly states that this was a petition to apply to all cities and towns. It was not. And that basically.
[SPEAKER_05]: That's what he wrote back to me. That's what he wrote? That's what he wrote.
[Robert Penta]: Apparently you didn't translate it properly, or you didn't understand it properly.
[SPEAKER_05]: I kind of transparent what you said to me to make sure that.
[Robert Penta]: But apparently it was wrong because I don't want anyone to be misled to think that I'm asking this for all cities and towns. It was just for the city of Medford, a local community home rule petition option.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Vice President Marks, I'm sorry, did you want to speak?
[uIlyuj9UctU_SPEAKER_01]: Yes. My name is Carolyn Jones. I try to come to... Can we have your address, please? 32 Arlington Street in West Medford. Thank you. I try to come to some of the meetings. My health hasn't been that great, so I can't always get to all of them. But I'm concerned about the increase in taxes, about the emphasis on the changes in Medford from the few meetings that I've been to, the emphasis seems to be on younger people rather than the entire community. And I'd like to see something that happens when, where you can have more people who come out to the city council meetings. that there's more information that's in the transcript so that people know that when they come to a meeting, they know what's going to occur at the meeting, they know what's happened in the past, and they can be or feel more readily able to express their opinions. I don't have that problem because I express my opinions all the time. But I think that what needs to happen is that the information needs to be more direct when it comes out to the residents of Medford, that there's not just a little card that comes out, but there is something, whether it's in the transcript, whether it's in the mercury, something on a weekly basis that can be an outline of what's going on, whether it's an increase in taxes, and encourage the people who live in West Medford and pay for taxes in West Medford to feel free to come to these meetings, to talk to all of you, to let you know what our feelings are. I mean, I'm one of the people who doesn't like to see my taxes go up, and that's just because I am retired now, and so I have a fixed income. And I don't like to go into my extra money unless I absolutely have to. I guess I got kind of stingy when I got older. how I was going to spend my money. But I just think that I would like to see something that encourages more people in the community to come out to these meetings and for more people in the community to really have some good information when they come to the meetings so that they can ask reasonable questions and hope to get reasonable answers from those of you who are on city council. That's all I have to say.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Vice President Mox, Mr. Clerk, if you could read that motion back.
[Clerk]: It was a letter to the state delegation on fully funding the match. Is that correct?
[Richard Caraviello]: That's correct. That's the B paper. That's the B paper. And the A paper? is the petition to be received and placed. We see we received the place and file.
[Robert Penta]: So there's no appetite here to send this to the city solicitor for the purposes of reviewing. So what we're saying is just keep taxing the people.
[Richard Caraviello]: So if somebody wants to make the motion to do that, what would you do it, Mr. President? I'm the president. You have six other Councilors in the question.
[Michael Marks]: I would be amendable to send this to a subcommittee where we can invite members of the CPA committee, where we can invite the city solicitor, and we can have a discussion and dialogue around the suggestions made by the petitioner. So I have no problem in discussing any issue that comes before this council, Mr. President. So I would make a recommendation that this be sent to the which is the best committee. Economic development.
[Richard Caraviello]: Legislative. I think we have a legislative committee, don't we?
[Michael Marks]: Whatever committee, it doesn't matter to me as long as the committee gets together and meets on the issue.
[Richard Caraviello]: I'll do a committee of the whole.
[Michael Marks]: If you want to do that, it's fine too.
[Richard Caraviello]: So it'll be on motion to send this to a committee of the whole?
[Michael Marks]: And make sure that members of the CPA are invited, the city solicitor, and that residents of the community are duly notified for their input as well, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Vice President Mox, seconded by To have a council of the whole of the committee of the whole meeting. Seconded by.
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Langlois-Curran. All those in favor. Roll call. Roll call vote has been requested by Councilor Knight.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo. No. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: No.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight. No. Councilor Langlois-Curran. Yes. Vice President Marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. No. President Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: No. Two in the affirmative and none in the negative. Motion fails. B paper. On the B paper. By Councilor Marks. Seconded by. Second. Councilor Lungo-Koehn. All those in favor. Roll call. Roll call. Roll call vote has been requested. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight?
[Adam Knight]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Kern? Yes. Vice President Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Vice President Calvelli?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. Motion passes. Thank you, Mr. Penta.
[Adam Knight]: We're on to suspension, Mr. President. Paper number 7661. 7661.
[Richard Caraviello]: 17, 6, 6, 1, offered by Councilor Knight, be it resolved that the Medford City Council request that in the interest of public safety and emergency response, the Traffic Commission implement no parking between Rice Avenue and Willard Avenue on the odd numbered side of Willis Avenue. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. In front of the stretch of homes between Rice and Willard along Willis Avenue on the odd numbered side, You'll see that it's very difficult for one vehicle to get by when cars are parked on each side of the street. In the audience today, we do have a homeowner that lives along that stretch who's contacted me and asked that we move this matter forward. Ultimately, the residents at 195-197 Willis Ave had a yellow painting in front of the curb, connotating that no parking was supposed to occur there. And over time, that paint wore off. I reached out and contacted the Traffic Commission in consultation with Councilor Marksley, who's been working on this with me. and we spoke with members of the Traffic Commission. The Traffic Commission went down and took a look at it. The DPW painted a certain stretch of the curb. However, they weren't able to paint the curb the entire length of Willis between Rice and Willard, and they also rendered the impression that even though the curb was yellow, if people parked there, the police weren't gonna do anything about it so that the appropriate steps that needed to be taken in order to address this public safety concern would be to put a no parking sign up. Um, however, um, the archaic and arcane way that we do signage in the city of Medford means that the individual homeowners who was aggrieved by this public safety concern is now asked to get a petition and go knock on doors and ask their neighbors to sign a petition, um, to address this public safety issue. And I don't think that that's right, Mr. President. I think that clearly there's a need, uh, clearly there's a public safety concern. and I put this resolution forward to request that the Traffic Commission take the appropriate steps to put the parking restrictions in place so that the individuals that reside on the stretch of roadway can feel safe and comfortable and know that if a fire engine or an ambulance is called to their home, that the fire engine or the ambulance can make it down the street to get to their home to bring them the life-saving care that they need, Mr. President. So it's a very simple and basic resolution, and it's really cut out of the cloth for the interest of public safety and emergency preparedness.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, Councilor Dela Russa. I'm very familiar with that situation and Councilor Knight's assessment is very accurate and I support this motion. Thank you.
[Michael Marks]: Vice President Marks. Thank you, Mr. President. This particular condition exists all around the community and anyone that goes down Willis Ave would say, how can you honestly allow parking anywhere, Willis Ave with two-way traffic? It's tough enough to get down the street just with the two-way traffic, but then we have a car park there. It's almost impossible. And these are the issues that we really need to be examined by the Traffic Commission, Mr. President. And I would ask fully that this be supported here tonight and sent to the Traffic Commission for immediate action, Mr. President, on this basis. Thank you.
[George Scarpelli]: How's this guy belly? Thank you. Mr. President. I concur with all of my colleagues I did receive a phone call today and I did take a ride down to Willis and it's it's It is a mess. So I think that we really need to That's as a traffic engineer stats pretty soon. Hopefully these are one of the dangerous areas, I mean, Willis is notorious for many accidents up and down Willis Ave, so I think that I support this resolution, and I appreciate Council and I bring this forward. So thank you. Thank you. Name and address of the record, please.
[3rLlhNFiQKU_SPEAKER_00]: Pamela D'Andrea, 197 Willis Avenue. I brought this up to Mr. Knight because I'm in that house three, I'm in this city 45 years, but I'm only in that house three years. And it's right across the street from the projects. The problem with the parking is the people in the projects who don't live there and don't have a permit to park in there. And then they park in front of my house, in front of my friend's house. Nobody can get in and out of their driveways. And Willis Avenue is not wide enough to be parking on both sides of the street, anywhere on Willis Avenue. I had two DBW guys come down and say they were going in and out on Willis Avenue because people were parked on both sides of the street. It's a safety issue. We had a car fire across the street from us in front of the projects. And this guy that parks in front of my house all the time was parked there and the fire truck barely made it through. It's a safety hazard. We've had accidents there. My mother-in-law, we had to take her to the hospital. Because this guy was parked there, the fire truck and the ambulance could not get down the street. They had to drag her to the corner to get to the hospital. It's not right. And you really, people should put no parking signs all the way up and down both there. Because they shouldn't be parking on both sides of the street. The people in the projects need to know that there's a law, and I'm telling you, as soon as that sign goes up and somebody parks there, I'm on the phone. They're going to get told so fast it isn't going to be funny. Because I've been watching this now for three years. And I thank you people for supporting this.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you for coming. Councilor Lococo.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Just briefly, I think everybody's said what they need to say, but maybe just have the traffic commission also evaluate the entire road, possibility of making it parking on one side, if it is pretty thin.
[Richard Caraviello]: You want to amend the paper with the traffic commission to evaluate making it one way? I mean, parking on one side? I'd like to be a B paper just because usually if you ask for two things they split the loaf and I don't want them to split the loaf I want them to put the do no parking sign up to They can go examine the motion by councillor night on the a paper seconded by Thank You councillor Falco all those in favor aye on the B paper as amended by council uncle current seconded by So all those in favor motion passes Thank you very much. Motion to revert back to regular business. If I could yield the chair to Mr. Vice President Marks for the first one, seeing that it's sponsored by me.
[Michael Marks]: Sure, paper 17-654 offered by President Caraviello, whereas the deteriorated hazardous condition of the public walkway from the driveway entrance at 3920 Mystic Valley Parkway to Locust Street poses a serious hazard to pedestrian traffic, and the lack of adequate lighting makes the specified public walkway more dangerous for pedestrians to navigate between the hours of sunset and sunrise, Whereas excessive overgrowth from trees and low-hanging branches along the public passageway presents an additional challenge to pedestrians, therefore be it resolved that the Medford City Council respectfully request that the Department of Conservation and Recreation take immediate action to repair, reconstruct the public passageway from the driveway entrance of 3920 Mystic Valley Parkway to Locust Street. Be it further resolved that the Medford City Council request immediate action to be taken to install adequate lighting to illuminate the public passageway from 3920 Mystic Valley Parkway to Locust Street, Medford. Be it further resolved that the Medford City Council request the overgrowth along the passageway and low hanging branches from the trees be trimmed. Council President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. With the implementation of awakements coming in, you're going to see more and more people walking to the new shopping center. And if anyone's been over to that area, you can see that it's very dark at night and the sidewalks are kind of beat up and the trees are hanging. So it's my recommendation that we contact our state delegation, Senator Jalen and Representative Barber to have the DCI go over there, inspect the sidewalk, and look at the feasibility of maybe putting a couple of street lights in there to help out the people that are going to be walking to the supermarket. It is dark there, and you'll be having people from the other movement walking over also. So if we could have some lights, and hopefully looking at the sidewalk. trimming the trees so make it be a little easier for them to walk there.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. Second. Councilor Falco second. Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it.
[Richard Caraviello]: The motion is adopted. Thank you Mr. Vice President. 17.655 offered by Councilor Lueb and O'Kerrin. We have resolved that the city looks into working with a group like team better block to engage in temporary scenarios in Medford Square. The MAPC is currently working with 101 communities, and it would be nice to also work with a company that focuses solely on Medford. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. In other cities and towns, they use different companies such as Team Better Block, which was brought to my attention and I did some research on it. It's a way, in addition to what the MAPC has been doing for Medford Square and has done for Medford Square, what Team Better Block, I know that the new developments at area at Union Square has used that company, Team Better Block, and I know there are other companies, so I just want to ask the administration if that's something that we've looked into, or if not, if we can look into it. Team Better Block is a company that comes in and they focus 100% of their energy on Medford, and they would do, like they've done in other cities and towns across the United States, they would do temporary scenarios, so wouldn't necessarily, and they would engage the public and the community, figure out ways to include, almost along the same lines of what we're trying to include, public space, public art, bump-outs, temporary crosswalks, but this is almost on a temporary basis, so we can not only get input and take surveys of what the city of Medford wants and what our residents want, but you would, they create bump-outs and crosswalks, all different types of public spaces, public green space as a temporary, fix to see how it works. And they would do it in all different areas, obviously different areas within Medford Square, and if it worked, obviously you can go to South Medford and West Medford, just to engage the public in ways that aren't so permanent, where people get an idea of, oh, wow, if we did do these bumbouts, they're not as scary as they seemed, or not as drastic as they seemed when it was, you know, going to be a permanent thing. Let people understand the ideas that NAACP has come up with, and Team Better Block obviously comes up with additional ideas and additional ways to make it happen. I know they did a project, I believe, on the west coast, and it cost a couple thousand dollars to do a large section of a city square on a temporary basis, and the life it created and the community that it created, I think, would be beneficial. They would focus 100% on Medford. I'm not sure of the cost, that's one thing that I just didn't research yet, but to actually do the temporary scenarios is very inexpensive, and it's somebody that would focus just on Medford, just on Medford Square, where we do need the revitalization, where people do want, do wanna see change, they wanna see more activity, more green space, more public art, more open space, and we're going there, it's just, we can't afford everything all at once, and this would be a way to say, These are the five things that we can try out, see if they work, and then if it is working and we are able to get the community involved and happy about these different scenarios, we can make it happen as a permanent fix, a permanent change. So it's just one idea that has come, was brought to my attention, and I think I don't think see any harm in doing some research on it and seeing if we can look into hiring some sort of company to do this type of work for us.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dello Russo. This idea was presented at the meeting we had on the master plan unveiling a couple weeks ago and I know that this was presented as an option from some citizens and that the mayor was aware of this and is eager to look into this and equally energetic about this matter and these options as the Director of our Community Development Office, Lauren.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If we could request just an update with regards to what has been done to hire or research companies like Team Better Block and what our plan is going forward. just so we can have an awareness. I mean, I've only researched the one company for, you know, an hour on the internet, watched a bunch of videos and seen actually what work they've done, and there's a lot more than obviously other companies, but what has the city administration done to use more than MAPC that is working with over 100 other communities? I mean, somebody to focus just on Medford. A public meeting is great, you know, on a Wednesday night, but to have, people somebody that will survey and get the community involved and active and it is a community team better buck uses the computer community to create these spaces and if we could get that done I think it would be beneficial to the you know in to use it going forward and all our squares is gonna be beneficial to the city of Medford so we get an update on where we're at if we've started researching that and if we're gonna move forward with such an option
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I'd like to thank the councilor for bringing this resolution forward. Ultimately, I don't think it's any secret in this community. We need to do something with Medford Square. And this is just another approach. I think that right now, our redevelopment focus on Medford Square is a leave no stone unturned approach. And this is just another tool in the toolbox for us to take a look at, Mr. President, and see if we can make a difference down there. So I support it wholeheartedly and move approval.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Just if I could and I think anything that can supplement an office of community development right now which is understaffed Mr. President I think would be helpful. It was mentioned at that meeting also and I hope the mayor takes heed to this that the office of community development staff has not changed since 2005. We still have the same inadequate staffing since 2005. That's 12 years and now we're looking into one of the largest revitalizations of our business district and we still have the same understaffed office, Mr. President, and I think is ill-equipped to move this project forward, to be quite frank with you, and I think there has to be a focus by this administration to look into the Office of Community Development because their main goal and focus is to bring in new business into the community and revitalize our business districts. And it's clear to me, Mr. President, that our five business districts right now need revitalization. They're struggling. We need new businesses to attract people into downtown business districts. And I don't think our Community Development Office has met that goal, Mr. President, and is in dire need of additional assistance in that office to move us forward on a project of this magnitude, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. On the motion by Councilman occurrence seconded by Also dollar also all those in favor aye motion passes 17 6 5 6 offered by councillor night resolved at the Medford City Council congratulate all square cafe in the sauna the prior longtime method resident Michael Mosher on being named Boston A-List Best Breakfast. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Although Ball Square Cafe is located right over the line over there on Boston Ave in Ball Square, Mike Mosher has been a longtime Method resident. I've known him for the majority of my life, Mr. President. I first met him. going into Victor's Deli in Ball Square that's owned and operated by his parents, Victor and Rosa, and his sister, Nancy, and her husband, Jason. Michael left Victor's and moved on to the Ball Square Cafe, where he opened up his own breakfast spot. And let me tell you, it's quite a place to go for breakfast, Mr. President. But more so, Mike's a great guy. He puts out a great product, and he's an integral member of this community here in Medford. He does a lot to give back. So with that being said, Mr. President, I ask my council colleagues to join me in congratulating Ball Square Cafe and its owner, Michael Mosher a long time graduate on the success of the organization. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, I can personally attest that last week I had the French toast with ala bread, extra crispy bacon, and I had the fancy maple syrup that's real maple syrup. Comes in a little glass jar. Very, very good breakfast. I'm hungry.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Layton. Seconded. Seconded by Councilor Leono-Curran. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. 17657 offered by Councilor Leono-Curran be it resolved that the city administration appoint a development committee made up of interested residents who are willing to give up their time to help everyone understand, to better understand the wants, needs, and recommendations of the community as it relates to development throughout Medford. Councilor Locarno.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I think this is something that, this issue of the development is something that everybody seems to be talking about. So many people have different opinions where development should go, how much, how little, not go certain places, more here, more there. And we don't really have a committee made up of residents to discuss the issues and to get the feedback from the entire community. And I think that's almost necessary, whether it be one committee or it be task force for each specific area. It was requested that there also be which I'm going to amend the paper, there'd be a Mystic Ave Task Force made up of residents who want to see development in Mystic Ave and want to have input and voice their concerns and ask questions and be able to figure out what the community wants down there. And I think that's important. I think that's something that's been lacking with regards to some of the projects that have moved forward over the last several years, no community input. It goes on the Zoning Board of Appeals agenda and gets approved. I think Canal Street is the only one that I know that did not get approved, but we need more community input and I think this is the way to do it. I think the committee, hopefully the mayor would be willing to set up a a task force or a development committee made up of Medford residents from all different areas, and I'd like to amend the paper to ask that a Mystic Ave task force be put in place made up of South Medford residents and business owners who work on Mystic Ave, because that's coming down the line, and we wanna make sure we're prepared for it. So I think this is something that's long overdue, and I believe the council, whether we have a council rep on the committee, If this isn't moved forward, I think it's best to be organized by the administration. If it's not moved forward by the administration, then I think the council has to create a committee within our own body to be able to discuss development in subcommittee and get the community involved as much as we can and get input. It's hard when you're trying to see everything that's being written everywhere and try to get You know, try to form your opinions on where development should go and how much of it, when you don't have sit-down meetings to discuss it, I think that's what's missing. For me, as one Councilor, I'm not against development, but if a neighborhood like near the mall didn't want 500 units, you know, our votes and our, Requests and our concerns stem from what the neighborhoods want and things are moving so quickly I think we need to be on top of it and a development committee To discuss development in general and then also different task force one specifically for mystic av is what we need. I
[George Scarpelli]: Oh, Scott Belly. Uh, thank you, Mr. President. I thank my colleague, um, for bringing this motion forward. I think, um, I think the mayor has done a very good job of getting, uh, constituents involved with different task force. I can attest to that with the recreation committee that worked so hard to see that through fruition. And I think that, uh, with so many questions and issues we have with development and so many educated, um, people in our community that if you went to the development hearing and you listened about the revitalization of Medford Square and the ideas from the different constituents, I think that would be a welcome attribute that that we should be using here in our community. So I think that I would second my fellow councilor's resolution. And I would hope the mayor's office will support that for the fact that a lot of the great things that are happening have come about with different task forces and committees that she started back in her beginning of her term. So I thank you for bringing that up.
[John Falco]: Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. I thank the Council for bringing this resolution forward. It's a resolution that I support and I do believe that there are many qualified professional people, you know, with professional backgrounds in different, you know, in development and traffic engineering and whatnot throughout our community that can really help out. with regard to the future development in our city. And who knows better than the people that actually live in that neighborhood on a daily basis what works and what doesn't work. So I think it's always important to reach out to the neighborhoods and get their input. And I think this is a great way of doing it. So this is a resolution that I do support. I think having people, You know in the neighborhoods that are active that want to be involved that want to help shape the future of their community is important and the input Should definitely be heard so I support the resolution as well.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you Thank you on the motion by council occurrence seconded by council Scarpelli all of the favor aye motion passes 17 6 5 8 offers by vice president mocks be it resolved that the pothole located on within the crosswalk at the McGlynn School main entrance be filled in the interest of public safety. Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. This was brought to my attention by a concerned resident that was dropping off a child and said there's been a pothole right in the middle of the crosswalk to the McGlynn School entrance and that it's a rather deep pothole that needs to be filled. So I would ask that this be filled in the interest of public safety immediately.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Vice President Monk, seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. 17-659. Progress. Offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, be it resolved that the Department of Public Works place a graphic on South Street at the intersection of Walnut to help warn the vehicles that there is a crosswalk. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. one of my several attempts for traffic calming on South Street because there are a number of residents that are working together to try to curb the speeding and obviously the heavy trucking that is speeding. There's been stop signs that have been put up, crosswalk signs that have been put up and a number of different things. The speed monitor sign, the new one that we have, there's one placed on South Street. There's also one placed on Lawrence Road, which is great to see. If you go over the speed limit, they start flashing.
[Richard Caraviello]: It's a little.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. So, I mean, what we're doing here and getting the speed monitor signs and working, Sergeant Hartnett has been great, to get some, you know, the speed reduced on some of our streets. South Street, when I went to the Traffic Commission meeting a couple weeks ago, this was brought up, requested, and it was something that I believe the Chief of Police was on board with. It's just a matter of getting the Department of Public Works to put down a big graphic, the graphic that shows that there's a crosswalk coming up ahead, which it's only a few feet before the crosswalk, but it's just a little extra. There are hundreds of people, like I said, I think a couple weeks ago, that cross South to Walnut because it's the gateway to the square leading into Colleen's ice cream shop. when you cross that bridge right into the heart of Medford Square. So if we could get a graphic put on by the DPW, it would be greatly appreciated. I think it's one of the many measures that are going on on South Street to help with the speeding and to help pedestrian safety.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, I agree with this measure. I, however, believe that that is the new standard for any repairs that are done on the streets and where that intersection is being corner of Winthrop and South Street is being renovated at this time. I believe that any significant renovations must end with the cross scoring. that's applied into the street as well as the new style of access ramps on the sidewalks with the hobnails in the ramp on the pad and other measures the like. We can see this demonstrated most clearly with the work that's been done at the intersections of College Avenue and Boston Avenue. So I agree with this and second approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, just I think I think he was talking about Winthrop himself. And this is with regards to Walnut, not Walnut himself. There's no construction until ever source in this part of that street. So I just want to make sure that was Yes, that was clear. Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Also, Vice President box, I too would like to just thank DPW. Over the last several weeks, they have erected 42 speed limit signs now. With the vote of this council, we have reduced the speed on many of our thoroughfares from 30 to 25 miles an hour. And indeed, those signs are being posted throughout the community. And I just want to thank DPW and the Traffic Commission for their efforts.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. Vice President. On the motion by Councilor Locario and seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. 17-660 offered by Vice President Mox.
[Adam Knight]: Be it ordered that- Mr. President, motion to waive the reading and have a brief synopsis by the city clerk.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. City Clerk, if you could please give a brief synopsis.
[Clerk]: Following is a warrant for the election. The election will be On Tuesday, November 7th, polls will be open at 7 a.m., close at 8 p.m. Races that will be on the ballot this year will be the mayor, city council, and the school committee. We have a listing of polling locations. These will be the polling locations but only it would be similar to the last November's. And if I would like to also note that even though it's not on here, it's the last day to register a vote is Wednesday by 8 PM on October 18th.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. Clerk. On the motion by Councilor, by Vice President Mach, seconded by. Second. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, would you like to amend the paper?
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Layton, would you like to amend the paper?
[Adam Knight]: To request that our Elections Commission review all the polling locations and do an analysis of feasibility to see if there are better and more local options for residents that live in certain wards.
[Clerk]: Mr. Clerk. On the motion by Vice President Mox seconded by Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Richard Caraviello]: All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. 17-662 I'll invite Vice President Mox be a resolve to the crosswalks on Highland Avenue. Be painted in the interest of public safety. Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you Mr. President. I know DPW is diligently working on the painting of many of our crosswalks. However, Highland Ave, I know, is a state road, and I would ask that our DPW reach out to the state to get the state on top of painting the crosswalks, Mr. President, in the interest of public safety. Also, Mr. President, if I could, I had the opportunity this past Saturday, there was a young gentleman in our community who was going for his Eagle Scout badge. His name is John Fee, and the project he selected, which I thought was a pretty unique project to assist this community, was to erect 100 hydrant markers to alert the fire department and also residents in a time when snow gets heavy where fire hydrants are located. And John Fee reached out to the vocational school. The vocational students bent up the wrought iron, cut it for John. John and his scouts painted them. And this past Saturday, with the thanks of Mr. Tanaglia in DPW and Mr. Kruger in the water department, they went out and erected 100 of these. And I can tell you, they're gonna last forever, these particular hydra markers. And it's a great community project and something that I know I've spoken about a number of times. And it's great to see someone in the community step forward and make such a positive change on behalf of the residents, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. If I can amend that, if we can invite him here to receive a citation in the near future.
[Michael Marks]: As soon as he gets his Eagle Skull badge, this was a step in the process, he will be invited and I appreciate that.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Vice President Mox. Second. Seconded by Councilor Inouye. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Motion to take papers in the hands of the clerk. All those in favor? Aye. Aye. Offered by Councilor Falco. Whereas the Medford Farmer's Market takes place at the Carleton Shell on the banks of the Mississippi River, whereas the Farmer's Market is from 3 to 7 PM on Thursday afternoon. We have resolved that the Mayor's Office or Electrical Department have the lights at the Carleton Shell activated in the interest of public safety. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. I had the opportunity this weekend to go along with a lot of my colleagues to go to the Mystic River celebration. And while I was there, I was going to some of the different tables and, you know, just, you know, getting more information, talking to people and whatnot. And they went to the Method Farmers Market table and just asked them because I think this is their first year in a new location down at the Condon Shell. And they said so far it's been really, really good. They've had a lot of great activity, a lot of people walking down on Thursday afternoons to just buy some local produce and whatnot, and just ask them a little bit about the new location. And they said it's great. They said the challenge now is it's towards the end of the season, so the sun goes down a little bit sooner, and the market goes until 7 PM. that last hour it gets a little it's it's getting dark basically and um you know so that you know it's it's tough for people to walk around and it's also tough for the vendors to clean up after you know the market closes down um so you know in the matter of public in the you know matter of public safety it'd be nice if we could uh at the mayor's office of the electric department um see what they can do to uh have the lights activated uh for at least the last hour uh of the um Farmers market at Thursday afternoon said so it'd probably be it'd be nice if they could activate him from pray anytime after 5 to at least I'm guessing maybe 7 30 p.m. Just just you know, so it's it's safe down there. It should be well lit and it's a great venue to have really any type of You know local city function. So it's in the matter of public safety, if we could have for that to the mayor's office of the electrical department, I'd greatly appreciate it.
[Richard Caraviello]: Second. All in the motion by Councilor Falco, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Records, tabled records of the meeting of August 15th, 2017 were passed to Councilor Langau-Kern. Councilor Langau-Kern, how have you found those records?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I've reviewed them a second time and I want to move approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion to accept the records of August 15, 2017, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor?
[Fred Dello Russo]: Aye.
[Richard Caraviello]: The records of the meeting of September 19, 2017 will pass through Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Scarpelli, how did you find those records?
[George Scarpelli]: If I could take these for a week to look in further depth, I'd appreciate it.
[Richard Caraviello]: All in favor? Aye. Motion passes.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President? Vice President Mox. Before we adjourn, if you can just get this body estimated time when we will be back in the Alderman Chambers for our regularly scheduled meetings, I think that would be helpful.
[Richard Caraviello]: I was there, I've looked, it looks like it's It's close, I would think maybe next week, hopefully will be the last week that we'll be here. But if we can get a more definite- I will try my hardest to, I've tried to get an answer from the people working in there, and I couldn't get a definitive answer from them. Maybe the administration- I will talk to the administration.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If I may. A couple residents complained about the meeting last week in the theater and how the, I guess it looked on TV. So I did reach out to Lauren Felch from the mayor's office and she did say the beginning of October we should be back in the chamber.
[Richard Caraviello]: Nobody's complaining more than us.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I love the lights.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion to adjourn by Councilor Dela Ruzzo. Seconded by Councilor Nunziata.
|
total time: 18.02 minutes total words: 2690  |
total time: 18.33 minutes total words: 3168  |
total time: 5.17 minutes total words: 641  |
total time: 6.8 minutes total words: 1289  |
|
total time: 4.15 minutes total words: 808  |
total time: 11.92 minutes total words: 1905  |
total time: 6.91 minutes total words: 1569  |
total time: 14.26 minutes total words: 2676  |
|
total time: 1.98 minutes total words: 305  |
|||