[Clerk]: Councilor Knight. Aye. Councilor Leonard Kern. Present. Vice President Marks.
[3UkqIlWnJXM_SPEAKER_04]: Present.
[Clerk]: Councilor Scarpelli. Present.
[Richard Caraviello]: President Caraviello. Present. Please rise and salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion to suspend the rules to take paper off the table.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion by Councilor Dello Russo to suspend the rules to take what paper, Mr. President? 17-075, third reading. 17-075, which would be the third reading for the law and order for the Newton Police Station. Is the paper before us? The paper is now before us. Move approval. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo for approval, Councilor Lungo-Kramer.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I know before we took the first reading on this paper, we had discussed, and I think it was voted six to one, to take the next three months, along with the administration, to review and discuss cost analysis with regards to a potential dual station and discuss a number of different things. people's concerns with regards to the fire station. So I wanted to see if we were going to schedule a meeting with the mayor on that before we.
[Richard Caraviello]: The mayor did not respond to our resolution that I know of. I haven't seen it in any of my packages. I haven't either.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I haven't seen it. So I don't know what the council wants to do. I just feel like that was a strong six to one vote with regards to looking into, and now I believe the fire station, I'm not sure, doesn't have any heat, and that's been going on, I think since the snowstorm, I was getting reports that there was no heat. So I think it's pretty pertinent to, for at least a discussion, even if it's next week, we have a discussion on that. And I don't know if it's worth putting this off a week and seeing if we can get a response from the mayor's office on that resolution, but it was a strong six to one vote, and a number of people were in this audience in support of looking into a cost analysis and getting some numbers together, better than what we were provided, so we can really see if we can't afford the dual station and get a better idea. I know a number of things were thrown around and certain contradictions were made a few weeks back, so I think some more clarity is in order. I don't know how my colleagues feel.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Knight? I second the motion for approval. Seconded by Councilor Knight.
[Robert Penta]: Name and address for the record, please. My name is Robert Pentez, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass. I'm a former member of the Saugus Party. I can appreciate what Councilor Lungelkorn is going to because apparently, I think folks, as I was speaking to them today, were led to believe it was going to be next Tuesday evening. And here we are, we have nobody here from the fire department or the police department. But if you go back and look at your capital improvement plan that was offered by the mayor, there's quite a few locations and suggestions in here that raised itself well over two and a half million dollars as to where and how this is going to be funded as it relates to the fire station and into the police station part of it. You know, a lot of people don't even realize what just took place on the 14th of March the day of the storm, the unfortunate circumstance down the fire department and the police department, their generator went out. Their backup generator to be supportive of their police operations, their telecommunications, their communications back and forth. From what I understand and I believe it to be true, one if not maybe two of the doors of the fire department couldn't even be open because they had no electricity. And their backup generator, which apparently wasn't serviced like it should have been serviced, was out for a couple of days and they had to wait for a pot, and that's all because of what took place with the storm. You really have a whole host of issues here. You talk about a $2 billion seismic study for that. None of you have gone through the reading of the over 690 pages of the $110,000 report that was written in January, submitted in January of 2013. You're going to be having here a little later this evening, because I see the superintendent here, and you're going to be having a discussion on something that relates to the high school in multi-millions of dollars. And you really need to ask the same question. You're going to have a seismic erratic study for that piece of property up there, too. You know, I think it's unfair to the Medford taxpayer. Just like you folks, I am a taxpayer here in the city. The building was built in 1962. Same thing with the high school, honor about in that same year of category. And they're looking for a major, major overhaul, if not reconstruction or additions to whatever it might be. But the question really needs to be asked. It's obvious that maintenance has not taken place in these buildings. You, Councilor Caraviello, if you remember correctly, I think it was your first term, the beginning of your first term, you indicated that the all new schools at that point in time, which are 11 years old, was a million point one in arrears for fixtures. And now it's still well in excess of a million, if not a million two, whatever it might be, 15 years later. And you don't want to get caught into the same trap that you got caught in before to buy and fix new schools, whether you go from 12 to three or whatever the amount was. You built new schools because the old ones weren't maintained. And you're going to be looking at the same argument that's going to be presenting itself as it relates to the high school later on this evening. But this is too important of an issue. You're talking about at the outset $22 million, $2 million for the alleged, I don't know where that dollar amount came from because I don't think any of you can answer how she came up with $2 million, and $20 million to pay for the station. And as you heard here a couple of weeks ago when you had the director of finance up here, they're talking about 2022 before anything might be eligible for expiration of bonds that would be needed to pay for this. So I think in all fairness, as Councilor Lungo-Koehn has alluded to, there's no reason to jump into this thing tonight. You've waited a long period of time. You haven't even satisfied the argument of where the training center would go and the fire department. And if we remember correctly, I think it was When the first reading took place, because the fire department were here in mass numbers, the mayor decided to include them in any future development as to where they might go. To this date, the police department or its union have yet to be involved. And you folks have yet to be involved in any type of involvement with this thing. And it just doesn't make sense. It's not good political sense. It's absolutely not good financial sense. You know, you have over $28 million in the deficit in your pension system. You have an application, as you're well aware of, Mr. President, before the Massachusetts Library Association for $20 million. And if that comes through, the city of Medford pays 40% of that. And you're looking at probably approximately over the next two or three years, if in fact the high school goes forward and gets its application approved with the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, $25 million there of taxpayers' money. You're looking at a fire station and a police station. Can you please tell me who's going to pay for this? This is nothing more than a leading to Proposition 2.5 override. And if you look at your sister city of Somerville, With all the development that has taken place over there, they have still raised their taxes on two, a single two and three family homes, which goes to prove and tell you that development for the sake of development is not always in the best interest of this community or any community. You really need to look at the long-term approach. And the long-term approach right now would say, one more week, I don't think, is going to make a big thing. And you know, you're people all talking about transparency and being fluid and having this conversation with the mayor. Well, where is there all a branch extended to you to sit down and discuss and talk with you about this? It's not there. It's not there. And what you're doing is the bottom line. And what you're doing, you're just accelerating the use and the argument to have more people run for this city council and to run for mayor of this community. Because people are sick and tired and fed, and fed up of being told about all these expenses and not being a part of it, not being included. And the council, likewise, not including them in the process. You're not talking about $100,000. You're talking about $22 million right now. $2 million for the study, $20 million allegedly for the station. None of you can explain how it's going to be paid. None of you can explain how she got to the $2 million seismographic study. You don't even know if an RFQ went out, whatever it might be. I think the move is wrong tonight if you vote for this. That sends the wrong message. And it's definitely, definitely not taxpayer. People are police department friendly. Thank you. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo, Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I would, with due respect, with regards to the resolve that was approved several weeks back, that we sit down and discuss this in more depth and ask the questions. I mean, like I said before, the headquarters building went down last week. The backup generator went down. There are a whole host of issues within that whole building. And when we're talking, I mean, the last speaker just hit the nail on the head. We're talking about potential library, promised new fire station somewhere between 2022 and 2025, Medford High School potential updates, and maintenance of the rest of our schools and city buildings. I think we need to be on the same page and not just, I mean, I feel like This was so reactive, we need to be on the same page. And I would ask that we table this for one week to sit down with the mayor before we vote on it or potentially vote on it next Tuesday so we can hash some things out.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Lungo-Koehn to table this for one week so we can have some discussion with the mayor. Vice President Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I remember the vote that Council Lungo-Koehn is speaking about, and it was a 6 to 1 vote requesting that we meet with the administration, in particular the mayor, and discuss not only the building of the police department, also the feasibility and capital improvement plan of where we're going for future projects. And as we'll hear tonight, we have the superintendent of schools here. And we're going to hear about a need for improvements within the Medford Public Schools. As was mentioned by Councilor Longo, we already know the public library is in need of some repairs or total rehab. And there are a number of other issues, Mr. President, that I'm sure will be addressed when the superintendent gets up. But we should have a master plan, Mr. President. And I know Councilor Falco has spoken about a master plan in the past and I've raised the issue to give at least a direction on where we're going to go. And we can't continue to operate and do business with the mayor's draft proposal of a capital plan. It's not even a capital plan, it's a draft proposal that the mayor is still working from. And many of the issues in the draft proposal are not present in the letter that she wrote on March 17th to this council stating what the public schools needs. needs are. So I'm not quite sure, Mr. President, where all this dialogue and debate is happening. It's probably happening in a vacuum in the mayor's office, but it's clearly not with the elected officials in this community and with the general public in this community. And I would agree, I think one week is not too long to wait to get some feedback on where we're going with the capital plan, Mr. President. And as the council president, I think you should be wary of the fact that we're receiving things piecemeal again, and we've stated in the past that we refuse to do business like that. I wouldn't operate my business, or I don't run my home that way, and we shouldn't operate a city government that way either, Mr. President. So I support Councilor Lungo's motion to table for one week. Councilor Lungo, go ahead.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Just briefly, thank you, President Caraviello. I think one simple thing that needs to be done, even if we can't discuss you know, everything within a week. I think one thing that needs to be done is that capital plan that we were given about 9669 months ago. It's completely changed. Um, something that was supposed to be done seven years from now is now being asked for the third reading tonight. So that needs to be revamped. I mean, redrafted basically because the largest thing within that five year plan was the metric police station or, you know, an update in that of that building. And that is completely changed the whole draft capital plan. And I think that's just one simple thing that could be looked into and given to us within a week's time so that we have a better idea. Even if it is just a draft, it's a better idea of where we're going, how we're moving forward. And I think it's something that's necessary and we're not going to get it unless if we keep rubber stamping everything that's put before us.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Alango-Kern to table this for one week, Roll call is as seconded by Councilor Marks. Table and meet with the administration. Table and meet with the administration. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo. Negative. Councilor Falco. Councilor Knight. No. Councilor Kerr.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Vice President Marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. No. President Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: No. Two in the affirmative, five in the negative, Motion fails. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo, seconded by Councilor Knight, that the bond package take its third reading. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor McIntyre? Yes. Yes. Vice President Mox? Yes. Councilor Scalpelli? Yes. President Caviolo?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative and the negative. Motion passes. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Can we take 17-312 out of order?
[Richard Caraviello]: 17-312. To the honorable presidents and members of the Medford City Council, City Hall, Method Mast. Dear Mr. President and City Council, On behalf of the School Committee, I respectfully request to recommend that the City Council approve and authorize the submission to the Massachusetts School Building Authority a statement of interest. The City of Method School Committee has previously approved the same. The documentation will be provided by Superintendent Roy Belson, who will be in attendance, to explain this matter in further depth and detail. Good evening, Mr. Superintendent. Name and address for the record, please.
[Roy Belson]: Roy Bellison, Superintendent of Schools, 2500 Mystic Valley Parkway, Medford, Massachusetts. Mr. President, members of the Council, thank you for hearing us this evening. The Medford School Committee recently approved a statement of interest to the Massachusetts School Building Authority, the purpose of which is to be very proactive and to find out, under the core program, that is funded by MSBA, what projects would be fundable for Medford High School, Medford Vocational Technical High School going forward? This particular SOI does not bind the city financially in any way. What it does is it enables the process to begin and to bring out a team from MSBA to sit with us to go over the various projects that may be possible and to determine what they would be considered eligible for possible funding going forward. Now, if in fact they identify projects that are eligible for going forward, we would then have to come back to you and talk to you about the possibility of doing a feasibility study, which would then possibly lead to design, and then later construction documents, which would then lead to an actual implementation. But at this point, all we're asking you for is approval to submit to the state an opportunity to meet with their team to review what we have at our schools and determine what is eligible for funding under their current funding structure. I think it's a very proactive thing. I think it's consistent with what I just heard about being part of a plan rather than simply asking for an item at a time. And I think that it's the kind of thing that we want to do to know what we can go forward with on our own or what we should go forward with on our own and what we clearly need support from the state for or could be eligible for support from the state. I think it's particularly significant since as we look at the future, inflation of construction costs certainly goes up. and the possibility of the reduction of reimbursement goes down as the city's wealth increases and our eligibility for a higher reimbursement rate might decrease. This is clearly something that would, if it goes forward, would be a two to three year activity. It wouldn't be something that would happen overnight, but it would be something that enables us to get into the discussion range with the MSBA. So with that, I just ask that the City Council approve what the school committee has already approved, allow us to submit a statement of interest to MSBA so that we can begin the process of exploring what might be helpful to us in Medford and what we can have the state share the cost of. Happy to take any questions.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. Superintendents. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. Billson for, Superintendent Billson, for coming before us with this paper. If you could maybe with your experience, go over what type of projects would be funded through these types of 55% reimbursement grants, just so we can kind of have an idea of, I guess, the history of the grants. And that would be my first question.
[Roy Belson]: So there are two programs at MSBA that take place. One is called Accelerated Repair. That's not the program we're applying under. This is the core program for renovation and rebuilding and possible new construction. There are priorities. There are different seven priorities that the state lists that they would consider. We have selected four of them that we've brought in front of you. All the items listed may not be items we're interested in, but we put them down because if the state comes out, we'll talk about everything that's possible and see what their interest level is. So, for example, it's highly unlikely that we're interested in boilers because we just replaced the boilers, okay, at Medford High School. But we put it down because boilers lead to a discussion of heating systems. An important thing to talk about is an upgrade, if you will, of the fire alarm system. at Medford High School, it goes back to 1970. So it's clear that this is a good time to look at the fire alarm system. We know that the roof was replaced in 2001. We know that at some point in time, the roof is going to need a replacement. We think it's five, six years out. But if we got funding for it, it would be propitious to move forward with that. We know that the vocational school is moving into very high-tech areas. And anything that would allow us to improve our shops in ways that would enable us to offer state-of-the-art programs above and beyond what we're currently doing is an advantage. So anything that moves the show forward enables us to look at the things that would be useful going forward as something that we would like to explore. Another example would be the floor tiles. The floor tiles contain a certain amount of asbestos in them. Now, they're not dangerous because they're not friable, but you can't pick them up without an abatement, and an abatement costs a lot of money. So if we're going to have to change the flooring, if we're going to improve the flooring and things of that type, then we should have somebody else join with us and partner with us in the funding of it. So those are the kinds of discussions we would like to have. We certainly know that some things they'll tell us we're not high enough priority for because there are other places that are in greater need. But there are some things that might actually fly through and we'd like to find out what they are. And that will inform not only a funding proposal potentially going forward, which would then come before you again. But it also informs what we would then push for in local capital funding, which would be necessary to do. Technology is another major area, with testing now being done on computers, with reporting all being done on computers and data management and the like, it's critical that, you know, our technology be totally up to date and 100% that we continue to move forward with that area. That's an area that might be of interest to the state. We certainly would move forward with that. We've also applied or will apply under the e-rate program, the universal libraries program, and we think we're eligible for about $600,000 there on top of this. So these are things that we're looking at. We want to advance our possibilities. We want to put before you all the possibilities for outside funding that will complement local funding. And the only way we can find out is if we sit with the state in a formal process and review and explore what they would consider a priority for Medford. Thank you, Mr. Superintendent.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: That kind of answered what was going to be my second question, kind of as, what is Medford looking for for our high school? versus what in the past these grants have been used for in other cities and towns. So with that being said, did the school committee or did you bring anything for us tonight with regards to a list, something in writing that says what the city of Medford's needs are for the high school?
[Roy Belson]: Well, the SOI includes everything. The SOI just simply talks about everything possible. We would look at the entire building with MSBA and not leave anything out that they might consider eligible for funding. The school committee obviously wants to anticipate possible needs going forward, as I indicated, flooring, staircases, The fire alarm system, these are things, the roof, these are things that should be looked at because the building is going to be 50 years old in another couple of years. And we have a very solid building. It's not a building that needs to be replaced. You can't buy a CMU building anymore. with the kind of money out there. Somerville is, what, $250 million to replace a building? Minuteman is $155 million. Waltham's looking at a couple hundred million. We're not going to spend that kind of money. We have the solid structure, but we have to make sure the internal systems are going to be up to date so they can go for another 40, 50 years before someone has to consider whether this building has any further life. So that's sort of what we're looking at. I think the school committee wants to understand and hear what the state is willing to fund. And I think we have a very extensive list of just almost a laundry list of everything we would look at.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. So you have the list to provide to us?
[Roy Belson]: It's on here. If you read through, you'll see the things that the school committee approved as things they would like the MSBA to look at.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Where is that list? I have like a list that says number one and then on the second page it says number six, number seven.
[Roy Belson]: That it references. So under each of the four priorities to address, we list a whole series of things we'd like MSBA to look at with us.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Is that on the last page, number six, number seven?
[Roy Belson]: Those are one, the last two pages.
[Richard Caraviello]: Point of information, Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Is that on the document dated March 17th, 2017? March 16th, 2017.
[Roy Belson]: March 16th. Yeah, well, my address is March 17th, mine's March 16th.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor LaRusso.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So just so I understand it better, would the SOI come in and bring in their own experts so they would know how out of date our systems are or when they're going to eventually need updating? Exactly. So the heating experts, so they would be telling us, the first priority is the roof, then the heating, then the boilers have another 10 years. So they'd give you a list and say, you are eligible for these funds and not these.
[Roy Belson]: Exactly. They would tell us, these are the things that we would consider funding with you. These are the things you're going to do yourself. Point of information, if I can.
[George Scarpelli]: Point of information, Councilor Scarpelli. From what you just said, Mr. Superintendent, what Councilwoman Longo just mentioned, the confusion that I want to make clear is, you're telling us they'll tell us what we can do. But let's say something is needed today. And we're saying, let's say the HVAC needs to be done today. But they had that on their list as three to be funded. Are we going to fund their request instead of what we think is, like the HVAC, that's probably the... So that's a discussion, Councilor, that we would have.
[Roy Belson]: First we want to know who's going to join with us on what projects. And then the school committee, and then obviously you, because you have to bond with us, to determine which items will take precedence and priority. Because otherwise, you know, we have a plan that might avoid doing something that we consider more important and MSBA might not consider as a priority for them. But we have to begin to understand what they will fund so we can understand how many dollars we might have left to tackle other issues and go back and forth. Now it may be something they're willing to fund that we don't care to fund in the short term. We can keep it on the boards, but once they determine it's eligible, we can go back and apply for it. So the goal is to know what we can apply for so that we know which items have to be funded by ourselves and which items can be funded in partnership, and then to determine the prioritization and the timing of each of these projects.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And one of my last questions, with regards to the amount of these grants that are given, if you know from other cities and towns that have got them in the past, or if Medford has gotten any, what are we talking? Are we talking you'll maybe get a grant for one or two things? Is there a cap amount-wise? Or are we talking, are we potentially $20, $30 million?
[Roy Belson]: It really depends on what they determine eligibility. Somerville, when they're rebuilding the high school, I guess, is eligible for about $130 million. Okay? Now, we're not, I don't think we're in that category. We're looking at something much smaller than that. But clearly, whatever they determine we're eligible for, we'll put a price tag on it after we do some feasibility work. And then we can decide how much this community wants to invest at this particular point in time or going forward. But at least we know what our partners are willing to put up on the table so that we can give you an informed proposal for both local capital planning and partnered capital planning.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And my last question, I guess, would be with regards to, I guess, the whole system, Medford High School and all of our other elementary and grade schools with regards to every school needing maintenance, having maintenance issues. I've heard from a few parents over the last month or so and beyond with regards to issues within each school. Have the grade schools and the elementary schools also been looked at with regards to their needs and how we are going to kind of assess it all, this and the grade schools?
[Roy Belson]: So the school committee had several meetings on this topic. And it's our impression that while there are things to be done at every school, obviously you have to keep it up. The major issues will be going forward at the high school. High school is now the oldest major building in our possession. One of the things I told the school committee, so I feel comfortable sharing it here, is that in next year's budget, I will look to increase the amount of money put in for maintenance across the board so that we can do some of the things that people have raised independent of any capital planning and independent of any state-funded planning. We also have grants, as we've indicated before, that are also giving us money. For example, we got $100,000 or just under $100,000 in biosciences recently. We got a $500,000 grant in capital skills development from the state just the other day, a week ago Friday. And we've got some other grants out there they're looking for. There's about $600,000, $700,000 in technology funding that we are eligible for that we're putting together the proposed for. It's an entitlement as long as we meet certain requirements. So we're putting all of this together to come so that we can actually deal with issues with other people's money as much as possible, but certainly recognizing that not everything that we want to do will be eligible for funding by an outside agency.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: That's it for now. Thank you.
[Roy Belson]: Thank you.
[John Falco]: Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Superintendent Felsen. Thanks for the report. I agree with you. The building is 50 years old. It was going to be 50 years old. It definitely needs improvements. I talk to parents on a daily basis. And a lot of parents that don't have kids at the high school yet, but they've been up to the high school. And the building does need work. When I was on the school committee with Councilor Scarpelli, we had the science lab renovation, 17 new science labs, which was a great project for the community, for the school system, and really, you know, the state-of-the-art school labs and science labs. And these are important, especially for programming, future programming for the vocational school. And, you know, we want to make sure that we have these programs in place. We want to make sure our buildings are up to date. I mean, there's one thing that I learned when I was on the school committee is people have an option. people have a choice. Years ago, you went to Medford High School. Maybe you went to parochial school. Now you can go to public school, public charter school. You can go to private school, parochial school. I mean, there's all kinds of options for people now. So I think a lot of people would like to go to school right here in Medford, but they want to make sure that their facilities are first class in nature and make sure that the programs that are being offered, for example, at the vocational school, are first rate. And I think we're heading in that direction. But I think we do need a cash infusion to make sure that a lot of this happens. And it's nice to see that to potentially get 55% reimbursement from the state, that doesn't come along every day. And we took advantage of that opportunity. When the science labs came across, I think we got 55, maybe even a little bit more, a little bit more. Between 55 and 60%, I think, reimbursement on those. So I think this is a great opportunity. And I think that it's something that we should take advantage of. One of the questions that I had with regard to, you mentioned HVAC. So would the HVAC include the actual individual heating systems in each of the classrooms at the high school? Okay, that's perfect because I know one of the complaints that I got when I was on the school committee was, you know, it'd be hot and cold in some of the buildings and sometimes there'd be no heat at all. So I think that would be a definite good addition. I also want to talk about the, let's see, you mentioned here in this memo it says, number seven, replacement of or addition to obsolete buildings in order to provide a full range of programs consistent with state and approved local requirements. MPS is seeking additional space on the high school campus by adding a cafeteria that can accommodate up to at least 500 students, a performing arts center that can accommodate up to 1,000 guests, adequate locker room facilities for male and female athletes, a fitness and wellness center, and expansion of vocational technical space to create a career pathway model. Can you comment on that a little bit? Is that talking about possibly a new structure, or is that building off the structures that we currently have?
[Roy Belson]: So let me give you a couple of examples. Anyone who's been up to high school, by the way, with a lot of, and with your help, by the way, and I appreciate that, a lot of capital projects have been done, and I could enumerate them You know, at some point, if you're interested, the council has approved money for them, so I appreciate that. But let's take the locker rooms at the high school. You've been up to the locker rooms at the high school. You know they're old, and you know that they're not particularly what we want them to be. The girls' locker room, it is what it is. There's a lot of old things in there. There's a lot of old marble, old shower stalls. It's a lot of empty space, unutilized space. That needs to be redone. Because if it's redone, we'll recapture some space for other programming, and we can provide a state-of-the-art locker room for the young women to use it. The same thing is true with the men's locker room. We need to do that. It's just these are the things that are there. When you talk about a performing arts center, that may be a little aspirational, you know, in regard because, you know, we're talking about having a program that promotes the theater arts and promotes media and the like, but I don't know that we need to go to 1,000 seats right now. So that may be a little bit aspirational, but the people doing the thinking raised it and said, you know, let's put it down and let's see if there's some interest in doing more with that. I think those are the kinds of cafeteria right now. There's three cafeterias. It may be that we can reconfigure them, especially since right now, as you undoubtedly have heard, maybe read in the transcript recently, we're redoing the Cafe Electra into a brand new hospitality and restaurant suite with state money. And that's critical because that's going to be up on the first floor. That's going to be a restaurant for the public. That's going to tie into our partnerships with WIN, which is creating the casino up the street and developing job opportunities. That's going to tie into a whole pile of activities and revenue generating activities that will support other programs. And that will free up space where Cafe Elector is now. And we can do some other things with that. So this is a whole process of looking at how we can reconfigure space to our greatest advantage. Now the print shop, because they don't use the big presses anymore, can now go down to a smaller place. We don't have to give them the big cavern that they had because they don't use that anymore. That's not what printing is about anymore. So Dr. Riccio, for example, has created what we'll call clusters or academies. putting programs together, human service programs together, construction programs together, programs that deal with media and development together, so that they can interact with each other. So that a youngster, when they're trained, is cross-trained for more than one area. That creates great opportunities for our young people. Instead of being trained only in one area, you're trained in multiple areas. You may have noticed that we've virtually recaptured all the students from Minuteman. By next year, we'll have only eight students at Minuteman. We'll have saved a million dollars a year on that alone by putting these programs together. By bringing some students in from the outside, we're recapturing revenue, possibly projecting over two or three years a million dollars a year in new revenue coming into it. This is going to help us weather the storm, whether it's federal cutbacks, state failure to pay, or some of the local issues, the priorities that we have. So these are ways that I think we're moving forward, and I believe that Looking at our school at 50 years of age and looking for another 50 years from that building is a really good time to start and be proactive now. Plan, recognizing we've got to come back to you. You're not voting for money tonight. You're voting for planning tonight. You're voting to be proactive, to look and see what's possible. And that's what we were asking you to do. And I think it's a great opportunity. Thank you.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. Superintendent. I agree with you with regard to the vocational school. In my opinion, I think it's the hidden jewel of the district. I mean, there are so many great opportunities that are happening at the vocational school. You know, Ms. Riccio and her staff are doing a great job. And I mean, there's so much demand now to go to the vocational school, and it's kind of the best of both worlds. You learn a trade, and you can still go to college if you want. So you really, you have the best of both worlds. It's an exciting time. There are more and more young kids going to the vocational school. It's a great time to reinvest, not only in the high school, but in the shops of the vocational school. I mean, when you think about it, at the end of the day, our buildings are our most important assets with regard to the future of Method students. We need to make sure that they are first class and make sure that all of our technology is current as can be. You had mentioned previously about the potential for feasibility studies. So if we have to do a feasibility study, is that something that we would have to pay for, or is that something that would be, would the MSBA help out with the cost of something like that?
[Roy Belson]: If we become eligible, we would then petition MSBA for the feasibility, a feasibility study for the specific projects that we determined were the priority that we wanted to go with them for, or with, and they would reimburse us At the same rate, they would reimburse the construction. So if the feasibility study was $500,000 and we're eligible for 50%, we'd get $250,000 back. We lay it out, but they reimburse us. I'm all set. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Councilman. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. Mr. Bellson, thank you for being here this evening. I think you do a great job, and I appreciate you coming down here this evening. So I think it's safe to say that you feel as though going forward with this statement of interest is the most prudent course at this point in time?
[Roy Belson]: It gets us in the game, and it allows us to consider our options, which I think is really important. Earlier this evening I heard you talking, you want to consider options, well you want to know who's going to pay for what. And if you've got somebody else who wants to pay for it, or will help you pay for it, you want to know that before you put your own money on the table.
[Adam Knight]: And this matter did come before the school committee and it was endorsed by the school committee? Yes. I have the copies of the votes if you need it. Do you recall what the vote was? Pardon me? Do you recall what the vote was?
[Adam Knight]: So it's endorsed by the superintendent of schools. It's endorsed by the school committee. And the purpose of the paper before us this evening, as I understand it, is that you're really seeking permission to meet with the state to examine what competitive grant opportunities the Massachusetts School Building Authority has out there for us that the Metro Public School District may be eligible for?
[Roy Belson]: That's correct.
[Adam Knight]: by submitting this application in the statement of interest, the Massachusetts School Building Authority in no way guarantees that we're going to receive money in the city of Medford, in no way guarantees that we're going to expend money?
[Roy Belson]: Right.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you very much, Mr. Belson. Move for approval, Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Vice President Mox. Thank you, Mr. President. And I want to thank Superintendent Belson for being here tonight. As the superintendent stated, Mr. President, This council, over the last several years, has approved many building programs within the Medford High School and the Medford Public Schools. And I think we've been very supportive as a council. My question tonight, Mr. President, is not regarding whether or not the high school needs improvements. I have two students that attend Medford High School, and I can speak firsthand that Medford High School, indeed, needs improvements. But my question to the superintendent is, my first question, back in September of 2016, the school committee, along with Mayor Burke, formulated a priority facility improvement list, of which they outlined $13,787,000 worth of repairs in the high school and our other school buildings, of which $10,100,000 was earmarked to Medford High School. Of that 10,100,000, Mr. Superintendent, what percentage of that 10,100,000 is in the current SOI?
[Roy Belson]: So I can't tell you that because basically we listed almost everything that we possibly could think of in the SOI. So it really depends on what the state determines would be eligible. I would say most of the things that we listed on that would be something we would discuss with them. There may be some things that they would say, that's your problem. You know, okay.
[Michael Marks]: So, so, and the reason why I asked Mr. Superintendent is, and I'll get into this a little bit later on, but, uh, we were recently told three weeks ago that, uh, in order to build a combined police and fire center, that we were told this by a treasurer collector and also by the mayor that, uh, the amount of money we were looking to bond would cause the city to have to go into a proposition two and a half override. And that was one of the factors the administration stated why we couldn't bond for $38 million. So the reason why I'm trying to get some facts and figures tonight is I want to make sure that we're not going down the same avenue that the mayor and the treasurer-collector were so adamantly opposed to three weeks ago. And I'm hoping to get those answers from you tonight. So as part of the SOI, from what I can see, The capital plan that was put forth by the mayor and the school committee back in September of 2016 did not include a 500-student cafeteria, did not include a performing arts center for 1,000 students, did not include a fitness center, and did not include, from what I can see, windows and boilers. Now if I could just finish. So based on the $10 million that was out there for other renovations, which included Medford High School flooring, which you mentioned had asbestos, which I would agree needs to be removed. Roof replacement for $2 million. Fire alarm system, which we know has been on the blink for a number of years, for $1,200,000. And $1 million to deconstruct the skateboard area and install modular units in the back of the high school. So at what expense is the addition of a cafeteria for 500 students, a performing arts center for 1,000, fitness center, windows, and boilers going to add to the $10 million that the school committee came out in September of 2016? OK, so let me try and answer this way.
[Roy Belson]: They're all good questions. Thank you. Personally, I allowed the planning team at the high school to put down some of their aspirational things. Now, I don't personally think I need a 500-student cafeteria. Personally, I don't think that. But I wouldn't tell my people they can't ask for it and let somebody else tell them, we don't think we'd fund that, OK? So I don't think that's going to be something MSBA is going to be interested in, because I think they already know we have cafeterias. And they'd say, probably, why don't you just put a coat of paint on and do some other things? So I don't think that's an issue. Point of information.
[Michael Marks]: Yeah. And I appreciate what you're saying, but doesn't that just muddy the waters? Because when I look at the SOI request, I'll be quite frank, it looks like we're building a brand new building. I mean, if you go through the list from roof to boiler to windows to flooring, I mean, it looks like we're building a brand new building. And I think to add stuff into the SOI that maybe you didn't agree upon as superintendent or thought it wasn't a priority, I think muddies the water. And what we have here, in my opinion, is a project that is probably closer to $30 or $40 million if we were to get total funding or total approval, I should say, from the state. And I know there's reimbursement. The number 55% has been tossed around. I talked to the State Building Assistance Program. Don't bet your bottom dollar on 55%. In the past, we've received upwards of 59% for the science labs. But there is nothing set in stone. I know the mayor put that in her letter, but according to the school building assistance, they have not arrived at any funding percentages as of today. So in a good predicament, we could get 50%. But my question, Mr. Superintendent, why throw everything into the mix? Shouldn't we be looking at our major priorities? We should be looking at the major deficiencies in the school? Because that's what the SOI calls for. It calls for the major deficiencies. And you yourself are saying, I don't think our deficiency is adding a 1,000-person performance center or a 500-person cafeteria. but it may be the alarm system or it may be an issue like Councilor Scarpelli talked about, other building improvements that need to be done immediately. So I think that's the question. Why are we throwing everything at the wall right now?
[Roy Belson]: Again, as I said to you, the SOI is a planning document. It's to get you into an exploration process and to find out what the state is willing to pay for. So you put down everything to talk about, And you find out that they're going to discard a few things here and a few things there, and maybe several things, and say that's really not important enough to us. But we'll find out. The document that you had in front of you is really a document that was produced in September, or early on, based on what people thought at that particular time. Different things emerge. People want to talk about them. There are some ideas that the headmaster has, that the vocational director has, that, you know, we put it down so that we could explore them with the state. Not because we necessarily think that they're going to fund all these things. We want to get into an exploratory process to examine what is possible for partnership with state funding. And then we'll merge the documents. The key thing you have to remember is we have to come back to you for the money. And any amount that we're going to spend, you're going to prioritize along with the school committee. It's not going to be the superintendent who makes the final call. The superintendent might make a recommendation. But you're going to decide, and the mayor's going to decide, and the school committee's going to decide how much money you're willing to put on the table at any given point in time. But knowing what's eligible gives you a leg up on what's going on. And as far as the percentage goes, I know what other people are getting at this point in time. I know what the relative things are. The state's not going to commit to something before they see it. I know we fall in that basic line of where we would be eligible, because I know what the economics are between the different communities. It doesn't mean that it won't go down a little bit, because obviously the wealth of the community is increasing.
[Michael Marks]: So Mr. Superintendent, if I could. So based on the laundry list that we're submitting in the SOI, and it is a laundry list, wouldn't it make more sense for us to prioritize what our needs are so we don't count on or have to count on some state bureaucrat coming back saying, you know what, Method, we know you need a fire alarm system and a sprinkler system and windows and an HVA system, but we're gonna give you a cafeteria for 500 students. They're not gonna do that. Mr. Secretary, we don't know what's going to happen. But why not put together a list of what our priorities are and not just put together a list of, it sounds great. You put everything in there in the kitchen sink and say, hey, look, we're looking to get funding. It sounds great in theory, but it's not practical. I don't believe it's practical to put everything in the SOI. And I'd rather see, like Councilor Scarpelli mentioned, a list of what our top priorities are. and have them go through our top priorities, Mr. Superintendent, and then make a selection from our top priorities. And if a 500 student cafeteria is not on the top of your priority list as superintendent of the school committee's priority list, then that should be at the bottom of the list. Or not on the list at all, Mr. Superintendent.
[Roy Belson]: I hear what you're saying, but I'm My experience tells me in meeting, because I've had these meetings before. As you know, we've had science labs. We've built new buildings and so on. My experience tells me that when we sit down with them, we'll focus in on the things that are high priority first. And then we'll look at whether any of these other things are possible. But they know the difference between a firearm system and a roof and a cafeteria. They know the difference. And they know where we would like to go first. This is an attempt to give everybody, every stakeholder, who was involved in the planning process of putting an SOI together, a chance to be heard, rather than say your idea is not worth being explored with the state. We're giving them a chance to be heard. But you know and I know that the state will zero in on firearms and roofs and heating systems long before they worry about the cafeteria.
[Michael Marks]: And if we were so concerned of having every stakeholder seat at the table, why don't we see the middle school and elementary schools as a separate S.O.I., Mr. Superintendent, which can be done. I'm sure you know that as superintendent. There is no mention about the needs of, as Councilor Lungo-Koehn mentioned, the secondary schools. within this, and nor should it be, because this is a high school proposal. But there's also proposals that are in need, as you know, in our other schools, in dire need. So my question is then, my second question, Mr. President, is the fact that I realize the order which takes place as you submit the SOI, I didn't realize after you submit the SOI then you go sit down with the state people. I didn't know that. You're telling me you now then go sit down with the state people and you, what do you do, compromise with them?
[Roy Belson]: No, you sit down and you go over and they'll tell you what they would consider to be priorities, what they would consider to be something that they would consider to be of concern to them, what they would like to fund. I mean, after all, they're accountable to their funding agency and their board as well. So I think that they'd be more interested in a fire alarm system, a roof, heating systems, more so than some of the other things. But, you know, we're giving them all these things, and they might say, you know, we're doing something with this. Who knew a few years ago that they were going to be funding science labs? But we put it in front of them, and we got it. You know, you have to try all these things. You put it in front of them. You say, are you interested in this? Could you consider this to be a reasonable investment? Maybe someone's going to say, yes, you know, we've got an interest in this at this point in time. So we're moving forward with a planning process. That's all we're doing tonight, asking you to allow us to go forward proactively and find out what the state wants to prioritize in our community. And this is going to take probably two to three years to actually actualize. In the meantime, that will inform, you know, our other capital planning that may have to be locally funded. And we will form also our maintenance issues, which will be locally funded. So, and then grant applications we make. If someone were to say we can't get grants for this, you know, for example, we built the, we're building the Culinary Arts and Hospitality Center. That wasn't gonna be funded by MSBA. But we got a grant to do it. So we have to know where we have to go. We have to know what's possible under what set of funding and what's possible under other sets of funding. And then we can then lay it out. And of course, we're going to have to work with you and the school committee for any kind of local money that's going to be needed to move the project forward. This isn't you say yes tonight, and I go off and do whatever I want. This is you say yes tonight, we get the process going, and then we come back to you and sit down. And it should be a robust process, because the city wants to move forward on some good projects, not only in the schools, but in the city. And we look forward to that.
[Michael Marks]: So if I could, Mr. Superintendent, I know you're probably not prepared tonight to put a dollar amount onto your deficiency request. But you were able to put a dollar amount back in September 2016 on the laundry list of items that you mentioned needed repair at the high school. Are you prepared tonight to put a dollar amount on your SOI request to the state?
[Roy Belson]: No, because I don't know, you know, the extent to which any of these things would be funded.
[Michael Marks]: But I do know... Now, I'm not talking about funding.
[Roy Belson]: What is the actual cost of your SOI request? You know, I wouldn't want to, you know, give you a guess right now, because quite frankly, it depends on the extent to which you do them. You know, and any one of these things might be a partial thing, maybe some windows, maybe some doors, and maybe not all, maybe all doors. I don't think we, you know, we can do that right now. When we get back from a planning process, and we get to a financial phase, then we can do that. That's the most prudent way to do it, not to throw speculative numbers out there right now. And if people come and say, look, that's too much at any one time, then that'll be too much at any one time.
[Michael Marks]: Okay, so what you're asking then is the council to let you go forward, and then in deliberations, when you submit your SOI with the state, you'll go back and forth with the state, and they'll determine what projects will be done or approved, And if they come back and say, you know what, Method, we like everything in your SOI. There's been a lack of requests for school building assistance this year. And we're going to fund you for $60 million, Method. Congratulations. And we're even going to give you half. We're going to give you $30 million. So you're going to have to bond for $30 million. Are you prepared to come back to this city, Mr. Superintendent, with a $30 million bond request within the next two to three years?
[Roy Belson]: I'd be prepared to come back to you to tell you what your options are and to allow you to decide what the finances of this city is willing to support in support of your public schools. That's all, just like anything else. We come to you with a budget. We come to you with other kinds of financial things. You can tell us how much more you want to put into it. But you know, for example, in five or six years, you're going to replace a roof at the high school. You are going to do it. The question is, who's going to pay for it? But if we are eligible to get somebody to share that with us, why not find out now? You know that there are some heating things that we want to do at the high school that we should do. If you don't do them in the next few years, you'll end up paying for it. So we should find out if we have a partner. And so on and so forth. We know that technology is moving at a rapid rate. And if we know that it's going to be expensive to increase all the technology that's going to be required of public schools, So if someone's willing to partner with us, great. You'll know that. That gives you those things. But you can decide that, you know, I'm not interested in a performing arts center, and I'm not interested in an expanded cafeteria, and I don't really care about some other things you're interested in. So even though someone's willing to partner with us, it's off the table for Medford because we have other things we want to do. My job is to give you options. My job is to give you an opportunity to look at it.
[Michael Marks]: And who's going to make that decision? So let's just say, in a perfect scenario, the state comes back and said, Medford, we're giving you everything you wanted. Who ultimately is going to make that decision? Are you saying it's this council that's going to sit there? School committee, mayor, and council are the arbiters of dollars and cents. Right. But we ultimately have the final funding say, Mr. Superintendent. So you think this council is going to sit back after the SOI is put in, and if everything works out perfectly, and they come to us and they pay for half, And we're getting everything we want. You think the city council is going to sit here and start slashing different items in the budget to make sure that we don't have a proposition two and a half override? Is that what you expect this council to do? That's my questioning, Mr. Superintendent. Why are we throwing everything at the wall when we know what deficiencies we have? we should prioritize them right now and move forward on them. This program is going nowhere. So to make people believe that, hey, that's, you know, let's get a partner today. We can get a partner today, tomorrow, next year, the year after this program has been around for years and we've taken advantage for many, many years, Mr. Superintendent, you know, uh, we, we got, uh, for a core program, uh, 59.79%. Um, uh, it doesn't give the year 2008, I'm sorry. Then the science labs, we've got 59%, $6 million reimbursement. Then the accelerated repair, $2,409,000, they gave us a million dollars. So I know we've been great partners with the state. My concern is eventually, because I've been on this council a number of years, is that eventually the issue's gonna come back before this council. And we're gonna be the ones that are gonna be sitting there saying, geez, you know what, the state wants to give us all this money, but the city council doesn't want to approve it. They want to pay half of this and this and this, but they don't want to approve it. And we know what the purse strings are, Mr. Superintendent, when we hear from the mayor three weeks ago, say that she can't afford to do a combined center for police and fire, because according to her and the treasurer collector, that the school bonds will be coming offline in the year 2022, which is five years. And she said we can't afford the spending that we want to do for a combined center until 2022. Now you're telling us that this project they could be looking for funding maybe two or three years. Is that correct?
[Roy Belson]: Well, what I'm telling you is I'm telling you it'll take two to three years to get through the process to actually get construction going on something, any project that gets approved and the like. But we won't even get to design feasibility and design until we come back here and talk about what the state is interested in. And in the feasibility period, that's when you will make some decisions before we actually go forward with a final number. I mean, the reality is that some things will be done over five years, some things may be done over 10 years. The reality is to find out what we can get some funding for and what we can get support for.
[Michael Marks]: Correct. And that is the reality. And that's why I'm bringing this up. There is a reality behind this. And when I hear from the administration and the treasurer-collector saying, that we can't afford any more bonds other than what we just did for the police department until the year 2022, unless we want to look at a Prop 2.5 override, I think every member of this council and every citizen should be concerned about it. And we should have a handle on what we're potentially looking at. And from what you're telling me now, the process is you just submit. You really don't know what the dollar amount will be. You just submit it. You hope for the best. And when it comes back, it comes back. And then at that point, you look at the financials. And what I'm telling you is, the mayor just told us three weeks ago, we're looking at five years down the line. And that doesn't seem what we're looking for for these schools. I mean, I read the SOI. It says an SOI should only be filed for a facility where a district has the ability to gain the proper local approvals and to fund a project in the next two years. So they're putting, you know, they want to see commitment, that's why they're asking for a vote, the school committee and the council, and they want to see a funding commitment.
[Roy Belson]: And we're at such an early stage. I know that. And quite frankly, look, you get hit with a lot of decisions that require you to make tough decisions on money. on policies, on zoning, on any number of issues. You can't hide from, not that you want to, from making tough decisions that make some people happy and some people less happy.
[Michael Marks]: With all due respect, you just stated that you put things in this SOI that you didn't want in there because you were hiding from dealing with other people at the table. So don't say people are hiding, Mr. Superintendent.
[Roy Belson]: I said I respected the right of the planning team to forward things that I consider to be, that they consider to be important to them, because I want to respect my administrative team and the teachers and others who participate. You're the educational leader of this community, Mr. Superintendent, and sometimes you have to make the tough decisions. And I like the participation of people. I don't have to make all the decisions myself. But the reality is that nothing is going to go forward financially unless you decide you can afford it. Nothing's going to go forward. We're trying to explore who wants to partner with us. And you know that the most important things will be systems that are important to the school. The operation of the building will get higher priority than some of the things that maybe are aspirational. You know that. So if you decide that certain things aren't something you want to fund, then you say, well, put that off for a couple of years. But certainly, you're going to face a roof. Certainly, you're going to face technology. Certainly, you're going to deal with other systems, heating systems and other things like that. And if we don't get in the game now, it'll be longer. before we get funding, and if we don't, and if the funding dries up because of the Commonwealth not being able to keep things moving, you see the green line, other things like that, we talk about these things, and it keeps getting pushed off, keeps getting pushed off. Let's get in the game, and then you can decide whether or not it's something you desire as a priority. That's what we need to look at. I think it's my job to put it in front of you. I hope it's your job to, or I hope it's your willingness to let me find out what's possible going forward.
[Michael Marks]: So Mr. Superintendent, just getting back to some of the building deficiencies, would you agree that the restrooms at the high school are a deficiency of Medford High School?
[Roy Belson]: I would agree that restrooms are something that should be addressed, yes. How come they're not part of the SOI? Because they're part of the general building envelope. That's something that we can talk about. They're part of the plumbing. They're part of the heating system, believe it or not. It's all part of the same consideration. And just because something isn't written here doesn't mean we can't talk about it with the team that comes out from MSBA. If we think of other things, we can say, you know, by the way, we'd like you to look at this as well. This is to get them, to give them an idea of which communities are interested in seeking partnership with the state.
[Michael Marks]: So just so I understand, you brought up a good point. So after the April 7th deadline, you're stating that we can add stuff to the SOI? We can talk to them about it, yes. Not talk, we can add stuff after the deadline.
[Roy Belson]: We can talk stuff, yes. We can talk with them about it. Maybe they'll let us add, maybe they won't. But I'm sure they would consider some of the things that we would bring up.
[Michael Marks]: With all due respect, Mr. Superintendent, I've been an advocate for a number of years regarding the cleanliness and the deplorable condition of the bathrooms at the high school. And there's been some headway made, I have to give credit, there's been some headway made with the water bubbles and so forth, but many of the restrooms at the high school are locked down, not because we don't have the manpower to supervise them, it's because they're in deplorable condition, Mr. Superintendent. And this is coming from first-hand knowledge. And I can tell you that the fact that it's not addressed in a deficiency in this program and say, well, it's covered under other things, I think is not adequately addressing the deficiencies that we have at that school. It may not be educational in nature, but what I can tell you is that there are kids at the high school that will hold and going to the restroom a whole day because they're so filthy dirty and you can't get toilet paper. There's no soap. There's no paper towels. There's no doors on the urinals. And I'm just telling you reality, Mr. Superintendent, because you have your own private bathroom and probably don't frequent other restrooms in the building. And I could just tell you that from what I hear from students, Mr. Superintendent, is that's what's happening up there. And I'm saddened to see that it's not addressed in the SOI. But if you're telling me it could be added at a later date, that's fine, and I hope it does get added, because that would be my addition.
[Roy Belson]: I guess I'm a stakeholder. That would be my addition. I certainly would bring that up in any kind of discussion, but I can tell you that I don't share your full assessment of our bathroom facilities. There may be a few that need some additional work, but there's a lot of them that work very well. They're in good shape and are being cleaned on a regular basis.
[Michael Marks]: That's my exact point. I know you don't share them and that's why they've been in deplorable condition for so many years. That's my exact point, Mr. Superintendent.
[Roy Belson]: So we can go back and forth on that.
[Michael Marks]: And also, Mr. Superintendent, you were here several months back when we were talking about safety at the high school. We had a great debate going back and forth. and I see you mentioned in the SOI that you have the inability to close off certain parts of the building and have the inability to keep it cordoned off to people from outside and so forth. I'm glad to see that you're finally admitting that there is a security issue at the high school and that there is concern, Mr. Superintendent, with access to that building throughout the course of the day and that we've been unable to control the access And I'm glad to see that you're offering some solutions to that effect, Mr. Superintendent.
[Roy Belson]: So for the record, I'm going to tell you the high school is a safe place. There's always more we can do to improve it. And some of the things we have here will add dimensions that we can't do by ourselves.
[Michael Marks]: That's all for now, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Vice President Mox. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. President Caraviello, I think it's important that we do, as a group, as a city council, understand what the immediate needs are, a five-year plan, and I think, that was my question in the beginning, and it's not really answered, and I have to review on this in depth, it does seem like everything is included, but when you stated that when the state comes in, you will let them know what the priorities are, I would just request through the chair that we do get a top five, top 10 list of things that need to be done and maybe why they need to be done. Nothing extensive, just the first thing we would need is a, just so we could better understand what those 10 things are. If the state is going to give us money, I think the city council, who will have to agree or disagree to bond for it, should know that up front before we submit something like this. I think that's number one. Number two, I just agree with Councilor Marks in the respect with regards to putting everything in the kitchen sink into this document, because we were told that we can't afford a fire station until 2022, 23, 24, and the fire department was also promised to be almost the next on the list So the administration told us that we can't afford probably a number of these larger items unless it's, you know, obviously a substantial need like a leaking roof or a blown boiler. So I would hate to have one of these larger projects that is not necessarily a necessity be approved and us be given a grant and then we come and see 500 students here advocating for that 500-person cafeteria or something that's almost a novelty that we can't afford and then have 75 firefighters in here. But wait, saying wait, we were promised a new station, a healthy, safe environment for us to work. And that's the way politics runs in Medford. It's not going to be up to all the elected body. How it's worked is it's going to come before the council to take that tough vote. So whether or not, I think this needs to be narrowed down just a bit. Because I understand both sides. I understand you want to include everything your staff and administration wants in the document. But it's a lie. We can't afford all these items. And what we should be able to afford are the necessities, health, safety, and obviously the security within that school. And that should be what's in this document. And that's what I'd be comfortable approving tonight. And you would have my approval if it was narrowed down a little bit to maybe the top 10 items that need to be done at the high school. and then we can do the necessities, do things that need to be done within the next five, six, seven years. So I mean, I agree, and I think that's some, those are two points, two things maybe that I think we should have before us, maybe a little updated document, a little less extravagant, and then also just a top 10 list of what needs to be done, what we're gonna need to do within the next five to 10 years, so that we can say, yes, good request, and then see what the state is willing to give us, because we cannot afford, we were told we cannot afford 10 extra million now, and we won't be able to afford it until we do the fire station, and then at that point, we won't be able to afford a library, and basically what I heard is we won't be able to afford a lot of these items in this document. So I'd rather ask for, hey, state, please, we need a roof, we need a new electrical system in A building, These things are going to, obviously, we need them evaluated, and they're going to fall apart, or are going to have to be replaced within the next five to 10 years. And I would ask the council to really think about that, because that's a situation we're going to face, or whoever's sitting behind this rail, four, five, three years from now, if we do get the monies for an extravagant item that we just really can't afford, that the kids are going to want so badly, and the administration's going to want. But will they need it, and will we be able to afford it? And we were told, no, it's not going to happen. So let's, I think we need to be a little bit more realistic.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I think we're getting the cut way, way, way ahead of the horse here, Mr. President. If we look at the history of the Medford City Council, just several weeks ago, we voted unanimously for the administration to hire a grant writer. Before us right here, we have a grant that's been written and an opportunity to let the school department go and explore options and opportunities for the city to be given free money. I don't think that's a bad thing, Mr. President. We get elected to make tough decisions. And if there comes a point in time when there's a room full of students and a room full of firefighters that are sitting here arguing about whose project is going to get funded, I think that everybody behind this rail is committed to the understanding that public safety is our first priority, Mr. President. But we will be the ones that have to make that tough decision. But that's what we're here for. Ultimately, Mr. President, all this is, is the school district seeking permission to go and sit down and have a conversation. That's what this is, the school district sitting down to have a conversation. As such, Mr. President, I've made a motion to move for approval. I make a motion to end all debate. Move the question.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. Clark, could you read the amendment, please?
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, motion to end all debate requires a two-thirds roll call vote.
[Michael Marks]: Vice President Mox. Thank you, Mr. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Point of parliamentary inquiry, Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Non-debatable motion.
[Adam Knight]: No, it's up to Robert's Rules of Orders.
[Michael Marks]: Why aren't we in the debate? We just got the paper tonight. We're in the debate now? We just got the paper tonight.
[Adam Knight]: We're in the debate? Do we want to allow the school district to move forward and pursue whether or not they have an opportunity to receive free grant money? based upon the history of the council. That's what we're here discussing. Voting in favor of hiring a grant writer.
[Michael Marks]: That's what we're here discussing.
[Adam Knight]: So the question is yes or no. Do we want him to go forward and apply or not?
[Michael Marks]: Why do you want to end debate? Where are we going with this?
[Adam Knight]: We're discussing it. It doesn't seem to me like it's going anywhere. It doesn't seem to me like it's going anywhere.
[Michael Marks]: Oh, maybe to you it doesn't. The rest of us have questions. Well, there's a motion on the floor. It's an undebatable motion that requires a two thirds vote. Mr. President. Again, you want to stifle the people's speech again.
[Adam Knight]: Yeah. Pretty sure three times in 10 minutes has been met. Mr. President.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. So for the last question, the chair is just giving, I let you speak. Okay. Do I, or do I not have the chair? I have the floor. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Knight is correct.
[Michael Marks]: I call for it.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Knight to end all discussion, and it takes a two thirds vote, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Clerk]: Yes. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Second. I second the original motion, that is adopted.
[Clerk]: Councilor Layton. Councilor Caraviello. Vice-President Marks. No. Councilor Scarpelli. No. Vice-President Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: No. Two in the affirmative, six in the negative, motion fails. Councilor Dello Russo has the floor.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, I had the floor before that, Mr. President. No, Councilor Dullos, you... No, no, no, he said it was undebatable. He said it was undebatable.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dullos, you had the floor when you were asking that question. Thank you. Councilor Layton, do you have any more to add? That was my motion, Mr. President. Thank you. Motion fails. Councilor Marks, do you want to add anything?
[Michael Marks]: I do, mister, I have a question for the superintendent.
[Richard Caraviello]: Speak.
[Michael Marks]: Are we here tonight? Speak. To discuss, the superintendent came up here, took his time out of his busy schedule. No one's denying you an opportunity to speak. We're just trying to deny freedom of speech. I was not trying to deny you.
[Richard Caraviello]: The people, the board spoke, and you were able to speak.
[Michael Marks]: The board spoke is right, and I'm thankful for my colleagues that know what this legislative process is all about. You have the floor, Vice President. I know I do, thank you, keep them interrupting. And I wanna thank my colleagues, that had the gumption, Mr. President, to allow this dialogue to keep going on and not be rubber stamps. Mr. Superintendent, are you willing to put together a priority list, as Councilor Wendell Kern mentioned, in the SOI? It seems like this is an ongoing, fluid discussion with the state. Are you willing to do that?
[Roy Belson]: I think that the school committee would meet to talk about that. And we could sit together, because I'm not going to speak solely for them. They have a right to determine what they would consider priorities within this list. And they're not going to meet for another two weeks. And so I think that that slows this down. This is due in a very short period of time into the state. And I think that we can always send you a priority list afterwards. But the things we would prioritize in our discussions with the state. But I think you should allow us to go forward and to get this going. I mean, it doesn't hurt. You're not committing anything in terms of money. You're just allowing us to submit an application to the state so that we can be heard with their team that evaluates issues. And they won't even get to us for a couple of months, I'm sure. They won't even get to us for a short period of time. But having said that, we have to be in. Because there are other communities going to submit as well. And if we're not in, we don't get any consideration. So I think I'll be happy to bring that up with the school committee to give you some sort of what they consider priorities within this list. But I don't think you should stop it tonight.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. Superintendent, if I could. And I don't think anyone behind this reeling, and I'll speak for myself, was looking to stop this tonight. We were looking to ask questions, Mr. Superintendent. And that's not confused questioning with being in opposition. It's part of the process. It's part of the process. I know this is an early step, and it's the first step, and now we're hearing April 7th is the deadline. No surprise, not for you, but no surprise to this council, because we're always presented with, oh, the deadline's next week. Make a decision. You can't table it for a week, because the deadline's next week. So we're always presented that way. But I'm not going to stand in the way of this tonight, Mr. Superintendent. I think what Councilor Lungo-Koehn offered about going back, and if you need to go back to the school committee and get a priority list, I think that's a great suggestion, Mr. Superintendent, to do that. And I would ask that that be done. And I would also ask that this council be privy to any discussions that you are having with the state regarding projects, of which projects may be taken off the board, which projects may be added to the SOI. So we're up to date and not just presented something on the last hour again for approval. And I would ask that you keep this council privy to that information, Mr. President.
[Roy Belson]: I certainly have no problem with any of that. I think, you know, look, let's not kid ourselves. Any project to go forward needs a school committee, needs the mayor, needs the city council, and needs the state. So there's a lot of deliberation that's going to have to take place and a lot of prioritization that's going to take place. But if you're only asking me to go back to the school committee and sit down and ask them to tell you what's most important to them, happy to do that. I think that that's a good thing. But I don't think we should stop getting in on the into the state with this so we can continue to move and get them to come out to us sooner rather than later. Because everybody's going to be submitting. And if we're the last one in the door, maybe our review date doesn't happen until August, September, October, whatever the case may be.
[Michael Marks]: I was told, just so you know, there's no priority according to when the SOI is received. So whether the last one in the door, first one in the door, second one in the door, I was also told that they're not going to look at applications or make any recommendations until December. of 2017, so there's plenty of time, and I'm just asking that we be part of any discussions that are ongoing. You will have my support here tonight, Mr. Superintendent. I could just tell you eventually, and as a longtime member of this council, eventually when something comes before us, whether it's a year, two or three years before us, and if it does, if and when it does require, maybe require a proposition two and a half override, you will not have my support. And I just want to let that be known right now because I'm not going to hold back any punches. You know, I voted not to have the combined center because we were told that it would require a proposition two and a half override for the police and fire. And, you know, we have a library coming down the pike pretty soon with some grant funding. We're going to have this project, and eventually we're going to have the fire department coming down. So I would just ask that whatever's done, that it stay within the confines of our budget without a proposition two and a half override.
[Roy Belson]: I respect your right to make those decisions, and, you know, I understand them. I mean, I'm not a rookie. I've been here a long time, and I've been in and out of these meetings many times, asking for funding and other forms of support. So I respect that. But it's important that you know your options, and that's all I'm asking you to know. Know your options.
[Richard Caraviello]: Counsel Max, are you finished? Thank you, Mr. President. Counsel De La Rosa.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you very much, Mr. President. And thank you, Mr. Superintendent, for your leadership and your clarity and your foresight. The way I understand this request, it is to get us, as you've presented, into the door and to have items for discussion on the table for us to see what can be funded and what we can receive help with. I'm all in favor of a priority list from the school board. My concern with priority lists from anybody is that they be responsible. and that they have in mind a larger picture that though this body makes the final decision that we all share a responsibility in. I approve of this request and I will support it, Mr. Superintendent. I must say that I hope that when we get into further discussion on how or in what way some of this money and some of these grants might be directed, that we're able to address some of the money that we've spent in the past on the same thing several times. It seems as though we're chasing leaks in those roofs and replacing them and spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on those roofs in a frequent manner. I'm concerned about that, and I hope we can get to the bottom of the top of the building. And so I think I've said enough, and I think perhaps we've heard enough tonight. And so I'd like to move approval, Mr. President.
[Roy Belson]: Thank you. Mr. President, just one quick thing to counsel, if I may. Just that we did an infrared study of the high school roof. We will repair those things that need to be repaired for about $25,000 this summer. OK, that's about all we need to do. The long-term renovation or repair or reconstruction of the roof is five to six years out. And, you know, if we were to take it to the end. So that's really where we're at. We had a couple of very difficult snow periods a few years ago where shoveling was required on the roof to avoid collapse and the like that may have done some damage in certain areas, and we need to repair those. But other than that, the roof's got another five, six years.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[Roy Belson]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Mr. Caraviello, through the chair, I just want to ask for clarification. So we're asking for a priority list and we're asking, I mean, I guess it would be a good compromise. Are we asking to keep the document as is and then put the priority list in there? Did you state that, Councilor Marks? Put the priority list within the application? I thought I heard you say that it will be within the document.
[Michael Marks]: We could put in the document, or the superintendent says he sits down and meets with the state, so I have no problem with him presenting the priority list. So it doesn't, I don't care about the avenue it gets to the state.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Okay, yeah, I just would like to add that, that our priority list that is drafted within the next week or two, even be added as an attachment to the application, so that the state knows, yes, we're looking for everything, but these are our top, whatever it might be, 10, 11, 12 things that we need done within the next five to 10 years that we're going to be putting money forward anyway for. And we would love some state reimbursement. I think that I'd just like to add that to the paper. And I'd also like to just point out that I think I heard that this document maybe was produced in September. And I think the school committee voted on it on the 6th of February, which was a month and a half ago. And for some reason, it came before us tonight with only a week or two left before it's actually due. So in the future, it would be nice to, obviously the school committee has the right to review and to discuss first, but a little bit sooner so that maybe we could prepare a little bit more. We got it on Friday. I think a lot of us review our packet over the weekend, leaving us only a couple days to form questions, do research, make calls, and get the questions we want answered before we have to vote on it. And it always just feels, not just, no offense to the superintendent, but no matter what we're presented, half the time, especially if it's something important, we're giving it the week of and it's just not the right way to run a city and to be transparent with not only us as the people who are elected to make the votes, but to the people who are electing us who are going to come and ask us the questions or who asks us the questions after they hear the meeting. So I think just think in the future and I'll say that all the time and whether or not it happens, highly unlikely, but I think it's extremely important to be more transparent and to give the city council more time for review.
[Roy Belson]: Thank you. So Mr. President, if I could just respond. I mean, I feel I have to. The document you're referring to in September was a different document. That's the capital plan that came from the mayor through the school committee. The document you have in front of you was approved by the school committee on February 6th after a committee of the whole meeting that they had the week before on that. And you received it, what do you call it, tonight. because, what do you call it, you were busy dealing with other capital considerations, in particular the police station and other things like that, so they confused those two items. But the reality is that that's the two things. And the other point I guess I would make is that the state has a form. We filled out the form. You don't add to the form. We'll be happy to provide that priority list to them, but the form is the form. That's what you submit. You don't add things to an application that is not required. I think that would be not consistent with the way you make a submittal. But certainly, we respect the right that the council has asked, and we certainly will honor that, to come up with a priority list, provide it to you, and provide it to MSBA, as part of the discussions that take place. Thank you. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I would, uh, my point was to be, uh, in support of that priority list attachment in so much as it, uh, it doesn't act as a hindrance or as an appropriate in that forum. I, uh, trust that the superintendent, uh, through the process of meetings, uh, with the authority and, uh, his presence and his negotiating skills won't lead us to be bamboozled.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor DelaRosso. And Mr. Superintendent, I thank you for your leadership. Our technical school and high school has moved forward in the last few years under your guidance, and I hope to see it continue moving forward.
[Roy Belson]: Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. I think we have somebody that wants to speak in back here.
[Michael Marks]: Okay.
[Richard Caraviello]: Excuse me, Mr. Penta, the gentleman was first.
[McKillop]: Name and address of the record, please. David McKillop, 94 Rock Glen Road. I was listening to all the conversation tonight, and I guess being a business person, I'm all about planning. It seems to be that for whatever reason, we're struggling with planning. One of the things that really strikes me as curious is the MSBA. The MSBA was presented. Now, when it was presented is the question, because if it was presented Two months ago, six months ago, a year ago, then you may have had the opportunity to actually get more information a lot sooner. So that should be a question that should be asked. When is the MSBA turn around and say, hey, when does the door open?
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. Subbotin, can you answer the gentleman's question?
[Roy Belson]: The MSBA opens up a window for statements of interest in January and then expects it to follow through by the April date. They actually pushed it out a little bit this year. Normally it's in March, but they open up the window for the SOIs in January.
[McKillop]: Okay, thank you. So that's the first thing. So if it's being opened up in January, the meeting is being done in February, the finalization is then, now it's March, April, really the window is much, much smaller than you might actually anticipate. So the question isn't answered in the respect of how to plan this better. So now, to be proactive, the next time the MSBA opens up, I think as a city council, I personally, if it were me, would say, hey, the next time this opens, we want from day one to know when and how and what we need to do. We want to be part of that. So when the school committee goes into the committee of the whole, the discussion is made, you're already aware something's going to be coming to your desk. And I think that would help. To me, again, looking at a business perspective, I've been in business for 14 years. My business needs a facelift really, really bad. So if you guys want to help me with that, please contribute. But in order to do that, four years ago, I had to start planning for this coming year, not 2017, 2018. Four years ago, I started to put that plan together. Four years ago, I did a cost analysis. Four years ago, we started to meet with people that could help us put this project together. This year we're meeting with a designer who's going to take an entire year to put this together. So I don't understand how we're looking at the police station, the fire station, the high school, and we're saying, oh my God. The world is coming to an end today when this has been happening for 10, 15, 20, 30 years. So the other thing I ask is, where's the plan? We just heard that it would be five years out for a new roof. Where's the plan? Do we have a plan in front of us? Do we know how much it's gonna cost in five years? Have we started to map that out? Are we planning for that? Secondly is, if we're going to get 40 more years out of this high school, Okay. What's the plan in 40 years? What's the new high school? Let's be visionaries and let's try to figure out how we can make this happen in the future for all of the people that are voting for you and all the people in this community. Because I look at Medford as a gateway city. Cambridge is maxed out. Somerville's maxed out. This is the next city on the line. You want it to be Medford or do you want it to be Malden or do you want it to be Everett? I think you guys really have to take a look at that and start planning ahead and putting your best foot forward, because if you don't start investing now, it's going to catch up later on. Thank you. Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: Name and address of the record, please. Robert Penter, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass., former member of this board. With all due respect to the superintendent, I appreciate the fact that he was here. Knowing that in January that the application is out there, And knowing that the school committee met, I believe, a week before February 6th, it really doesn't give much time, whether it be for the school committee or even before the city council. You know, and this is something I believe, Mr. President, that you should have been advised of in a joint meeting between the school committee and the city council. While the council may have a lot of priorities and financial obligations to meet, that should be not an excuse or a red herring to say that's the reason why they didn't sit down or bring this out sooner. It's not right, it's not fair, it doesn't make any sense. The job is here to deal with everything that this city involves you with. Finances, education, whatever it might be. And if you have to meet more than one night a week, wow, what a shame that would be. Maybe if you met three or four times a week and you made the mayor become involved in all of this and make you to become involved with this, you'd have a better handle on what's going on. Mr. Superintendent, you state on your document that you are submitting, you state, the school which is structurally unsound or otherwise in a condition seriously jeopardizing the health and safety of school children where no alternatives exist. You go on further to state that the renovation that took place in 2013 regarding the science labs for which the Medford City Council discussed on more than one night, I believe it was four times, and as a result of that, part of that was because of recertification with the Commonwealth of Mass. And further, the fact of the matter is that the building has not since then been renovated to meet ADA compliance standards and fire code standards that are needed to be current. Now, how can our city allow that building right now not to go forward and have those requirements met? That should be something that the school committee addresses on an annual basis. That's an everyday thing. You're talking about the safety of the children in the school. You indicate at that point in time, you indicate that the fire code would be approximately $1,200,000 to do an upgrade on that. You also indicated that there is no way to close off the sections of the building. to prevent citizens to enter restricted areas during non-school hours. You can go back to 1991, when I was sitting up there as president of the council, and that was an issue that was presented to us as it relates to out-of-towners coming to Medford High School that were not certified to be there. And in 2012, it was Councilman Marks who brought up the issue regarding the community schools on people coming in and out of the buildings. And now you're talking about maybe having a program that cuts down the entrances, where and how you can get in? You can walk up to that high school right now at any point in time, after hours, and walk into that building, and there's nobody there to check you in or to check you out. It's totally unfair. It's not right. I can appreciate the fact that you might want to do all of these things now, but I beg the question, where has the school committee been on each and every one of these budgets, on each and every one of these years, especially on ADA compliance, especially on fire code compliance? That's the thing that's necessary each and every day, that a child goes to school. That's what you pay your taxes for. That's what a parent believes their elected officials are doing. They're making sure and ensuring that their children are protected when they go to school each and every day. Mr. Belson further stated, with all due respect, that in next year's budget he's going to put a dollar amount in there for school renovations or school upgradings, whatever it might be. We've been talking about this thing for years. The new school building program had a 5% annual charge that the city was supposed to put in each and every one of those new buildings to maintain themselves. And now, Councilor Caraviello, Mr. President, it's well over a million dollars. The buildings are less than, they're going on 14 to 15 years. We're right back to where you were in the beginning as the reason why you had to build new schools, because the maintenance didn't take place. Granted, Medford High School is a big school. It's a big school to take place. But you've got three roofs, three brand new roofs on that building, and now you're looking at a fourth one. The question then becomes, is the quality of the work not right? Are we not checking out to make sure that the quality of the work is not right? Are we just paying to have something done? Another part that I really think that needs to take place to be discussed is the fact that, you know, this is such an important issue because this isn't a million dollars or two million dollars. This is well in excess of your $10 million, Councilor Marks. The school committee should be here sitting with you And you, Mr. President, I would hope you would call for a joint meeting between the school committee to consider as you go forward on this particular project. You people got hit with this cold turkey tonight. You should have been called ahead of time to have a committee of the whole meeting to discuss it. It's before the bodies, before the public here tonight. And to shut off debate on millions of dollars being discussed is wrong.
[Richard Caraviello]: Debate was not shut off. Point of information, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: It's not relative to millions and millions of dollars, it's relative to whether or not we're going to authorize the school district to sit down and meet with the Massachusetts School Building Assistance Program to determine whether or not there are any grant funding opportunities that are competitive in nature for the city of Medford to pursue.
[Robert Penta]: And if that be the case, that's a dollar amount attached to it. Because the application before the school building assistance program, no matter what they allow, is going to have a dollar amount attached to it. That dollar amount has to be paid for by the city as to what portion of it they're going to accept, if not all of it or part of it. It's a dollar amount. You should never shut off anybody, colleague or citizen, at the podium. This is the only place you have an opportunity. Nobody was shut off. I just said you should not shut off anyone. There was an attempt to end debate. Nobody was shut off. I said there was an attempt to end debate, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President. One information, Councilor Knight. Robert's Rules of Order have been adopted by the City Council as a standard to be used in the deliberation and discussion in the governing of our meetings. Section 18 of Robert's Rules of Order was raised. Thank you. Section of 18 of Robert's Rules of Order failed. No big deal.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you. Robert's Rules of Order also allows Public participation, Mr. President. Public participation is allowed. I don't want to hear it again. What is that, a threat?
[Richard Caraviello]: Is that a threat, Mr. President? I have a right to say what I want.
[Robert Penta]: This is a public forum, and I have a right to say what I want. Thank you very much. Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dello Russo. This is a meeting of the Medford City Council.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you. Mr. President, Mr. Belson also alluded to the fact that, and he's probably right in part, but he says we need to be partners with the state. We need to be partners between and amongst ourselves, council, school committee people, to get the best of ideas that need to go forward. I can appreciate the fact that he wants to submit something now and you can't change it because the form is there, but it's been hanging around since January of this year. That's the sad part, since January of this year. School committee allegedly only met once, if I understand that correctly. And if that be the case to discuss it, they probably didn't have the same opportunities, and I don't know. Maybe the superintendent presented what he thought the priorities might be. I don't know. None of us know, because we haven't had that opportunity. That's why not having joint meetings with our other legislative body hurts the process that's before you. It hurts the idea that you can get a better idea as to why and how it's going on. You get a better idea what the cost is going to be. You can get a better idea what the priorities are going to be. As the gentleman just came up here, Mr. McAuliffe, as he relates to the fact of how he has to run his business and what he has to plan for. No matter what the outcome is of this, whether they give you $1 million, $5 million, or $6 million, worthy, worthy of work to be done. You still have no priority program as it relates to any comprehensive financial program as to where this city is going. Police, fire, retirement board that needs to be paid. The deficit as it relates to the retirement fund, $28 million that the city has. Again, nobody wants to discuss that and how you're going to go forward with that. And more importantly, a fire and police department. Does that mean now fire and police are going to be separated? Or is it not going to be separated? You haven't even gotten a final answer as it relates to the police department going forward. If they take down the station over there for the training tower for the fire department, and you're going to go to a regional location, that's going to put the fire department at issue for backup, because they're going to have to send their truck and their men to that regional location. A public safety issue.
[3UkqIlWnJXM_SPEAKER_08]: One information, Councilor Knight. Training tower is being addressed by a working group that's headed up by the chief and made up of members of the fire department's training division. I do also believe that their wish, inclination, desire, and focus is to have a training tower that's located in the city of Medford that may be open to regional communities.
[Adam Knight]: However, it would be maintained, dictated, and controlled by the city of Medford. That's based upon some meetings that I've had with the training team and the administration, Mr. President.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Mr. President, the Medford Public Schools as in the commentary from the superintendent, would like to meet with state and local governments as it relates to current code, including fire doors, fire alarms, sprinkler systems, and safety conditions. All things that right now are in potential violation are, if not in violation, as we presently speak. After the new, I believe we all can remember, after the new science labs were built, there was a major problem for almost a year where a fire person had to be up at the high school because the fire system, the fire alarm system didn't work as it related to something happened, whether through the electrical department or what have you. Then, if I understand this correctly, in Mr. Belson's commentary, And I agree with you 100%. You said any decision regarding the specific projects and the financial commitments would be developed over time and after multiple meetings within city government and at the state level. Well, at least he's got the ability to understand and recognize that city government officials need to sit down and discuss it, much more than the person who calls herself the mayor of this community. This is a big issue, whether you want to realize it or not. The building is 50 years old. You're talking about the same fire and police station that's down there right now. Maintenance didn't take place in the building. Now, a lot of these things are maintenance driven, whether they be fire, whether they be the windows, whether they be the boiler or what have you, the asbestos. It's a big building. I think it's four and a half miles long, Mr. Superintendent. 550,000 square feet, whatever it might be. It was built at a time to be a college campus type of a school. But that's not the point. You're getting a lot of this all at once. Maybe, to some degree, maybe, whether it's the cafeteria or whatever the auditorium is that they... Maybe if you just stuck to the real desperate needs that the building has on a slow annual basis, you can look at these other things and put them into the budget. Let me just remind you, and I'll just leave you with this last thought. Just look at the city of Somerville. Look at all the development that's taken place over there. All the development. Okay? Many, many more jobs, and their taxes keep on going up. You don't have that opportunity here in the city of Medford, because if we're going to follow the mainstream of Somerville and taxing the citizens of this community to pay for bond indebtedness that you can't afford, and as Council Marks and others have alluded to, you're going to get yourself into a Proposition 2.5 override, it'll lose. Everyone behind this council, I guarantee you, will lose if you'll be supportive of that, if you're serving at that point in time. You need to plan ahead. And when you plan ahead, you'll be able to address these issues. These have been long overdue. This is a shame. Prior school committees ought to hang their head in embarrassment for allowing this to go this long. And so should the city of Medford, because that's been their downfall, letting their buildings run into a demise situation year in and year out. And now you're going to pay the price for it.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, move the question. Second.
[Roy Belson]: As amended, Mr. Belson, do you want to finish up with anything? I just want to finish a couple of quick statements, if I may, with your permission. First of all, some of the things that were quoted were quoted as the priorities of the state. When they say the building structurally unsound, that's not what we're saying. That's what the state is using as a category for things that you can put things under. When the building says that the renovation of schools such as roofs, that's what they're saying you can ask for. That's not what we're saying is our need. That's the first thing. As far as handicapped accessibility, we put in three elevators, ramps, we've made the Little Theater or the Karen Theater now handicapped accessible. The building is handicapped accessible. There are a lot of things, and with all due respect to, I understand there's a give and take here, but the reality is that a lot of improvements have been made to that high school and that technical school, and you have helped to pay for it over the years as a city council and as a school committee. The school committee had a right, when this thing came out, to deliberate and determine what it considered to be important and to talk about it. And they had a committee of the whole. And they then had a follow-up meeting where they voted it. You're getting it. And all we're asking is for you to allow us to submit it so we can then begin a process of finding out what's possible. And then we can have a more robust interactive process between council, school committee, mayor, administration, to determine what this city considers important, what this city wants to fund on its own, what this city wants to partner with, and what we're going to do in what time frame. And that's all we're looking for tonight.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Belson. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo, seconded by Councilor Knight and Falco. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor McCoy? Yes. Vice President Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Caviar?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. Motion passes. Thank you very much. Thank you. While we're under suspension, by confirmation. I don't get to speak on this?
[3UkqIlWnJXM_SPEAKER_04]: I don't get to speak? We're done with that issue, Mr. Bignone. But you said that we could still speak. You said you weren't going to shut the- We're done with that issue, Mr. Bignone. That's why you lost in criminal court.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Motion's been disposed of.
[3UkqIlWnJXM_SPEAKER_04]: That's why you lost in criminal court.
[Richard Caraviello]: Excuse me, 17307, the 306, excuse me, 311. Request for expenditure from the law department claims over $1,000. Account 0101515762 to the President and members of the Honorable City Council for Mayor Stephanie M. Burke. Claimant name Mary Bradley versus City of Medford. Date of accident March 26, 2016. Motion to waive the ratings. Name and address for the record, please.
[k3Xg1illaRI_SPEAKER_15]: Thank you, Mr. President. Kimberly Scanlon, Assistant City Solicitor for the City of Medford. I reside at 75 Ashcroft Road in Medford. The brief synopsis is, in this case, the claimant, 62 years old, a Medford resident, slipped and fell in March of last year right around 392 Main Street. As a result, she broke several bones in her left foot, including twisting her left ankle. She was treated, the proper release has been obtained, and her medical bills were in excess of $5,616. To clarify, this also includes an approximately $1,900 medical lien. And if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer them.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may? Councilor Knight, has the street defect been repaired?
[k3Xg1illaRI_SPEAKER_15]: Across the street, it has. That particular location, though, in anticipation of your question, Councilor, I went out today to look at the property. and took pictures. That area that technically a lot of Main Street could use improvement. So I submitted an inquiry to DPW again to make sure that that particular area, as well as across the street, which was previously fixed, is repaired as well.
[Adam Knight]: Excellent. Mr. President, I'd also move for approval. I'd request that the solicitor forward that information to the council when she receives it. Thank you. Council Member O'Connor.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I just want to go on record abstaining a conflict of interest.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn has a conflict of interest. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo, seconded by Councilor Knight. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Yes. Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Lungo-Koehn? Vice President Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one abstention. Motion passes. Thank you very much.
[k3Xg1illaRI_SPEAKER_15]: Thank you, Mr. President. Members of the Council.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion by Councilor Dela Ruzzo to move back to regular business. Hearings. 1700 Grants of Location, Medford, Massachusetts City Clerk's Office. You're here notified that by order of the City Council, public hearing will be given in Howard Alden-Murray Autorium, 85 George B. Hassett Drive, City Hall, Medford, Massachusetts. 7 o'clock p.m. Tuesday, March 21st, on a petition of National Grid for permission to the locations of means as hereinafter described for the transmission and distribution of gas in and under the following public streets, lanes, highways, in places the City of Medford, in the end of pipes, valves, Governors, manholes, and other structures, fixtures, and... Motion by Councilor Layton to waive the reading. Is the applicant here this evening?
[Clerk]: Those in favor, those opposed?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Name and address of the record, please.
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Matthew Carmody, National Grade 170, Medford Street, Malden.
[Richard Caraviello]: Are you in favor of this project? Yes. Thank you. Do I hear anybody else in favor of this project? Hearing and seeing none, that part of the meeting is closed. Is there anyone here in opposition of this project? Hearing and seeing none, that part of the meeting is closed. Name and address of the record, please. Again.
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Matthew Carmody, National Grade 170, Medford Street, Malden.
[Richard Caraviello]: You can give us a brief synopsis of the project, please.
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Yes, we currently have a cast-iron main that goes up through a lot that's for a new waypoint building going up. We need to relocate 52 feet of 4-inch down the street, about 100 feet to cross, so it goes into the easement for a new main to go up the side so they can do their construction safely.
[Richard Caraviello]: And this is Winthrop Street up by Smith Lane, is that correct? Correct. And how much of the street will you be digging up?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Well, part of the project is about 430 feet. and that's for a main replacement on a leak-prone pipe, along with the association of 52 feet that will be crossing Winthrop Street to the easement for the new main.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Mr. President, first of all, I want to preface my remarks by saying I approve of this project and support of it, and I'm in support of it. However, I urge our friends from the utility company that they need to be extra sensitive to the neighbors in that area. They've been under tremendous duress of recent times with construction, repaving, utility work in that vicinity, and it's created great stress and unease with them. So it's essential that all efforts be made to prevent inconveniences to anybody who's there, whose houses may abut this digging. We don't want to hold up construction at all, but at the same time, we want to preserve the tranquility of those who reside there and see to it that the street is returned to its pristine condition.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Donovan.
[George Scarpelli]: Chairman Scarpelli. If I can, the dates publicly for the project, when are you looking to start?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: We're looking to start this upcoming Monday.
[George Scarpelli]: Monday? Yes. And the times of hours of work?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: That would be under the direction of the engineering department from the city. That has not been discussed yet, but we do a pre-construction walk once it's been approved by yourself.
[George Scarpelli]: OK. Now, has anyone in the engineering department talked about the, I believe that street's going to be dug up again in a few weeks, correct? Is it maybe a few months?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah, coming down the lines. Is it three years? Yeah, a year or two. All right.
[George Scarpelli]: So again, I think just reiterating, just making sure that the sidewalk, you know, anything that's where people are walking, excuse me, the street, that it's put back where, and then revisited again in six months, making sure that there was no dippage or, you know, so any future holes later. Understood. Okay. Um, everything else. See, that's an order. So I move for approval.
[Adam Knight]: Um, Mr. President, uh, I am sure Mr. Kamadi is familiar with the area in the neighborhood. Um, and I'm sure he's also aware that we do have a public school in the vicinity of the location where they're going to be doing construction. Um, it's my understanding as he just stated that the construction schedule will be up to the office of the city engineer. Um, I'd ask the city engineering office by way of an amendment or a second paper, um, restrict the construction during the rush hour periods when schools drop off and school pickup is occurring, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor. Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Will there be any limitations for people using the driveways?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: If there is anyone affected during the day for their driveways, our foreman on site will coordinate with them to let them know when they can go in and out. If not, we can also put a plate down for them to access the driveway, but only be for a day period, if anything, and they'd be notified prior.
[Michael Marks]: So when will they receive notification?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: 48 hours in advance. The new foreman will try to notify, leave a door hanger out on the door if they're going to be in front. We also post no parking signs in the location that we will be trenching for that day to let residents know.
[Michael Marks]: And are there any expectations regarding the traffic flow? Are you going to have to close a partial lane? Or is there any consideration with that?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: We should be able to keep two lanes of traffic flowing since our new installation will be in the curb line closer to the side. So we won't have any issue keeping traffic flow. As many details are needed will be directed by direction of the captain. And whatever is needed for traffic flow, we certainly will do.
[Michael Marks]: So you already have a detailed plan from the police department?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: That is an on-site meeting that takes place at the start of the job.
[Michael Marks]: Say that again?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: The direction of how traffic is set up is an on-site meeting that happens at the prior or at the start of the job. Because the beginning of the job is only verification holes, which is a very small portion of the roadway that will be taken up. Before trenching begins, it is under that direction.
[Michael Marks]: So prior to Monday, because you said Monday the construction is going to start?
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Once this is approved, then we can move forward with anything that needs to be done prior to construction. But we need approval from the council first.
[Michael Marks]: Right, but that traffic impact of mitigation will take place prior to the start date. Yes. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Councilor Knight, when the streets resurfaced, who's responsible for the striping? We normally are responsible for the striping, unless the city has future plans.
[Adam Knight]: And you are aware that there is a bike lane that's been put along Winthrop Street in that vicinity? Yes. OK. Thank you very much.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Scarpelli, as seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Thank you very much.
[-8Uy-JvGvpg_SPEAKER_22]: Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motions, orders, and resolutions. 17303, offered by Councilor Knight, be it resolved that the DPW commissioner provide the council with the schedule for crosswalk and roadway re-striping. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, I put this forward two weeks ago. I guess it was wishful thinking, then the snow came, and here we are. It's not spring yet. However, I'm just wondering when the DPW is going to go out and begin restriping our crosswalks and our streets. We have some faded paint out there that is annually in the need of repair and replacement. And I would like the DPW commissioner to provide us with a schedule as to when that is going to occur. I'd ask my council colleagues to join me in supporting this resolution and move for approval.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Councilor. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: If I can just add on to that, I know that it might be, I know that, uh, Mr. Cairns did respond to us about Evans street, but didn't respond back on Paris street. So if you can just, uh, if you could just reach back, uh, come back to us with a response on the repaving of Paris street. Thank you.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Councilor.
[Richard Caraviello]: Council President Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, I know this is a topic of yours with the thermoplastic painting. During this year's MMA show, I went there. I had an opportunity to meet with the company that does the, that sells the thermoplastic painting. And I met with some other city officials who have done the thermoplastic painting. Not on all the lines or anything, but they have at least done the crosswalks at different schools in different places. And they said that the thermoplastic lasts five to six years, and it's been a win for them. And I'd like to see us do that again this year. I know you've championed this for many years, But again, I think it's something that it should be done. The company even said they would come down here and do one for free to show us how it would work. And I think we should take them up on it. And I say at least to do the crosswalks, the schools, and different things like that. You don't have to do the whole city with them. And I would like to amend that.
[Michael Marks]: As amended. On the motion, if I just could add, Council President Caraviello is absolutely correct. The thermoplastic crosswalks are highly reflective, they're slip resistant, they have a life expectancy of four to five years, and they're cost effective in the long run.
[Richard Caraviello]: Bill O'Regan said six years, they've gotten out of this.
[Michael Marks]: Six years. The state uses them for the state highway and many of their projects. So it's a very effective and efficient way of laying down a painted crosswalk. without the upkeep year to year of repainting. So on the motion by Councilor Dello Russo for approval as amended by Councilor Scott Peli, as further amended by Councilor President Caraviello. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? The ayes have it. The motion is adopted.
[Clerk]: Thank you Mr. Vice President.
[Richard Caraviello]: 17-304, offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, be it resolved that the Medford City Council request an opinion as to if we can vote to change our zoning one section or even one street at a time. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. This is something that a number of residents and I have been discussing along with, I believe, a few other prior councilors something that this council is beginning to discuss and have meetings on in subcommittee. After doing some research with regards to how Seminole is handling their zoning changes, I read a few articles on it, and it sounds like they started their process about two years ago. And the last I read sometime this fall, they were still working on it. They're actively working on it. They've had community meetings. They've had subcommittee meetings. They've created a committee to review their zoning in its entirety. It seems like they're doing it extensively. Obviously, it's been brought up before that we should reach out to, I forget the gentleman's name, but reach out to the person from Somerville who is overseeing this project and get some ideas on how we can do it. But in the meantime, we have a situation where a number of huge developments have gone up, a number of highly dense residential dwellings have gone up, whether it be Luminaire, we have one coming up on Middlesex Ave, and obviously a couple of controversial properties that have come down the line and have created controversy, I should say. And it seems like the public and the public that have been reaching out to me and that I've been reading discussing these issues are interested in developing, they're interested in not seeing empty storefronts. Our residents are interested in redeveloping to a point where it's beneficial for the city and beneficial, how I should say it, beneficial for the neighborhood in a way that complements the neighborhood. And what we're seeing with regards to, especially in the past, the number of variances that have been allowed We're seeing a need for zoning change in this community, and we're seeing it, we're in need of it far prior to how long it would take this city council to review it in its entirety. So my question, and I haven't reviewed any acts, and I know Councilor Knight just mentioned an act, so he can bring that up, but I'm looking for an opinion, whether that be from our city solicitor or reaching out to Somerville, some way to find out if we, as a city council, can review whether it be a section of the city at a time, a street at a time. We know of developers who are very interested in developing in certain areas, and we want to make sure that we protect our neighborhoods. And you've seen that at the last few zoning meetings. The public have been forced to have to come to the table and bring their concerns and questions and downright just opposition to certain projects, which is unfortunate. You know, it does, whether or not zoning is going to be the solve-all, I don't think so, because we do still have the process of variances. But with the new board and with proper zoning changes, I think we can make this a better process, and I think we can protect our neighborhoods. So my question to our city solicitor would be, can we do this? Can we sit down as a committee of the whole and discuss, I think, the latest project, Salem Street, for example? Somebody else has mentioned Fountain Street is zoned apartment one. Can we take an individual section of our city and say, okay, what is zone where and this is the problem? And then call that street or section in for a meeting. I mean, ask the public to weigh in on what do you want to see in your residential neighborhood or your business districts that are right outside your residential neighborhood? seems like the administration is pushing for housing, housing, housing everywhere, which is not great for our infrastructure, our schools, our traffic, our parking problems that we have on so many different levels. And what I'm hearing from the people is we don't want to turn into Somerville, Cambridge, or Boston, these chairlifts we're talking about. We don't want to turn into Boston. We have more single-family districts or single-double-family districts in Medford than Cambridge and Somerville have, and people do not want to see us turn into Boston, and nor do I. Our schools can't handle it. Our streets, sidewalks, infrastructure, parking, traffic cannot handle it. And I think zoning is something that we need to discuss. Obviously, I have a long-term plan, but we need to discuss it. If we can do it in a quicker fashion, I think we need to at least explore that option. And this is one way that I think it could be possible, and I'm hoping that we get a positive result from it. And we can take those sections of our city that are plugged hotspots for developers and really figure out what's best for our neighborhoods.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you very much.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knife. Mr. President, I wholeheartedly support the resolution. I feel as though getting an opinion from the solicitor is a great start for this conversation. I also think it's very important for the council as we move forward to consider the impact that zoning has on our tax rate. Because we have a bifurcated tax rate, we have the ability to equitably shift the residential property tax burden from the residential properties to the industrial and commercially zoned properties. And now we're seeing a lot of use variances where they're going to try and eliminate these commercial and industrial properties. And it's very important that we maintain a good stock of commercial and industrial properties so that we do have the ability to provide residential property tax relief, Mr. President. So, moving forward, I think that's a very important aspect. of zoning here in the community. Councilor Lungo-Kerr was absolutely right. You know, when we go back and we think five, six, and seven years ago when the website, the real estate website Reddit found Medford, the first thing that they said was unbelievable tracks of open space and natural resources and a large stock of single family homes. And as we begin to develop and grow here in Medford, we're moving away from our large stock of single family homes and we're moving into high density apartments, Mr. President. And in some areas of the city, that's OK. And in some places, that's good. And the mixed-use growth, I think, is an excellent opportunity for us to pursue an equitable shift between the commercial, industrial, and residential tax properties and the burdens that are provided to the residents. But going forward, there are a number of issues that we need to look at. And I think that one of them would be maintaining a good balance of commercial and industrial zone properties, as well as increasing our stock of affordable housing. Because as our real estate market begins to thrive, the people that have lived in this community for so long and made Medford such a great place to live are being displaced. and they have no place to go. So they're actually getting forced out of Medford because they can no longer afford to live here. And our stock of affordable housing is so low at this point in time, Mr. President, there's really no other option for them but to leave the community that they helped make great. So I want to thank Councilor Lungo-Koehn for bringing this matter forward. I support it wholeheartedly, and I would anxiously await the solicitor's opinion.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Good motion. You both are 100% correct. On the motion by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, as seconded by Councilor Knight, name and address for the record, please.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Hi, I'm Cheryl Rodriguez. I live at 281 Park Street. And I'm pretty happy to see that this is coming up, because I've spoken here countless times about that we need to follow zoning. But the second part of that is that we also need to look at the zoning that we currently have and see if that zoning is working for us. I pulled out a zoning map of Medford today and I looked around my neighborhood and I saw that all of Salem Street and pretty much every street from Fulton Street to 93 was zoned apartment 1. And as I drove here and took 10 minutes to drive from Park Street to City Hall, which is pretty crazy because it's four blocks, all the traffic, I thought, can we really handle that many apartment buildings? on Salem Street in that area with traffic, with the school that's the largest elementary school in the city, and overcrowded? No, we can't. So we really need to move forward. I know that there is calls for hiring consultants, but that can take a lot of time. Anyone who attended the zoning meeting on the Salem Street project said, well, you know, one apartment building isn't going to do it. But they did have a stack of support letters from people that owned property on Salem Street. that would probably be the next buildings that come up and want to add apartment buildings. So that could be six more buildings in the next year or two, 10 more buildings. Then we'd swing around down Fountain Street and add another 10 or 15 or 20 buildings. And we would cripple that entire side of the city. We would change the dynamic. My parents have lived in that neighborhood for more than 15 years. It's a heavy owner-occupied neighborhood. I live on another side that's also heavily owner-occupied. More than 80% of Medford is owner-occupied. Shifting to more buildings where people are not coming out and talking to their neighbors is really not what Medford is about. And we really need to be cognizant of whether our quality of life is more important than just adding more buildings. Because when you add more buildings, they don't just drop tax money off at the city. They come with infrastructure needs. They come with costs. And do those costs exceed the tax money that we get? Because I know it looks great when it said, look, we got this much more tax money this year. But we really have to factor in our infrastructure costs as we see that we're short police and we're short fire. And I don't believe that these additional tax revenues that we're getting from the Lumiere's or the, I don't even want to say, but the Locust Street that hopefully will never happen, will not exceed the costs that they will add to our city. They'll diminish our quality of life. And we really need to think about that. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[McKillop]: Name and address of the record, please. David McKillop, 94 Rockland Road. Point to Councilor Knight. Being able to balance zoning is an incredibly important thing for a city to do because of the actual tax base. And having to be able to, or actually just being able to, increase the commercial tax base so you can actually either balance or decrease the residential tax base is an amazing prospect for the residents of Medford. And I think any resident in Medford would be more than happy to accept that kind of a balance or that shift in being able to kind of offset the burden. Secondly, being an old retailer, there is a major, major shift for shoppers to get out of the malls and get into neighborhoods, back into neighborhoods, back into what they call fabricated cities as you see in Somerville and in Wellington and up in, there's so many different places. So you really have to look at what we have. We have such great opportunity downtown and maybe reworking some of these zones to actually structure a future for that. This would be an excellent downtown for something like that. to be able to take advantage of the .75 tax, sales tax that you could take advantage of with additional restaurants and the hotel tax with the new hotel that's coming, you're really gonna position yourself to be able to go back to what we said earlier, which is plan for much bigger projects and better ideas. But you have to have the vision to understand that and you have to kind of try to fight your way towards that because I'll tell you, you've got a waterway, most cities don't. You've got such a proximity to Boston that most cities don't. You've got so many things working for us and in our favor that if we don't look at this and don't look at the rezoning, it's a missed opportunity for everyone. And I'm telling you right now, that's the opportunity to gain. That's the opportunity to look at, because that is where most people are gravitating towards when it comes to shopping. And they want that lifestyle. They want that hometown feel again. And I'm lucky enough to do business in a city like that, and that city does get it. And I can tell you the residents of that city, their tax burden year after year after year is constantly offset by people like myself and some other friends that do business in that city as well. And it's a great, great thing. So thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[McKillop]: Councilor Falco.
[Richard Caraviello]: I yield. Councilor Falco yields to the podium. Name and address of the record, please.
[Jean Nuzzo]: Thank you. Jean Nuzzo, 35 Parris Street. I think it's no secret that I am extremely passionate about both Medford and its development. I am totally heartened to see this come before the council. I think it is one of the most critical responsibilities that the City Council holds. Residents of this city make a social contract when we purchase here that where we purchase will stay similar, not the same, but similar to where we buy. And I think that we are in some ways under attack from developers around us that are starting to come in and cannibalize us. I'm concerned for people who've made the decision to age in place here in Medford. We historically have people come and stay for generations and that is with thought, not by accident. And I feel that if we're not careful, those families are going to be pushed out and Medford will be gentrified just as Somerville has been gentrified and Cambridge before it. I think Medford is in an enviable position. When you look at the surrounding cities, they don't have the green spaces that we have. When you look at their green maps, their teeny dots across the city, little islands, Medford has whole areas where we don't have development. And I think we have an opportunity to be very purposeful about what we do. I always liken Medford to a diamond in the rough, because I do believe that. If you know a jeweler, they won't cleave a diamond until they're sure of what they're doing. And Medford has areas that are ripe for development, but it should be development that we deem necessary. And so I would encourage this council to continue to move forward. And I would put forth for your consideration that we have a great deal of subject matter expertise within our city limits. There are many people who are very passionate about this specific topic and have good visions. I've talked with some of them. I've heard of some of them. And I think that we have committees for Walk Medford, Bike Medford, the arts, but we do not have a citizen representation. for development, which is the critical thing for our city. And I really think that that's one thing that's lacking because a good and meaningful committee or coalition of Medford residents with some subject matter expertise can help you in that, you know, and bring to bear. It's a big undertaking, but I'm glad to see it. And again, I would stress that in my mind and in my opinion, it is one of the most crucial things the crucial contracts that you have between your constituents, that you're going to, you know, look to protect the interest of the Medford residents, recognizing that developers coming in are buying and they're property owners, but they're not the same type of property owners that are going to be here and stay here. They're going to turn the property around and make their profit and usually leave. So, I'm very encouraged to see it. I appreciate the positive thoughts and I hope that we continue in this forward movement.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Falco. I yield as well. Councilor Falco yields to a gentleman from East Medford.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you, Council President. Name and address of the record, please. Andrew Castagnetti, Medford. Good development, I believe, most of the time is very good. It's just that, how was this now? How was I going to present this? especially if it's mixed use, a la station landing, because that's how the Roman Empire did business way back. If you lived here, if you worked here, you could eat downstairs, you didn't even need a bicycle, for God's sakes, in the T's there. It'd be nice to have one in Method Square someday also. Might as well get that in there again. Council President, however, when the new growth That's the new real estate taxes from these brand new developments that grow out of ground are not applied to offset the prop two and a half increases. This new growth doesn't help the taxpayer at all that pays real estate taxes. It hurts us because we have to get more schools, more teachers, more police, more fire. infrastructure. So I don't see how it helps us. As a matter of fact, it hurts us because the following year to the $100 million tax levy, they add the new growth, the 1.7 million, and then the two, prop two and a half, another two and a half million on top. Then they take two and a half percent of that greater number. Again, it's like the Russian lady used to say here 15, 20 years ago. It's like an annuity that keeps on giving, but at the cost of the real estate taxpayers here. I'd like to see the city to be a hopping place, because the location is strategic. It's probably the best in all of Massachusetts, proximity to Boston. There's a lot of open space. We're being jammed in in East Medford. I'm not sure, maybe we should secede from the city. It's a capital idea, possibly. Councilor Marks, you lived it yourself. West Medford can stay with Winchester, with your own zip code, by the way. Well, that's okay, because who's gonna pay for their services, the squeaky wheels? The salt won't be able to pay anymore if West Medford secedes. Good luck. You get all the money, but we have the territory. From Route 93 all the way to Fells Lake, this is like Donald Trump land, very valuable. If you ever have one of the two fires Chelsea ever had, hang on to your land. I like new growth. But if you don't use the real estate taxes, and by the way, who says you have to raise real estate taxes $1 or actually $2.5 million at 2.5% of last year's $100 million levy? Is there a law that says you have to? Thank you, Councilor Briana. I knew I liked you. Thank you for listening.
[John Falco]: Thank you. Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. And I thank Councilor Lungo-Koehn for bringing this forward tonight. I fully support the resolution. I have been pretty vocal about zoning since I've been on this council. And I made a resolution a year ago. The resolution is still in subcommittee, but I still firmly believe that we need to hire someone from the outside to come in and look at zoning in every neighborhood throughout this city. I understand going street by street, but every neighborhood needs to be looked at. It probably is the most important responsibility that we have, zoning as a board. That is one of our most important responsibilities. This needs to be looked at. It needs to be looked at sooner than later. I firmly believe that we need to bring in someone from the outside. I'll say it again. There's no one behind this reel that is qualified to look at zoning. I think we need an expert opinion on this. You talk about balanced zoning. You talk about different neighborhoods, residential versus commercial. the changes that are made, or the lack of changes that are made, really affect and impact the fabric of each neighborhood. So I want to just go on record, I do support this, but I also do think that we need to meet to address this and to bring in someone from the outside to look at this even further. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[George Scarpelli]: Councilor Scarpelli. Thank you, Mr. President. I, too, have have pushed for different avenues to oversee and review our zoning. And I'll say it again. I think the mayor mentioned it at her State of the City and reaching out to the Metropolitan Area Planning Council and getting their immediate sit down and set a plan with the city and the stakeholders to make sure that we could do what's right for our community and our vision. As Mr. McKillop said, Medford is the jewel. It's our term. You know, we have the Chevalier, we have the Mystic, we have the Fells, 93, Mystic Ave. There's so much. There's so much to plan in those areas. So again, if we can put an amendment, I appreciate Councilor Long and Kern for putting this in, but reaching out to the mayor and asking them, reaching out again to the Metropolitan Area Planning Council to set a plan in reviewing how we need to even start our process in zoning because things are happening so fast, it's going too fast. And we need to slow it down so we can all share our vision and what we think Medford should be and will be in years to come. So, thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Approval on the paper, Mr. President. On the motion by Councilor Alango-Kern as amended and seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor. Aye. Motion passes. Motion to suspend the rules.
[Adam Knight]: We just had a discussion about zoning. We just had a discussion about zoning. As I look at the agenda, Mr. President, we have a petition on a similar matter, 17307, a petition by Ms. Rodriguez, who was just up here speaking. I think it might be best to continue the discussion on zoning if we have two papers that are similar in nature. Name and address of the record, please. If you don't want to do it now, you can come back when you're not prepared.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: No, that's totally fine. I can do it now. I'm Cheryl Rodriguez at 281 Park Street. And yes, I tried not to say exactly what I was going to say for the petition when I came up earlier. But before I begin, a couple of things. I noticed that Councilor Falco wants to slow down and wait for a consultant. Or no, actually, Councilor Scarpelli slowed slow down. You said to get a consultant. And Councilor Scarpelli said to slow down and get the mayor's opinion. Unfortunately, that doesn't help me. I wrote it down, it's an exact quote.
[George Scarpelli]: I did not say, I get the mayor's opinion. I said the mayor mentioned at a State of the City that we would reach out to the Metropolitan Area Planning Council to get them involved, to start dialogue, to get us moving for zoning in our community. That's what I said.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: You didn't say to get the administration's opinion? Can we roll the tape back? Absolutely not. Because I wrote it down.
[Richard Caraviello]: Absolutely not. Point of order, Mr. President. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Perhaps it would be helpful that When speaking in the chambers, one ought not to put words in another's mouth.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you, if you could proceed. Thank you very much.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: OK. So either way, either of those courses is not going to help those of us living in the Salem Street area, because we are currently under siege. The first apartment building is on the block, and the line behind them is stretching all the way from Haines Square to 93, and it's taking a turn down Fountain Street. I can't wait a year. I can't wait six months for a consultant to come in and go, wow, are you crazy? You can't do that. Because there's already going to be six, 10 buildings already approved and ready to go, because it's apartment zoned. And all they have to do is say, we'll do three stories, and they're good to go. Because that's what the zoning says. This is an emergency. This needs to happen now. The Roberts Elementary School currently has 569 children. And just to put that into perspective, more than 100 of those students are ELL students that require extra services. So while the schools are built to hold 600 students, they are not built to hold 600 students where 100 of them need extra services in this and 50 of them need extra services in that, because those are extra spaces. So this is extremely important to me as I have a third grader in that school. and the largest third grade in the entire city at five classes and more than 100 students, just in the third grade, not including the ELL, not including the inclusion classes. So this is very important to me. This is very personal. but just to get back. So I think that we really need to consider this before we think about waiting for a consultant. This is one of the most important things that the city council's in charge of is zoning. And when zoning is going well, zoning is virtually invisible. For years, the zoning in Medford was virtually invisible. A lot of people went in and they got their decks and they added their extra parking spaces, but all of a sudden, some developers noticed a hole and they came in and they're trying to fill us in. And so now we're paying attention. So we need to look realistically at what these neighborhoods can handle. When we saw the traffic loads at the meeting that I attended for Salem Street, they recorded more than 1,000 cars per hour going down Salem Street. Think about that. That's a lot of cars. A lot of times that traffic is backed up. I tried to get to Haines Square over the weekend and the traffic was backed up almost to the Rotary at 93 on just a random Saturday. The zoning there calls for apartment buildings. Those apartment buildings can be three stories high and probably between 12 to 15 units. Imagine them on every plot on Salem Street and the street would just be closed. The neighborhood would be decimated. That is what the zoning intends for that area as a whole. And that may have been true when they created that zoning. It's no longer true. It's emergent that this council act to change that zoning. to a more appropriate scenario. What that scenario is, I can't say, but I can say that it's not apartments up and down Salem Street. We also need to consider the load of those additional residents on our infrastructure. Our police and our fire are understaffed. Our DPW is understaffed. So we really need to consider the quality of life also of people that are living in those areas. What are their expectations when they moved in? Because if you look at Salem Street, most of those buildings are one story. There are some two family houses mixed in. There's a couple of apartment buildings. More of them are closer to 93. These are not areas that we think of as high concentrated residences. basically trying to overcrowd this side of the city if we now target this street to suddenly enact the apartment one zoning. We need to consider, when we keep the zoning, if our infrastructure needs can meet the expanding population that this zoning allows. I would say no. We can't support it. We're not gonna suddenly be able to add one, five, 10% to our population and be able to have enough police and fire to support that. We know that it takes several months to train police and fire, but it also takes tax dollars. While we heard that these new buildings will bring 100,000, or I think Locust Street said they were going to bring a million dollars in new tax revenue, 490 families would bring in an incredible amount of additional needs on the city. even if they just had a small 10% children, that's almost 50 children added to the school system. Can our school system handle that burden? Can our budget handle the additional costs of those students? So I urge you to immediately look at all the streets that are zoned apartment one. Salem Street's not the only street. Fountain Street's not the only street. I'm sure there are pockets in other parts of the city. My map is pretty hard to read out the street names, so I could only pick out the ones that I recognize. This is coming and this isn't just something that is going to maybe happen. This is something that is actively happening. People are watching to see if this project at the old break pro is going to be approved. And while it's great to see something different there as opposed to an abandoned building, we have to consider if the street can handle the load of buildings up and down the street. So I hope that you will take this seriously and responsibly try to change this zoning as quickly as possible before it's too late. Because once those buildings are constructed and sitting on those sites, once those children are going up to the high school to enroll in our schools, it's too late. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Point of information, Councilor Neistat. Any zoning change is a process that takes about 180 days, about six months, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Name and address of the record, please.
[Jean Nuzzo]: G. Nuzzo, 35 Parris Street, right around the corner from Salem Street. This is my neighborhood, so I feel doubly strongly about this. Again, as far as I can tell from all of the readings and all of my interactions in various cities that are structured similarly, Zoning starts with the city council. With all respect, I'm disinterested in what the mayor's opinion is. I'm disinterested in what the community development's opinion is. And I'm disinterested at some level of what the ZBA's opinion is. This is the neighborhood that we live in. We are the residents. We are the people who will drive by it. We are the people who will sit in the traffic. We are the people that as these buildings go up will deal with the power outages. We just had one not a week ago on Tuesday that was for hours for some people. It's getting into the shower and not getting proper water supply because we're already getting developed more than we need to be. It's sewer systems. It's backing up the streets. It's the fact that when you drive down the streets in our neighborhood, people are cutting through because they're trying to avoid 93, and with the fast 14, the entire state has learned how to cut through the city of Medford. So I mean, I think that we can't handle the additional volume that we're hearing someone somewhere is envisioning in this neighborhood. I mean, it looks like Beirut. It looks like they test missiles around there. The potholes are so big it'll eat a Subaru. So I get that it's considered somewhat blighted, although I take exception to that term because it's blighted because it hasn't been cared for properly in budgeting, budgetary planning. So I don't think that, you know, having a vision of putting 15, 20 of these down Stalem Street is really going to do anybody any favor. I think we're going to get into a situation where the people who live in the neighborhood, their properties are going to be devalued because they're not going to be these new buildings. We're going to be dwarfed by these big buildings coming down Salem Street, and we're going to be gentrified out. People who have been in those neighborhoods for two and three generations. families that are young and have bought in because they like the neighborhood and they like the small feel of it. So respectfully, I understand that there are different groups that have political, optical interests at play, but when it comes nine o'clock at night, they don't put their head on the pillow, you know, in the various areas of the city. It's just where they live, and I don't see any big circles being drawn around where their houses are. So I would ask that you make this a top priority, because they are lining up. There is a scuttlebutt. We're starting to see some construction happen. We started to see a few people apply. Some, it looks like, are going to get it. Some looks like they may not. I'm not sure what the rhyme or reason will be, but it would be very unfortunate to see an area that has some beautiful buildings. Some of the buildings in our neighborhood are quite lovely. you know, be taken away and have it turn out to look like Main Street in Cambridge. Not that there's anything wrong with Main Street in Cambridge, but that was Cambridge's decision. I don't want it to be a developer's decision. So I know it's a little bit strong, my commentary, but I feel like our neighbourhood is really on the chopping block very quickly. And it will go like dominoes if we don't do something about it. So I would urge you to please consider it. Because for those of us who live there, it's heartbreaking for us to consider that it might not be there anymore. Thanks.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Motion by Councilor Knight to receive and place on file. Motion by Councilor Lungo-Koehn to revert back to regular business. 17305, offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Be it resolved that the sewer connection fees that are charged by the City of Medford, per lateral, be updated and charged per fixture as our fees have not been updated since 2013 and are due for reassessment. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. This is a resolution I had on maybe two months ago with regards to connection fees, requesting an update from our city engineer, and she thankfully I thank her for giving us an update. She did mention that they are due for a reassessment. So I ask that we look into, rather than a per lateral fee, we look into a charging per fixture. I believe our fee amounts are outdated by probably several years. And if we look at other cities and towns, they're doing it much differently and capturing more revenue than the city of Medford is. This is just one area that was brought to my attention that I've been looking into. And I think it's a good resolve. can definitely be a start to updating what we need to. I ask for a roll call vote.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Kern, seconded by Councilor Marks, roll call vote has been requested.
[Michael Marks]: Vice President Marks. Just so I understand, this is a connection fee for new construction you're talking? Only new construction. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I believe a sewer connection fee is for new construction, yes.
[Michael Marks]: Right, because as part of that paper you offered two months ago, we also asked if the, as a separate, I think it was a paper A or B, that if the water and sewer commissioners were looking at a sewer connection for existing homes. And we never really got an answer on that. We got an answer that there is a sewer connection for new construction.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yeah, I mean, we can specify that. This can be for new construction and maybe get an update with regards to any other, if a reassessment is looked at by our city engineer, that we get an update with regards to any other updates or, you know, any other updates or different assessments that she thinks are necessary. This is just one that I know. I read the city of Cambridge's ordinance and it's very different than ours and they're capturing a new construction much more that could go towards our infrastructure needs, especially in those areas that are being developed.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. So we amend the paper to say new construction. Sure.
[Richard Caraviello]: As amended.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Um, yes, Mr. President. I was wondering if the sponsor of the resolution could explain, um, how more revenue was captured by changing the current situation. and whether or not she spoke with anybody from the Water and Sewer Commission as to whether or not we would be able to actually capture more revenue or whether or not it would be a zero-sum game. I know these are probably questions that you can't answer offhand, but something that raises a concern because I don't want to see raising fees and costing additional funds to individuals trying to develop certain properties if, in fact, we're not going to see a return on the other end, Mr. President. But for the purposes of the resolution, I don't feel comfortable dictating to the Water and Sewer Commission what approach they should take. I'd feel better having them present to us what our options are and then us making a recommendation. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Langlois-Carran.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think what we do as a city council is make recommendations anyway. This is a recommendation that this type of fee be added. I did speak to somebody in the City of Cambridge Engineering Department. Who did say by charging the per fixture, you do capture much more revenue because it's obviously per fixture versus whatever the per lateral is. I believe it was just one set fee. I think it's $100, the city of Medford charges. And it sounded to me like it was per project. So per fixture fee, obviously, if you have a larger project, you have many more fixtures, which you could capture. And obviously, we have so much need to update our infrastructure, water and sewer, especially, that I believe this money could go to, obviously, to help with that.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you. Name and address of the record, please. Robert Penta, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass., former member of this board. I understand the resolution is adopted, but the question I would have is that why would you want to charge somebody a connection fee, because right now you pay from your house to the middle of the street. So now you're saying that you connect to the city's lines for water and sewer, for which the city charges you for inflow and outflow of the water going through. We have over $8.5 million in a surplus account that they can't figure out how and where it should be spent as it relates to infrastructure and water-sewer lines. Now, if you want to talk about doing that for a commercial piece of property, that's one thing, because they're digging up the street, and there's a linkage fee that's attached to it as it relates to it. But on single-family homes, two-family homes, or whatever it might be, you're already charging the homeowners, already paying for that hookup from the middle of the street to the house. So I think what you need is probably a further clarification. as it relates to where it's going on that. And I think this begs the question, where are you going with your $8.5 million in the surplus account? Where's the infrastructure? Where's the LNI that's taking place in the city? Where are the projects that have been sitting there that need to be addressed? Before you start charging another fee, possibly, to the taxpayer in this community, I mean, you've got a CPA tax. that the state isn't even going to give you a dime back, because they have no money to give it back to you. So you're technically putting another tax on the Medford resident taxpayer in this community, and they're getting nothing back for it. But you are charging them, and you don't even have a program set aside for what it's going to be used for. You've got almost $8.5 million in water and sewer. You've got close to $9 million in your free cash account. And then you're talking about building all these new buildings that need to be built, that nothing can take place until after 2022, going into 2023 to free up the bonds. So what are you going to do? Start taking from your free cash? Or are you going to do an override of two and a half with the taxpayers? Or are you going to start laying off people? You just spent $14.4 million to build a new Department of Public Works building. You don't have enough men to do it, to work it on a daily basis. The problem that I see, and it's just my opinion, that you folks have got no relationship with this mayor. You absolutely have nothing to do with her on anything in this city. She just uses you for whatever she wants, when she wants. Listen, if this is going to be cohesive and a working relationship, you people need to put your foot down. It only takes four of you. Four of you have enough intestinal fortitude to tell the city administration enough is enough. Because I'll tell you right now, you folks keep going in this direction, your election this November is going to have a different audience out there and behind this rail, because people are fed up with the fact that they're paying for something, they're not getting it, there's no cooperation, there's no fluidness, there's no transparency, and there's no honesty coming out of this building. Thank you. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Name and address of the record, please.
[Jean Nuzzo]: I'm sorry, I had a little trouble hearing. I wondered if I could inquire clarification. I heard that there's a linkage fee, but is there a purpose identified for that fee? Is it going to go into a City Council account where you guys would be responsible to disburse the funds, or is it just general? The speakers went out, so I didn't hear.
[Richard Caraviello]: City Council does not have any of their own private accounts that I know of.
[Jean Nuzzo]: So it's just an additional fee? To me, it would seem like it would make more sense if you had the purview there is Use it for like, you know sidewalks or crosswalks or Whatever. All right. Thanks. I just didn't hear.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thanks On the motion by council on current as amended and seconded by councillor mocks roll call vote has been requested His absence
[Clerk]: Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? No. Councilor Kerr? Yes. Vice President Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Caraviello?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Five in the affirmative, one in the negative, and one absent. Motion passes. 17.309 offered by Councilor Knight. Be it resolved that the administration update the council on the status of the Community Preservation Act Commission Appointments.
[Adam Knight]: which establishes the Community Preservation Commission, which is required by law in order to execute the goals and objectives of the Community Preservation Act. The administration opened up a period of applications and that has since closed. And I'm wondering if she can give us an update as to what the status is of appointing that board so that we can get to work on some good projects in recreation and affordable housing. open space and historic revitalization, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Motion by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Falco. All those in favor? Motion passes. Motion to take hands in the hands of the clerk. Offered by Councilor Knight, be it resolved that the DPW commissioner update the council regarding the Spring Street sweeping schedule. It was hard to get out.
[Adam Knight]: It always is. Sweet streaping, right? Mr. President, again, in line with the paper that I offered earlier in the evening, relative to when the striping of sidewalks and roadways, I'm sorry, crosswalks and roadways is going to be performed, I know that every spring we also have our, what's termed the big sweep. And I believe it's supposed to start relatively soon, weather permitting. So I'm hoping that the DPW commissioner can provide us with a schedule as to when it's going to happen so that we can help get the word out to the residents in the neighborhood so that they're not inconvenienced by any type of notification problems that may occur relative to the street sweeping program.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Light, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Councilor, Vice President Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I must say, even though the weather is getting warmer, that the last snowstorm that we had on Tuesday, the plow trucks had gotten many complaints. They weren't plowing to the curb. And the next day, the city of Medford removed the restriction of parking on both sides. And cars were literally parking two or three feet from the curb itself because it was all snow there. And trash trucks, emergency vehicles couldn't get down many of the roads. And it maintains consistently a problem in this community about plowing to the curb. And I would just ask as part of this paper that we once again ask the administration and the DPW commissioner to make sure that if we're going to have cars be removed from one side or the other, that the trucks plow to the curb. so the cars have a place to park after the snow emergency is removed.
[Richard Caraviello]: As amended by Councilor Marks. All those in favor? Motion passes. Offered by Councilor Marks being resolved that the Medford City Council receive an update on the status of the property located at Maple Park Avenue known as the Hegner Center.
[Michael Marks]: provides services to the disability community. And this council requested that that property was given to the Hegnon Center for $1 back some many years ago. And when it changed hands to Bridgewell, and Bridgewell was looking to sell the property, we asked that the city solicitor meet with Bridgewell and state that because it was no longer being utilized for the purpose of the deed, which said it had to be used for disabilities, that it revert back to the City of Method. And I'm proud to say that has happened, and there are dumpsters out in front there that are being filled up with items, and residents are concerned with what's taking place in the area. So if we can get an update, I don't know if it's Bridgewell that's cleaning out the building, or if the City of Method is doing something with the building, but if we can get an update, Mr. President, for next council meeting regarding what is the status of the pharma-hegmas at the site and what's taking place.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. I myself have received several phone calls on what was going on in the building because there seemed to be some meetings going on there also. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. I'd like to thank Councilor Marks for bringing this forward. And if you wouldn't mind an amendment to the resolution. I think it would be ideal if we could actually have a tour of the building as a committee. I mean, if that building's coming back onto the city rolls, then we should actually go down, take a look at the facility, see what condition it's in. We haven't had it, it hasn't been part of the city amendment for many years. And I think we should really get a firsthand look at the condition of the facility. So if Councilor Marks wouldn't mind, I'd like to add that as an amendment to the resolution.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Council. On the motion by Councilor Marks, as amended by Councilor Falco, and seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Petition presentation and similar matters.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, earlier this evening at 6 p.m., the committee of the whole met to discuss two papers in committee. One paper was uh, regulating replica firearms in the city of Medford. That paper was, um, referred to remaining committee with, uh, some opinion from the city solicitor, uh, to take a look at some additional aspects of potentially, uh, regulating the sale of replica firearms in the community as well as recommended by councilor marks. Um, there was also a paper that was on the table, Mr. President, that has gone through the legislative process and that paper was related to the wage theft Ordinance Prevention of Wage Theft in the City of Medford, Mr. President. That paper was reported out of committee favorably. And I would move for adoption of the committee report this evening, Mr. President. And after the adoption of the committee report, I would move to put the paper through first reading.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Knight to adopt the paper and let it take its first reading. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. On the motion by Councilor Knight to let the paper take its first reading. Mr. Clerk. please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Kern? Yes. Vice President Marks? Yes. Councilor Scapelli? Yes. President Caraviello?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent, motion passes and takes its first reading. Petitions, presentations and similar matters. 17-306 petition by Gene Martin, 10 Cumming Street, Bedford, to address the council on banners on the city hall. Name and address for the record, please.
[Jeanne Martin]: Thank you, Gene Martin, 10 Cumming Street. If the mayor listens to me on this, she's going to get a lot of hard phone calls and some emails. Unfortunately, she has started a bad precedent for the city. While I appreciate the intent of public awareness of certain city-sponsored events, posting them on City Hall's outside wall is an inappropriate place to display such information. City Hall is the seat of our government, not a billboard for city-wide information. I find it cheapens the city in a few ways. One, it unknowingly sets up favorite versus non-favorite groups. While some are vocal, There may be other groups that feel intimidated to speak in opposition of the quote, favorite group, which has already attained preference in City Hall. This unseen bias can create unnecessary resentment. It can pit one group against the other. Eventually, we may have two groups who will oppose each other in concept, wanting to be represented on City Hall, i.e., pro-life versus pro-choice. This is a dangerous practice. It detracts from the visual image of the building itself. Our City Hall was built in a time of magnificent architecture. The banners detract from the U.S. flag, which should be the only thing on a person's mind as they pass City Hall. Yes, the MIA flag is there as well, for a reason that you should already also be thinking about. Three, the banners are distracting to drivers. Four, and most importantly, it detracts from the true purpose of City Hall. to be the people's house, the building which holds the right of everyone to enter and express their views in the way that they would like to be governed. We should revere this building as peoples all around the world would die to have a building such as this, where their voices could be heard, not to be an advertisement space. I understand why the gay community wanted to see the rainbow flag up on City Hall. It was simply for affirmation, which is an understandable goal. So since I am asking the mayor not to put up the flag in June, I feel obligated to make at least three other suggestions to affirm the gay population in Medford. They are as follows. We can interview people who are gay on a TV show through the new access station We can write a book on gays who live in Medford, and I would recommend Carl Seberg to top the list. We can rent the Chevalier Theater and hold a celebration of gay life through a musical. We can organize a pizza night for gays at a certain restaurant and invite straights who want to support them, et cetera. I hope that these other avenues will be received in the spirit that I offer them. If the city would like to sponsor something, they could hold a night at the library in June where they have readings on gay material or have gay speakers. These are actually more grassroots methods and require the gay community to advocate for themselves. And seeing this, it will commit more people to participate in the rest of the community. And by example, they will lead and be better received. In conclusion, I am therefore respectfully asking you to take down any and all ads for future events or community communications. For they disrespect the purpose and solemnity in which this building deserves. This is not to say that any of the causes are unworthy of respect. This is just not the place for it. Thank you for considering my request.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Ms. Martin. Motion to receive and place on file, Mr. President. Motion by Councilor Knight to receive and place on file, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Motion passes. OK, we have several uh, condolences. So if we can wait to the end, uh, to do one moment of silence, it'd be appreciated. 17 three zero eight offered by council of Falco and president Caraviello be resolved at the Medford city council extend its deep and sincere condolences to the family of Elaine board narrow on her recent passing. Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. Uh, Elaine board, Nara Palachi was a, good friend of mine. She passed away a few weeks ago. She lived in Medford most of her life. She was a teacher for more than 30 years at the Lincoln Junior High School and at the McGlynn School as well. She was just a very friendly, outgoing person. Everyone loved her. She actually won the Teacher of the Year award from the state of Massachusetts in World History and I believe Ancient History. And she'll be missed. Thoughts and prayers go out to her husband, Eric, and their family.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Falco. And I, too, have known Elaine and her family. Our kids grew up together and did many things together. And it was sad to see her pass. Name and address for the record.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Andrew Castagnetti, Cushing Street. Thank you, Councilor Falco. I knew Elaine Bordenaro. I think her name was Elaine Carrier back at high school when I knew her. And great person. And she ended up marrying one of the top five friends I ever had in my life, truest gentleman of all time, Michael Bordenaro, back in the 70s. And I remember going down to Michael's house when we were engaged, and he would be playing Emerson Lake and Pablo on the organ. And although he was educated at Berklee School of Music, And unfortunately, he passed away more than 25 years ago. And she was fortunate, and also her present husband was fortunate to meet each other, Eric. He's also a great person. And as I said at the wake to Elaine's daughter, Christine, and her brother, the children were very lucky to have three of the greatest parents that ever parented. Thank you. I wish him all the best. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: He was very fortunate to have two very good husbands. You are correct.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Oh, incredible.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. 17-310 offered by President Caraviello, be it resolved that the Medford City Council send its condolences to the family of Captain Joseph Conway in his recent passing. Captain Conway was a member of the Medford Police Department for 35 years. He was a Navy veteran who served his country in World War II. Again, another World War II veteran that's passed on. Again, I say I knew him, and again, community will be sadly missed. Offered by Councilor Marks, be it resolved that the Medford City Council hold a moment of silence for longtime Methodist resident Steve Honeycutt on his recent passing. Vice President Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I'm sad to say that a good friend of mine Steve Honeycutt passed away just recently. For any of us that know Steve, he was always around the community, served on the Disability Commission for a number of years, and was Method's disability monitor for a number of years. And Steve was just an all-around good guy, someone you could talk sports, politics, electrical, because he was an electrician, and just a great guy, great family man. And he will be sorely missed, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Another colleague in the community going. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. I wasn't aware that Steve passed away. I just want to say I served with him on the Disability Commission for a number of years. And he was such a great man and a great advocate for people with disabilities. And he will be sorely missed.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Offered by Councilor Marks. be resolved that a moment of silence be held for long-time Method resident, Jane Cangiano, on her recent passing. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I believe it's lifelong Method resident. I might have wrote it down wrong, but Jane lived in the city, born and brought up here, went to school here, and was a nurse for many years. She was a very active member of her parish. She was a loving wife, mother, grandmother, And again, she will be sorely missed by her family, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Be it resolved, offered by Council March, be it resolved that the Medford City Council hold a moment of silence for a long, lifelong Method resident, Norma Andre, on her recent passing. Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. This was a real tough week for Method. Norma was a staple in this community for many years. If anyone know the Andres, they used to own the movie theater in the square back some many, many years ago. And Norma and her late husband, Frank, shared life for 70 years together, 70 years married. And her focus was always on her family. Anytime you saw her, she'd talk about the grandkids or her son. And, you know, everything was family oriented and, again, Truly a remarkable woman, and she'll be sorely missed, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yeah, I agree. The Andre family, a good family in the city of Medford. We all rise for a moment of silence, please. These great Medford people. Thank you. The records of the meeting of March 7th, 2017 were passed to Council of Have you investigated those records and how have you found them?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I have two amendments to the records and I have written them down. I'll give them to the clerk. Otherwise, I move approval with these two changes.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Council, I'd like to adjourn.
|
total time: 14.71 minutes total words: 1441  |
total time: 3.39 minutes total words: 250  |
total time: 20.34 minutes total words: 1189  |
total time: 20.1 minutes total words: 544  |
|
total time: 27.42 minutes total words: 2462  |
total time: 7.3 minutes total words: 432  |
total time: 33.65 minutes total words: 2703  |
total time: 3.43 minutes total words: 274  |
|
total time: 9.69 minutes total words: 887  |
|||