[SPEAKER_00]: I feel sorry for them. I don't know, after 30 years of working on computers, it's not the best thing. So that's why it's really nice to make stuff. I love working with materials. I think that gets me off the computer. For a while, I was reading a lot of black American women writers' work, and so I started making quilts because there was that story of quilts, that feminine process, and that whole idea of recycling. So I asked people to come and visit me.
[Richard Caraviello]: Medford City Council, 39th regular meeting. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo. Present. Councilor Falco. Present. Councilor Knight. Present. Councilor Kerr. Present. Vice President Martins. Present. Councilor Scarpelli. Present. President Caraviello.
[Richard 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. Motion by Councilor Lococo for the suspension of the rules to take paper 17795. All those in favor? Motion passes. 17795, offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council take a first reading on the ordinance change to read as follows. In ordinance amending chapter 94 of the ordinance of the city of Medford, be it ordained. by the City Council of City of Medford that Chapter 94 of the Ordinance of the City of Medford entitled Zoning, Article 2, Division 1, Section 94-35, Paragraph E, that presently states, E, appeals from administrative decisions, petitions for variances, and applications for special permits shall be filed together with other supporting materials as required by applicable rules. The City Council or Board of Appeals shall fix a reasonable time for a hearing and shall cause notice of such a hearing to be published in accordance with Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 40A, Section 11, as further amended and shall now state as follows. A. Appeals from administrative decisions, petitions for variances, and applications for special permits shall be filed together with other supporting materials as required by applicable rules. The City Council or Board of Appeals shall fix a reasonable time for hearing and shall cause notice of such hearing to be published in accordance with Massachusetts General Law's Chapter 40A, section 11, and such notice shall also be given to all owners within 400 feet of the property line of the petitioner as the same are listed in the most recent tax list as kept by the chief assessor of the city and such notice shall also be given to the owners within 400 feet of the property line of the petitioner as the same area listed in the most recent text that's kept by the chief assessor of the city by way of telephone call, text message that uses computerized auto dialer to deliver a pre-recorded message or its equivalent. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello, and thank you for reading it. It's lengthy. This was something that the council was interested in doing back in August of 2016. It went to committee, and I believe there's some questions whether they were answered or not. It just stayed in committee. I brought it up again probably two months ago. At that time, the council voted seven to nothing with regards to being interested in this and just needing legal language drafted by our city solicitor. I followed up with the solicitor. Thankfully, in November, a decision was rendered. I believe, I'm not sure if you received it before that, but I did forward it to everybody this morning, just in case. It tells you what the prior requirements were under Mass General Law 48. Yes, thank you. I know he's here. I was just going to finish. Mass General Laws, Section 40, Chapter 40A, Section 11. The fact of the matter with regards to just notifying abutters and abutters to abutters is something that has caused a great deal of put it plainly, heartache to those who live either across the street or very close to a potential, in this case, obviously we're doing it for mainly the developments that have been proposed and people finding out after the fact and being really upset The council gets frantic emails and phone calls, and we're left having to step in. Obviously, the mayor's office probably gets the same. We're going to and from, myself and a number of Councilors, going to and from OCD meetings and zoning meetings and conservation commission meetings to try to find out what's going on and how to give the residents the ability to be heard and to voice their concerns, questions, and get answers to specific questions that they do have. So I think it's important and I know it's important to this whole council that we give more notice and that be done in multiple ways. And what this proposed ordinance change does, that I'm thankful the solicitor drafted, is it provides notice to everybody, every owner within 400 feet, and it provides notice through mail and through our reverse 911 system, which is something that was well deserving of the reverse 9-1-1. I think it's a win-win. I know there are some questions that the Councilors may have, one being how enforceable this is, which our solicitor is here to discuss. And also if there is a minor permit or a minor variance that needs to be had, is this necessary? And I think the answer is it's just necessary because We have had such a problem over the last couple years, and we need to change that. We need to change it for the people and the neighbors. This is one step of many that has to be taken, and I ask my colleagues to obviously get your questions answered, but to move forward and vote for approval for the first reading of this ordinance change.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Mr. Solicitor, would you take any questions or any opinion?
[Mark Rumley]: I can give a supplement to what Councilor Lungo-Koehn just said. I can give a brief supplement which might go to the core of some concerns or some questions about the language. First, my name. My name is Mark Rumley. I'm the city solicitor. I reside at 50 Woodrow Avenue in Medford. right now the way the state statute is, and you have to understand this in terms of state statute and local ordinance. The state statute says in terms of notice that it should be given to abutters to a petitioner property or abutters to abutters or those who are across the street within a 300-foot ambit. Now that doesn't mean under the state statute that everybody within the 300-foot ambit would receive notice. It just means abutters, abutters to abutters or those across the street. The resolution which is before you tonight would make it a requirement that locally, that in the city of Medford, notice be given to all persons, all persons, within a 400-foot ambit. Now, it's important to be cognizant of the fact that this is in excess of what's required by the state statute. Therefore, from a legal point of view, it would be considered directory only. I want to give you an example. The example would be this. If you were somebody who was, say, 300 feet away, but you were not an abutter or an abutter to an abutter or across the street, and you disagreed with a decision made by the board, If you appealed it, the land court would not recognize the fact that you didn't get notice because you were 300 feet away, because that's a local rule. So the land court would not say that that would give you the status of a party in interest. You would have to establish that another way. So when I say that the extra notice would be directory only, it doesn't mean that it wouldn't be given, because if you pass it as an ordinance, then the board and commission would have to implement that. However, what I'm saying is that if somebody appealed the decision to the courts, that would not give them an additional leg to stand on or some status that they didn't otherwise have, because the state statute would control as being the only requirement that's compulsory. So that's essentially what this ordinance would be. And I have a little bit of data that I didn't have earlier this morning that I received from Mr. McDougal as to what this would mean from a substantive point of view by way of example, which I could give you if you like. I'll just explain it. Dennis McDougall is the clerk for the administrator for the ZBA. And just as an example of what this would mean, there's one project, I won't give the address, it's not that important, but it was the change of a property from a single family to a two family. It was before the Board of Appeals. Under the state statute, which means abutters, abutters to abutters, or those across the street, there were 10 notices that were given out. If it were all owners within 300 feet, there were 234 people that would have to be notified because there was a condominium within that area. If it were 400 feet, there'd be 357 people that would have had to have been notified because of that condominium. Now, that's a very steep example. There's another one where, on a matter before the ZBA, under the law, 18 people were notified. If the circle was drawn at 300 feet, 38 people would be notified. And at 400 feet, 60 people would be notified. So you can see how there's an additional notice requirement if you draw the circle further out and further out. That's how this would work. So I give that to you simply for your information, but that's how this would work. And the condominium example is steep because obviously there are many units in a condominium.
[John Falco]: Thank you. Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. City solicitor Romley, if I may ask a few questions. So is this enforceable as far as if we were to vote for this change? I mean, is it enforceable as far as from, I mean, I guess you could always appeal it, but I mean, do we have any grounds to enforce this, I guess?
[Mark Rumley]: Yes, the enforceability would be this. It would be a requirement of the local board and commission to give that notice. Actually, it would be the petitioner who's going forth to make sure that that notice is given. For example, Mr. McDougal does the notices for the Board of Appeals, but the costs of that are borne by the petitioner. Is it enforceable? So the answer to that question is split. The first part of the answer is, if it's made an ordinance, then it is required that it be implemented by the local board or commission. However, at the state level, if there was an appeal to the courts, it would be informational but not required. So to the degree that you would think that the state would enforce it, it would not.
[John Falco]: So I mean, I think it's interesting, and I think it's definitely, I definitely like notifying more people. I think that's a good thing. I just have, I guess, some concerns that there's like unintended consequences here. So for like the local person that's trying to make a home improvement, put a deck on the back of their house, and they need a variance, maybe they're too close to the property line. So if they have that type of a situation, that person is going to have to notify everyone within that 400 foot?
[Mark Rumley]: Yes, if this ordinance were passed in its present form, yes. And they would actually pay the cost of that as well? Yeah, I don't know what the cost would be of something like that. But they're responsible for that? Ultimately, yes. It's done by Mr. McDougal, but the notices, the labels, I think the postage, along with the petition fee, advertisement, that's borne by the petitioner.
[John Falco]: That's my concern, because I definitely like the idea of making sure that we notify more people. But I guess I'm worried about once you get into the neighborhoods, if you're doing something to increase the value of your property. Maybe you're putting on a deck. You're doing some sort of home improvement. And it's not that major. There's a concern, I think, that you're adding a cost to that. And there's just a little bit of a concern there. So I think for big developments, this is something that's definitely needed and warranted. I mean, I think it's definitely something that would benefit the whole neighborhood. But for someone that's doing a small type of home improvement, I have some concerns there. my colleague wouldn't mind if we could amend this maybe just to projects that have to go through site plan review. And I'm not sure if that makes sense. Maybe you could weigh in on that. But I'm just thinking that if we're going to have local, my concern is that if we're going to have local neighbors that want to make an improvement and add cost to that and add more red tape to that, I think that's a little bit of a concern. So I'm just thinking if maybe we could have this applied to any type of project that requires site plan review. Maybe that's the direction we should head in, and that's an amendment to the resolution that I would offer if my colleague is willing to accept that.
[Mark Rumley]: Well, I can answer you this way, Councilor. First, a site plan review project is one which has a greater magnitude towards it. I think it's six or more units for site plan review. Of the list that I had for Mr. McDougall today, which again is just for my information. There were two projects that he has here that were subject to site plan review. And the first one, under the present law, or under the law of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, under the first one, there were 20 abutters, or abutters to abutters, et cetera, who were notified. If it went to 300 feet, there would have been 71. If it went to 400 feet, there would have been 100. In the next project that was subject to site plan review, under the law and the state statute in its present incarnation, the number of people notified was 15. If that line were drawn out 300 feet, it would have been 58 people notified. And if the line were drawn out to 400 feet, it would be 99 people who would have been notified. So there you can see, and of course that all depends upon the location, because as I said earlier, if there's a condo next door, that number's gonna go up exponentially. So site plan review is only applicable, my recollection is, to projects which call for six units or more. But just generally speaking.
[John Falco]: And I appreciate that. Thank you. That's just my concern. I mean, I think it's a great, I mean, I like the resolution. I think it's, I think we should be reaching out to talk to more, to actually communicate with more people in the neighborhood when there's a project or development that's going to impact them. So more communication is definitely better. I just wonder if, you know, if there's some unintended consequences to this where we're gonna impact them financially and make a simple home improvement into a larger type of project. So that's why I offer the resolution if you're willing that maybe we have this apply just to something that requires site plan review.
[Richard Caraviello]: That's up to Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I definitely think that that is something I'd like to hear the rest of my colleagues discuss. I don't see the harm in that. I'm not putting this forward to hurt the individual homeowner. I think you can look at it two ways, which is definitely, that is an option. I don't think it's a huge financial burden. 100 people need to be notified. It's going to be $49 in postage. But six or more units is something that definitely can be talked about tonight and discussed.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Scarpelli.
[John Falco]: I'm done for now. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you for bringing this forward. And to this solicitor, I know John already brought this up, and I don't want to be redundant, but I actually had two phone calls today that residents were running to the building's office today to try to secure permits and possibly variances because they were looking at building up, because they're nervous, the same questions you had, probably I've been getting, and I think that's my concern, is that the home improvement jobs, the home improvement variances that people will be looking for, because, you know, facts are facts, the costs of housing now have gone up, so people want to take advantage of that while they can, and try to make their homes the best they can at this time. So looking at the fear of someone questioning it down the line or that don't belong, that don't live in that radius and that these people that they've grown up and the neighbors that they know that they might have talked to and let them know that this is what's happening, They'll be going to the appeal board and they'll be looking for something like this. They are just nervous that if it goes further out where people might not want a two family or a second floor built or that they would question out of fear that they wouldn't get this. This is one of their biggest concerns. So I like the idea that, you know, the idea that putting it for the six or more units, I think that that's probably our biggest fear that we've heard here is that, the fear that things are happening so fast, so quick, and notifying people. But my question is ultimately, it can't be, the ordinance can't be written, excuse me, I'm getting off track, but the question is that, If this, what we have in line right now, if this is adopted, it still goes to the state level, and the state level, it's just something that could be heard, but won't be, can't be used as judgment.
[Mark Rumley]: All right. It's a valid concern, and it gets a little bit confusing. But it runs this way. The state statute is the core. It is required. It is compulsory. And the state statute says that notice must be given to abutters or abutters to abutters, and those across the street, within 300 feet. That's the core. That doesn't change. And that's required. This would be additional requirement, a local option. Not local option. That's not the way to put it. Local requirement. And, if it's passed by the council, ultimately, then the Board of Appeals would have to implement that notice requirement. Now, as I said at the beginning, if Mr. Jones or Ms. Smith is not happy with the approval of a variance or whatever it is, and then appeals to the court, If they're not in that core area, they would not be considered to be a party in interest because of their location. There may be some other reasons that they could have standing. I'm not saying that they wouldn't. But their location, if they're outside of that core area, would not give them proper standing. What it would do is mean that from a local point of view, here in Medford, they would get some notification. Now here's the thing. There's nothing bad in anything that anybody just said. Because here's, I don't want to sound like Pollyanna, but I've been part of municipal government for 34 years. And one of the common threads that goes through as a criticism is, I didn't know. When did that happen? Who did that? And when that occurs, what you have is a lessening of the quantum of trust that a resident has in the local government. This measure will address that in a fashion by giving greater notice, even if it doesn't give legal teeth. The benefit of fine-tuning it is that Ms. Jones or Mr. Smith, who wants to extend a bedroom for maybe an elderly member of their family, won't have to go through hoops if this only applies to larger projects. And generally speaking, I don't hear, in my 34 years, I don't hear, I didn't know about that when we're talking about a neighbor increasing the size of their house a little bit for a family reason. When you hear it, you already know the projects that you hear it on. They don't have to say what they are. But they're the larger projects, the ones that have multiple units, the ones that have traffic impact, which, by the way, is an element or an issue that has to be reviewed in site plan review. Traffic. And those are the ones where people say, I didn't know that. And so there's where, if there is any fine-tuning, that may be a benefit. The other thing is, since this is an amendment to the zoning ordinance, then this would have to go, assuming that it left the launching pad here at the city council, it would have to go to the planning board for a public hearing. So the input of others could be received, too, and then the planning board makes its recommendation back to the council. Well, that's a pretty good thing to have. public input on whether or not to extend public notification. Seems to me that that fits together like Legos. So that's what I'd say.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you very much for my trivial response, but I think, again, I know that my council colleague put together a very thoughtful ordinance. I think that the concerns that Councilor Falco brought up with the site plan review, I would definitely support this if, because I think we all sit here and understand the phone calls we get with the bigger developments that come out that are affecting the zoning that's affecting our our community so I will support this wholeheartedly if we can that I agree with what council Falco stated with site plan reviews, anything over six units, that this would be implemented. So I think that wouldn't affect the phone calls I got that were questioning and nervousness and the fear of our neighbors that how this could affect a homeowner who was looking to improve their home and their future. So I hope that helps with the other Brianna, but thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: The clerk has informed me that the cost is approximately a dollar to send out a mailing to all the homes. And then it's another dollar because he has to also mail them the decision that is written. So it will be about two dollars per household. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. City Solicitor Rumley has framed this in a pretty basic and outright fashion, that the steps that we need to go through, if we decide to adopt the zoning amendment this evening, that it goes to the Community Development Board for a public hearing. So, in looking at the action that we're taking here as a body tonight, I think we're torn. I mean, we've all sat here and we've all talked about requirements for notice. We want more people to know what's going on in their neighborhood, and we don't want to hurt people at the same time, Mr. President. So here we have a proposal that would increase the notification ramifications by about 100 yards, and then also add everybody that lives in that jurisdiction to the notification requirements. I think it might be in our best interest to send the paper as authored to the Community Development Board for their input at a public hearing, get the information and the input that they can secure, And when they bring it back to us, then we'll be in a better position to make a determination as to what language changes we would like to see made. I certainly would agree that I think projects requiring site plan review only would be something that I'd be very supportive of, Mr. President, but I don't think that that's going to be something that's going to be a hindrance for me this evening for supporting this measure and sending it to the Community Development Board for a public hearing and for their input.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dello Russo. Yes, thank you, Mr. President. I'm generally in favor of this expanded notification, but if I could, Mr. President, through the chair to the solicitor, ask a question regarding the amendment. My question is this. It was stated by Councilor Lungo-Koehn that, and I'm sure this is true without a doubt, that we're not seeking to harm the homeowner in this ordinance, but if we put a stipulation on the expansion of the notification to those projects that require site plan review, i.e., a way of getting at the bigger projects, is that a signaling that we're aiming to harm someone? Could it be read as that? So are we targeting someone? Are we being prejudicial? So what applies to one thing, should it apply to all? That's just my question.
[Mark Rumley]: I get the question, and I'd say this. First of all, the legislative discretion of a body like the City Council is indeed that. If you exercise that discretion in a reasonable way, based upon considerations before you, it would not be arbitrary, nor would it be discriminatory. In addition, the greater concern of the public is always the larger projects. It's not the smaller ones that have been alluded to here tonight. So indeed, if a large developer said, I'm being prejudiced by having to notice this many people, I would say, so what? Take your shot, bring us to court, and let's see what happens. Thank you. You're welcome.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you, President Caraviello. I think we've heard from a number of councilors. It looks like there potentially is a vote to pass the first reading tonight, but as long as there's limited to site plan review projects or greater, obviously. Just plain devil's advocate, my question would be to the solicitor is Because I understand it if it has to do with a deck or expanding a home so you can have a couple more feet in your bedroom or a walk-in closet, whatever it might be. And those are the people that, obviously, we don't want to have to bear the burden of hundreds and hundreds of dollars. But what about a single-family home that the owner wants to turn it into a three-family and it's a two-family district or it's a single-family district? Now, I'm playing devil's advocate because if that was in my neighborhood and it was down the street, in a single-family district and a homeowner wanted to put up a three-family, I'd want to know.
[Mark Rumley]: Right. And I don't think necessarily that you're playing devil's advocate. What you're doing is drawing the line at a different place. Right. Right.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And how could we do that?
[Mark Rumley]: Well, I think that the best thing is to let the planning board have some people in to hear their opinions so they can make appropriate recommendations back to the council. So because while the line suggested tonight by a prospective amendment has been projects that would require site plan review, and you just pointed out a larger project than a small addition to a house that nonetheless may impact a particular neighborhood, That is drawing the line at a different place. And I think the best way to decide where to draw that line, and I don't say that either one of those ideas are wrong, even the initial idea is not wrong, it's a matter of judgment and choice. So the question is where is that line drawn? And that really is something that would be interesting to receive in the recommendation from the planning board. So I understand your point, Councilor. I think you're drawing the boundary line in a little different place. There's nothing wrong with that.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you.
[Michael Marks]: Vice President Mox. Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. Solicitor, in the letter dated November 8th regarding this paper 17-731, your response to the mayor on page 2, the last paragraph, it states that failure to comply with the ordinance requirements would not invalidate the approval of a variance. That's correct. And my question to you would be, if this was not implemented and the Zoning Board of Appeals did not comply with the state statute, would that be, in and of itself, a reason to invalidate approval of a variance?
[Mark Rumley]: Not complying with the state statute would absolutely be a reason to invalidate something. That's happened before. We had years ago, there was a clerk of the ZBA who was ill with cancer and certain notices didn't go out. That case was in the land court for one day and came back for re-notification.
[Michael Marks]: So based on that, I guess my question is that, other than the fact that we're going to create a city ordinance, what would bound the Zoning Board of Appeals to follow it? If there's no ramification on whether or not they follow it, it doesn't impact an appeal. As you mentioned, it's governed by state statutory requirements or regulations. So what would bound them to follow this new notification of 400 feet?
[Mark Rumley]: All municipal employees, and that includes board and commission members, are required to comply with the requirements set forth in the revised ordinances of the City of Medford. If they do not, what could happen to them. I really don't know, not being the person that appoints them, what could happen. But I'll tell you this, if a board or commission member just summarily said, well we're not doing that, we don't really care what the ordinance says, we have a fundamental problem that would have to be addressed. And it wouldn't be addressed by way of another ordinance. I think it would be addressed by way of removal.
[Michael Marks]: So you're saying once this is implemented, then we can rest assured that notification will take place based on whatever the ordinance reads?
[Mark Rumley]: Yes, the words that you used, rest assured, sounds like, could I say that once the ordinance is in place that it will always be complied with? There's always room for the frailty of human nature and error. I'm not saying that it's a foolproof system, but it certainly is greater than what exists right now. And it may or may not be implemented for us.
[Michael Marks]: The reason why I bring it up, Mr. Solicitor, is that one of the ZBA meetings, it was brought up by a member of this council during public participation, that we may be interested in expanding their notification by changing city ordinance. And one of the board members more or less said, do whatever you have to do. We're not going to follow it anyways. And that was my concern, Mr. Solicitor. And if it doesn't invalidate, to me, if it's a city ordinance, and I realize what you're saying about appeals and so forth, but if it's a city ordinance and our own Zoning Board of Appeals does not adhere to the notification process that's laid out, that should be enough to invalidate whatever variance they gave out.
[Mark Rumley]: So to me, that should be enough. I get what you're saying. What you're saying is that the remedy should be invalidation of the variance. However, if the variance is given in compliance with the state law, the fact that the municipal law wasn't followed or the municipal ordinance wasn't followed would not, in and of itself, invalidate the approval. That's clear in what my opinion is. I will agree with you. that if a board or commission member just summarily says, I don't care what you say, we're not doing it. That raises another issue which I think has to be remedied in a different way than invalidating an approval that's consistent with state law. If it's consistent with state law and somebody thumbed their nose at you, but it's consistent with state law, I think the remedy is not to invalidate the approval. The remedy is something else, which I think is removal.
[Michael Marks]: Of course, that's just my opinion. We appreciate your opinion. like what Councilor Falco threw out there by trying to target site plan review for units over six. On the other side, I can see, as Councilor Longo-Kurd mentioned, that a lot of the projects we're going through now are in commercial zoned areas and so forth, but as we're seeing development, we're seeing it in neighborhoods. And the complaints that I'm also receiving aren't just on main roads or in commercial industrial areas, they're in neighborhoods. And I, too, would like to see maybe some discussion and that may be for a future or the the zoning board itself, when they have their public hearing, to look at how do we rest assure that we don't target, naturally, someone that wants to put another foot onto their porch in their backyard, but target units that will have an impact, as the city solicitor mentioned, regarding traffic, regarding quality of life, regarding, you know, A lot of other issues, infrastructure, water pressure, and a host of other issues that usually come when you develop large projects. So I too would like to see a compromise on that and possibly lower the number of units and not just site plan review. Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you, Mr. President. Councilor Rumley, this question is also for you. If an applicant is in substantial compliance with the state law but fails to comply with the local expanded ordinance and submits their application in compliance with one but not the other, does the clock start ticking on the Zoning Board of Appeals timelines relative to when they have to take the application up for hearing?
[Mark Rumley]: The statutory timeframes are not waivable or changeable locally. There are timeframes during which times the Board of Appeals must act. If they do not, then there is constructive approval. I can tell you, having been down the road on a couple of constructive approval cases over the years, It's a very steep way to try to get an approval. Because what happens is, if somebody says the Board of Appeals didn't act within a certain time frame, and then they go for their building permit, you might say, well, everything's okay, right? Well, the building department is going to say, is this okay? So then they come to me, we look at the time frames, whether or not everything is the way it's supposed to be. But the litmus test on something like that is the lender who's lending to the person that's developing, in this case. The lender might say, I don't know if I want a loan on this project because you got a constructive approval from the ZBA. There are all kinds of variables when that stuff happens. All kinds.
[Adam Knight]: So if they put the application in and only just notify abutters of abutters within 300 feet, the time frame starts ticking right away. And the zoning board has no recourse to require them to expand the notification to the city ordinance.
[Mark Rumley]: Well, we're hoping that the board is going to request their clerk to make sure that that's implied with, yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So through the clerk, what does our next step have to be? Can we take a first reading or if we even got there?
[Clerk]: This is a zoning matter. It has to be referred to the Community Development Board for their recommendation and public hearing. Then it comes back if you accept the recommendations, then you would vote to go out to public hearing. Which is a two week process, two or three week process.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So we have to move and get a vote on moving this to? We have to send it up. Send it up to? Send it up to the Community Development Board. So I make a motion that we send this up to the Community Development Board.
[Richard Caraviello]: Second, as amended.
[George Scarpelli]: If I can, point of information. Councilor Scott, point of information. Is this as amended with what we talked about with the three, you know, with looking into, you know, the site review and the three family? That would be, we send the whole paper. We send the whole thing, okay, all right, thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Palco, I mean Councilor Knight.
[John Falco]: Is this the amendment, is this the motion with ritual methods?
[Richard Caraviello]: The paper is as it is until we make an amendment to it.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Can we ask for them to review it with all our discussions and give us their opinions?
[Clerk]: This paper, as is written, will go to the Community Development Board for their public hearing. If you want to add that amendment, they'll look at that amendment also. Maybe an amendment would be- If they want to incorporate it, they'll come back, but with their language and their recommendations.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So why don't we amend this, okay, through the chair, amend this to read, to exclude, but, Mr. Rumley could get it probably perfectly, but amended to exclude property owners who only want to make a small change, like a deck or an extension of a bedroom on their property.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may. Ultimately, it's going to go to the Community Development Board for a public hearing, right? They're going to have a public hearing, they're going to get input from the public, and they're going to come back to us and make a recommendation to us. If we're going to be sending them a document, and we're going to say we want this amendment and that amendment, I think that it's incumbent upon us to get language together and send them that language, Mr. President. So if we were going to take a vote on this matter this evening, and we sent them the proposal as written, that's the language, we send it up to them, it's going to come back to us anyway. In the interim, if we want to put together a site, put in review language, or anything else, we can do that. We can do that, because the bill is still going to have to go through its three readings here at this level. But ultimately, what we want to do is get input from the general public as to what they think is going to be good for them. So we're already starting to amend a paper that's an idea. And I think this idea is going to be shaped by the input that happens at the public hearing. So I think it might be a good idea for us, Mr. President, to send this paper forward now. Now, I'm wholeheartedly in support of limiting the scope to site plan review or to something a little bit smaller than Mrs. Jones getting her porch done or Mrs. O'Malley trying to expand her driveway. I don't think that that's the legislative intent of this proposal. I don't think that that's what Councilwoman Lungo is trying to accomplish. I think what she's trying to accomplish is expanding notifications in neighborhoods so people feel as though they have a voice. A voice in their neighborhood as to what's going on and what direction things are going in. So why don't we let that process happen and then when it comes back to us, we'll have the ability and the opportunity to make all the changes to it in the world we need, but we'll have more information and more data to make an informed decision. I second. Thank you.
[John Falco]: Councilor Falco. Thank you. And I agree with the resolution. I think it's a good resolution, but I do think that, and I don't think you're trying to do this on purpose, but I think there's unintended consequences that we're really, there's a cost associated with this. And it's borne by the taxpayer, the person that owns the property. And that's the piece that I guess I'm guarding against. So the only thing I'm saying is if we add the amendment in, we're at least giving some guidance to the community development board to say, you know, there is an amendment here to see what the public thinks about the amendment. To send them the language, I think we're at least giving them a little bit more guidance if we're actually adding the amendment in as to what we're thinking. I mean, it seems like there's definitely some sort of an appetite for the amendment that was offered.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Council Member. So let's give the clerk the language for the amendments. Okay, on the motion by Council Member.
[Adam Knight]: What information Councilor table it and let him write the amendment and then we can take it up next week I Just I'm not comfortable mr. President sending a paper to the board or a commission Asking them to do something if we don't have the language for them to look at it. I mean we want a zoning issue It's not like we're asking them to fix a pothole and you know what I mean Smith Street, you know what I mean? This is a big deal. So I think that if we're going to do it, we have to do it right. And we have to have everything in a nice little box with some Christmas wrapping paper on it and a bow when they get it.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Name and address for the record, please.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Hi, I'm Cheryl Rodriguez. I live at 281 Park Street. I'm always in favor of expanded notification. And I think I like the part in here about the text message or the phone call. As we all know, reverse 911 calls cost pennies. So if you ask someone to make 400 reverse 911 calls, we're talking about $4 to $10, which I don't think is exorbitant. And then 400 neighbors get to get notification of a project. I think that any project that is adding a housing unit, there should be an expanded notification. Because if you live next door to a single family and it's going to be a two or a three, that's going to be a big difference. If you live half a block down from that house, that's going to be a big difference on your street. A lot of us lives on streets where parking is difficult. We face the every time there's a snow emergency, it's where am I going to put my car? If you start adding housing units onto streets, people are going to want to have input on to whether or not there's going to be parking because that's the most common variance that's granted when these units are added.
[Richard Caraviello]: Excuse me, Mrs. Rodriguez. Mr. Vignoli, if you're going to film, please film from the notified area, please. Thank you. I apologize.
[Cheryl Rodriguez]: Okay, so I think that we should just strive for more notification. I would love to see the agendas for the zoning board on the front page of the website. I would love to see them read here at meetings. We really need to find a way for people to know because we're chasing these things. I was at the building department last week and I asked them if there was a way for me to find out about permit refusals because the most common question that people are asking online about zoning is how do we find out about these projects before they get to the ZBA? because once they get there, it feels too late. Currently, unless you know the address of a project that's received a permit refusal, you cannot find out what the permit refusals are in the city. So that's an obstacle that we have to face and that we're chasing down as we're seeing more and more units. We're seeing zoning ordinances being written by our mayor and I'm very concerned as are many, many of our residents. Thank you. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn. The motion is on the floor. Oh, excuse me.
[John Elliott]: Name and address of the record, please. My name is John Elliott. I live at 34 Emery Street on the hillside. I'm in favor of expanding the notification area as well. And that's primarily, if you'd asked me a year ago, I might not have felt so strongly. My opinion is heavily influenced by the fact that I live just over 300 feet from the closest house in what's being called the Capon Village. It's just by that luck of the draw that I got notification. That's a huge project. I wouldn't have known. My next door neighbor didn't get notification because he's over the 300-foot line. I think it's worthwhile that people know what's going on in their neighborhoods. I think sunlight is a good thing to have, and more sunlight is an even better thing to have. I'm certain that 300 feet isn't enough in all cases. I'm not even sure that 400 feet is enough in some cases. Emory Street is a thousand feet long and it's one way and it's only a block and a half. Anybody who lives in the first block is going to drive by or walk by houses that are at the beginning. And they're going to be affected one way or the other. I think it's important to let as many people as, you know, you shouldn't let the whole city know, but there's, as I think the solicitor was saying, it's drawing the line. And I think the 300 foot line is too short. and maybe the 400 feet is enough. It's the right direction. Thank you. Thank you. Councilor Locren, motion is on the floor.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I didn't know if anybody else wanted to speak, I think.
[Richard Caraviello]: Name, address, or the record, please.
[Elizabeth Bayle]: Elizabeth Bale, 34 Emory Street. I appreciate this discussion. I think that some really good points are being made. And I would appreciate some language that draws the line with this. And I'm not sure what that should be. For example, on our street, Emory Street, Change that there's a definite changeover going on from single-family houses being changed to multifamily houses Which are being snapped up by absentee landlords that are renting to students that has changed the nature of our street drastically, and it really Has an effect on a negative effect on our quality of life. So I'm just submitting that as an example along with Councilor Mangocon's point about changing from a You know say from a two-family to a three-family or especially I feel a single family to a multi-family it really things that can change the character of a neighborhood And I can't pretend that I know what the way is, but I would encourage you to try to find it and to add it, rather than just sending this as written for a public hearing. Because I think people are going to get agitated, to Councilor Falco's point, if you want to add it. do a deck or something to have to have, it's not the cost, I don't think. It's just the burden of having a lot of people being able to chime in on a project that shouldn't really, it's not really gonna affect their lives versus one that will. So that's all I have to say. Thank you very much for bringing this up and discussing the consequences.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you, President Caraviello. I guess to my two colleagues that want to do the site plan review, my question would be, what about notice with regards to any unit, any housing unit? You still think that's too much notice? Versus six plus, what about any unit, any housing unit? Yeah.
[John Falco]: If I may, because I think that is definitely a legitimate concern about when you're adding units to existing units. So if we can work on a compromise, I'm all for it. So I was wondering, City Solicitor Rumley, is there a way that we can, and I'm not sure if you could give us an opinion on this, but right now if the amendment is only apply where site plan review is required, could we also put or if, you know, something. A housing unit is to be added. Yeah, or if an existing unit is adding additional units, can we, can we, or if you have a recommendation as to some order.
[Mark Rumley]: Well, I'm gonna, I've listened and done my share of speaking tonight. The line can be drawn a whole bunch of places. So I would suggest, and I don't know how you feel about this, that you just send the resolution up. with an amendment that says that the city council suggests or recommends that the planning board discuss viable alternatives for the applicability of this expanded notification, such as applying it only to projects that are subject to site plan review or the conversion of housing to more units than it presently has. Something like that. That's the best I can come up with off the top of my head. Move approval. I didn't write it down. Did you get that Mr. Finn?
[John Falco]: I'd be fine with that amendment. Did you get that?
[Richard Caraviello]: So on the motion by Councilor O'Connor, as amended that the City Council ask for viable alternatives to housing for applicability. Housing applicability. As amended by Councilor Lococo. As amended. Seconded by Councilor Falco. Roll call. Roll call vote has been requested, Mr. Clerk. Refer to this OCB board. We did it! Woo!
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo, yay. Councilor Falco, yes. Councilor Knight, yes. Councilor Kerr, yes. Vice President Monaco, yes. Councilor Scarpelli, yes.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. Motion passes. Motion to be referred back to regular business by Councilor Dello Russo, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Motion passes. Public hearing 17782. A public hearing will be held by the Medford City Council in the Howard F. Alden Memorial Chamber, City Hall, Medford Mass on Tuesday, December 12th, 2017 at 7 o'clock p.m. The purpose of the hearing is to hear the Board of Assessors on the following items for the purpose of the allocation of the fiscal year 2018 property tax. One, to determine the residential factor to be used for fiscal year 2018. Two, to select an open space discount. Three, to select a residential exemption. And four, to select a small commercial exemption. Call 781-393-242501 for any combinations to see if Medford is equal opportunity employer. Edward P. Finn-Clark. All those in favor of the accepting the tax recommendations. This is a public hearing. Name and address for the record, please.
[Nunley-Benjamin]: Yes, Aleesha Nunley Benjamin, Finance Director, Auditor for the City of Medford.
[Kenneth Stein]: And Kenneth Stein, Interim Assessor for the Board of Assessors. Thank you.
[Nunley-Benjamin]: Tonight, I'd like you to accept the residential factor at 0.906926, which will produce the 175% shift.
[Richard Caraviello]: I'm sorry, okay.
[Nunley-Benjamin]: The residential factor for this evening is 0.906, 926, which will produce a 175% shift. On the motion. On the motion to. I'm sorry.
[Richard Caraviello]: on the motion by Councilor Knight to accept the residential factor. Seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Motion passes. I'm sorry. It's the public hearing at the moment, Mr. Storaro.
[Sorrell]: Motion passed before there was any discussion. and I didn't hear the councilors discuss this and I didn't hear the audience invited up to it being a public hearing. Motion for reconsideration. Uh, I, I did have, I did have some comments here and it seemed like he gathered my papers here. Uh, point of order, Mr. President.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Yes, Mr. Donaldson. Uh, we in the public, uh, forum of the, uh, public hearing in those in opposition or in those in favor, Mr. President? Mr. Starella is in opposition.
[Sorrell]: Opposition. Correct? No, I'm not in opposition. I'm neutral. But I do want it discussed on an information basis. I want the Councilors who already know all about this, but the audience out there, the people, they don't understand this, most of my sayings.
[Richard Caraviello]: We have to know if there's anyone else in opposition first.
[SPEAKER_11]: Okay, go ahead.
[Richard Caraviello]: Is there anyone else in opposition to the resident? By the way, I'm not in opposition. Okay, so you're in favor of it? No, not yet. Okay, this is a public hearing, Dr. Straub. So you're either in favor or you're opposed.
[Sorrell]: At this point, let's move to the public hearing. I'm in favor of an understanding. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: And you can come back and speak after we. Certainly. Is there anyone in opposition? I await your invitation. Thank you. Is there anyone in opposition? Hearing and seeing none. Motion to hear and close. We motion to not file the hearing and close. Now you can address. Okay, now you can address. Mr. President, point of order. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Are we now in the portion of the meeting that we can openly discuss and debate? Yes, we are. The format is before us. Yes, we are. Thank you. Thank you.
[Sorrell]: Name and address of the record, please. Thank you, Councilor Dello Russo. My name is John Strahler, and I reside at 20 Metcalf Street, right here in Medford. And I want to thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to speak. And thank you to the city council. which I would like to thank individually for the opportunity to exercise our First Amendment right, freedom of speech. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Thank you, Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Thank you, Councilor Marks. Thank you, Councilor Dello Russo. Thank you, Councilor Favreau. The property tax has already been passed. It was passed in June of 2017. That was six months ago. It was passed by a unanimous vote of the city council at $109.5 million, the most allowed. All seven councilors voted and the mayor approved a $54 million increase in the property tax. I mean, I'm sorry, I want to correct that. A $4 million increase. Because last year it was $105 million. This year it's $109 million. And the council passed the same $4 million increase in June of 2016. Again, in June of 2017. And it's already scheduled to do it again in June of 2018. We can predict right now that this city council will pass a $4 million increase in June of 2018. Now, the reason the council does that is because you cannot run the city without that increase. You cannot pay the help. So it must be passed with that increase. That's why we went from $105 million last year for a property tax to $109.5 million this year. Let's catch up here. Now, without the annual property tax, as I said, without that increase, the Medford City government will not be able to adequately compensate our loyal civil servants. So, if the highest ever property tax is already the law, why are we here? That's what the discussion is about. The city council is here now to decide who will pay for the property tax. That's what's gonna be determined tonight. Not whether or not there is a tax, not how much the tax is. We've already decided how much it is. This council is gonna decide who is going to pay for it. By the way, it's not paid equally. It is decided on a sometimes political basis. The council will choose who among our tax groups will pay and how much each group will pay. The 109, oh, by the way, Mr. President, this does not carry on for long, so please bear with me. The $109 million property tax, if divided evenly and fairly, would come to a rate of $11.30 for each $1,000 of assessed property. That seems fair. The minimum commercial shift in the state law. Now when I say commercial, I'm talking about CIPs, commercial, industrial, and personal property. The minimum commercial shift in the state law is 1.75. I mean, you can't shift less than that. And that makes the minimum residential factor 90.7. That's what Auditor Nunley was referring to. leaving the commercials that have 10% of the property to pay 20% of the tax. Now think of that. The commercials have only 10% of the property, but they pay 20% of the tax. The residents, that's all of us, who own 90% of the property pay only 80% of the tax. I don't know if that's fair, but that is saving, is a saving which the council later takes away from our residents. Now the council wants to help the residents by having them pay less than the commercials, but later on it takes that away if, and this is where the two are connected, if it does not pass the residential exemption, the 35% exemption has got to be passed too. That's why these have to be discussed mutually, together, at the same time. Do you see how convoluted the government has made this? The commercials are the ones who invest their money in Medford. They build the squares. They provide the services and provide jobs to Medford residents. And they, the commercials, are punished by the city. Pardon me. Now, with reference to the residential exemption, if the residential exemption allows residents to pay less of the property tax and the commercials to pay more, guess what? If the residential exemption of 35% is not passed, those same residents who are owner-occupiers would be deprived of the tax gain which the council wanted to award them, and it would be given to the non-occupying investors who are already collecting huge rents at big profits, up to $3,000 a month for an apartment. So the resident taxpayers bear the burden of the property tax. Is that what the city council wants? The city council wants the residents to think that they are favoring them, and then by not passing the residential exemption, they take that away. Anyway, to conclude, they always say that, don't they, to conclude. But they go on. A residential exemption. would save the owner-occupied properties $800 to $1,000 a year, that's all. People are paying $5,000, $6,000 in taxes. Now this saves the people who own their homes and occupy them somewhere from $800 to $1,000 a year. The assessor could not come up with a number, but this is a reasonable number, and it seems that the average tax say is $5,000 to $6,000. This would save them, If you live in a single family house and you occupy it, your tax would, instead of being say $5,000, would be $4,200. The cities in the area already using, now there's cities already using this residential exemption are Chelsea, Somerville, Boston, Cambridge, Malden, Everett, Waltham, and Watertown. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Dr. Straub. Thank you, Dr. Straub. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Apologize, can you go over the number one again? Sure. The determine the residential factor to be used in fiscal year 2018. What was the number again? The number for the residential factor is 0.906926 to produce the 175% shift. on the motion to accept the residential factor. With the roll call, Mr. President. Roll call. Councilor Lengelkram.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello, and thank you, Dr. Storillo, for your speech. I think the residential factor was brought up by Dr. Storillo, and it's something we discussed in depth today at our Committee of the Whole meeting at 6 and last week, and I thank the consultant and Ms. Nunley for giving us answers to all the questions we did ask and that fifth document we did want was a breakdown of the break even point and I just think it's worth some a summary or some clarification for the viewing public, because I know once a month I feel like I get an email, why doesn't Medford have the residential exemption when it comes to owner-occupied versus non-owner-occupied? And the answer I always give is because although we'd be helping the owner-occupied parcels, we'd also be burdening about this year would be about 1,300 properties that are above $720,000. And that's always the answer that I give. But sometimes it's almost not good enough. And there are a lot of people struggling, I think, on both ends. And this council's never adopted the residential owner-occupied exemption. And I think it's just It's good for the public to know that we are going to look into getting new data. Our data is five to six years old and we did request at our Committee of the Whole meeting to get new data so we can get better, more clear and accurate numbers. Because if you look at a property that is worth a million dollars, if we took the shift at 5% they'd be paying about an extra $110. If we took it at 20%, they'd be paying an extra $500. And that's, I think, something that's obviously the sticking point of doing this shift that a number of communities do do. So I don't know if you could add anything else, just to educate the public a little more. Because it is something that a lot of people do ask us, please accept this shift. And we're left explaining time after time after time.
[Kenneth Stein]: what the issues are. It's a program that's revenue neutral for the city. What it does is only within the residential class, it cuts the taxes of those properties qualifying as owner-occupied, and to make up for that, increases the tax on two classes of property. One, those that are above that so-called break-even point that are still worse off with a residential exemption than if the city didn't have it, and it also increases the tax on all those properties that don't qualify for the residential exemption, particularly rental properties, apartments, and so forth. So it's a cost-benefit analysis and an economic analysis for the council each year to determine is it worth the benefit to those people that qualify to increase the taxes on those people that don't qualify. And of the 351 towns and cities, right now I think only 13 actually have adopted it. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And with regard to that, we did take a vote to get more updated data. And I believe, Ms. Nunley, you did say that that is something the city is willing to pursue if the mayor and the council. Yes, the administration is absolutely open to that. So I just want to put that on record that we were told that the city is going to pursue getting us more accurate data and I think that will allow us, with this breakdown, number 5 of what we have in our packet, I think updated data, having this as well as what the savings would be for the owner occupied under 720 or whatever that number may be next year. I think we can make a more educated decision on whether or not to do it or maybe try it at 5% or whatnot. And I think that's just important to point out that we are looking into it. We've looked into it, I think, two times in depth in the past 10 plus years. And I think if we can get this more updated data, it's something we can definitely think about again next year.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. Vice President Mox. Thank you, Mr. President. As was stated, this has been an issue before this council for, geez, the last probably five to eight years regarding a residential exemption. And my stance has always been the same, Mr. President. You know, in theory, it sounds great if you can shift to those that aren't living in their property and using them as income. you know, that are living outside this community, or maybe even inside this community that have rental apartments, shift the burden to them and take it off the people that live in their homes. That sounds perfect. Sign me up for it. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way. And what we've been told by the assessor's office, not only this year, but in past years, there's roughly a thousand or some homes in the community that will not get this benefit that actually live in their home. So if you're above the 720,000, I believe it is, assessed value, you could potentially pay more, even though you live in your home and we're giving out exemptions. To me, that is unfair. I cannot support that, Mr. President. care of the lion's share of people living in their homes, but what about the other percent? I represent everyone in this community, and in my opinion, it's not fair. And the second point is that you have many elderly people in this community that are property rich. So you may have someone that bought their home 55, 60 years ago, and their home is assessed at $800,000, $900,000. And the woman is living there by herself now on a fixed income. And guess what? Based on what we're being presented for this exemption, that particular woman living by herself in a $900,000 house, she's property rich, would pay more under that proposal. And I cannot support that. I cannot support that. Someday, like other communities, it'll average out like they do in Malden, in Somerville, in Cambridge, that there are a fair number of non-owner-occupied in the city that you could shift the entire burden to them. We in this community don't have that shift yet. It doesn't work for our community yet. Someday it may. At the rate, you know, properties go into this community, it may work that way. But currently right now, Mr. President, I cannot support that because it leaves out over a thousand homeowners in this community that will fall above the $720,000 and that live in their property, and that they will end up paying more. So that's where I stand, Mr. President, on this, and I appreciate the fact that we will get updated information, and maybe next year or the following year, who knows? At that point, it may work, and I'll be the first to vote to shift it to the non-owned occupied, but not at this point, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the first question, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. What is the question, sir? The question is to determine the residential factor to be used in fiscal year 2018. Dr. Stroud, do you have something to add?
[Sorrell]: Yes, I want to respond to what the councilors have said. They are very much concerned about the 1,000 people who will pay more. And we talk about $900,000 value homes. How many of those are there in Medford, please? Awful lot. How many? An awful lot. How many, well. 1,300 at the moment. All right, now if you want to talk about the 1,000. All right, 1,300. Well, there are 13,000 which are unoccupied. 1,300 on one side, 13,000 on the other side. I think this council should take care of the majority of the people. My opinion is- Point of information, Councilor Naith.
[Adam Knight]: I think it's important to point out, Mr. President, that the assessor's office in their presentation noted that the data that they were using to determine how many homes in this community were owner-occupied was certainly outdated. Therefore, all the data that was generated is garbage in, garbage out. So we really don't have an accurate representation. All we know is that based on the materials that we had before us this evening, we weren't ready to go forward. We recognize the fact that the information that we had before us was deficient, and we're asking the administration to go forward and get us the appropriate information so that in the future we can make an informed decision. That is correct.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Yay. Councilor Falco?
[SPEAKER_27]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Lockerran?
[SPEAKER_27]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Vice President Monson?
[SPEAKER_27]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Scarpelli?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. President Caraviello? Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none of the negative. Number two, to select an open space discount.
[Kenneth Stein]: We don't have any open space currently classified in measure.
[Richard Caraviello]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Do not adopt the open space discounts. Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: I'm on the agenda, it says select an open space discount.
[Richard Caraviello]: We don't have one.
[SPEAKER_68]: The way that the clerk put it was the motion by Councilor Nantz did not adopt. So my motion would be to make a motion, you would have to vote in favor. This here, the old language is different than we have, where I used 15 years. So Councilor Nantz, yes vote would not adopt the open space discount.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'm just saying turn their microphones on, people are wondering what they're saying.
[Fred Dello Russo]: A yes vote would not adopt the open space discount, am I correct?
[Adam Knight]: The motion that was made was a motion to not adopt, which would mean that the yes vote would be the negative on the question.
[Fred Dello Russo]: That is the motion, yay.
[Clerk]: Councilor Falco.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Kerr.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Clerk]: Vice President Marks. Yes.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello. Yes, seven in the affirmative and none in the negative. Number three, to select a residential exemption. Motion by Councilor Knight not to adopt a residential exemption. We have someone who would like to speak. Name and address of the record, please.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Thank you, Honorable Council President. Andrew Castagnetti, Cushion Street, Method, Massachusetts. I'm a little bit disconnected here. I had to go home for some papers. And the information that I received today was actually not the answer I was looking for from the assessor's office. So first of all, good evening, honorable Councilors. Please bear with me because I'm a bit disconnected here. This is probably my seventh and a half year that I've come here for this month of December as you set the tax rate or post to elect a residential owner exemption or not. And without success in the last 7.5 years that I've come before you since 2009, I believe. When I ran for city council, my platform mission was, and still is, which I like to pass out, because some councilors had requested my political brochure, so I would like to.
[Adam Knight]: We're not handing out political brochures.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: No, this is information. It's about the real estate tax exemption, and if I may give it to the, Mr. Clerk, Mr. Lepore, the seven for the council, one specifically for Ms. Mayor Muccini-Burke. I would like you to pass them out after I'm done, please. Not now. Thank you very much for your consideration. My priority number one for the community, for the people, is to improve public safety. Number two, improve maintenance of public buildings and city infrastructure. Number three, encourage fiscal responsibility. Number four, promote responsible development. And number five, My special interest would be to reduce real estate tax bills for owner-occupied.
[Adam Knight]: Andy, I asked you not to give out any political literature. This is about the- This is political literature on here. That's old news.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: It's political literature.
[Adam Knight]: It's just about the owner-occupied exemption. It's political literature. Number five. Mr. Clerk, please take those back. It's political literature. You can keep it. Thank you, Brianna. That's political literature, Andy. I asked you not to give it up. No, it's obsolete. It's political literature.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Okay, you win. I still would like to speak on behalf of the majority of the homeowners. Number five, I would want to reduce real estate tax bills for owner-occupied homeowners by adopting the full 35% under Massachusetts general law Chapter 59, Section 5C, as it is done, as Dr. Sturela said, in Somerville, Malden, Everett, all of Boston, and other area communities, to provide some long overdue tax relief to homeowners. Please be aware and assured all seven Councilors, and Ms. Mayor Burke, the city would not lose any real estate tax dollars. They still will receive the whole real estate tax levy of $109.5 million, as they want, with a 4% increase from last year. Our savings will simply be paid for by all others, such as absentee, residential only, residential homeowners who are absentee landlords, period. At the tune of whatever it cost on their bill, I didn't get enough current factual information to write this number in. However, I may continue. On average, these absentee owners, they're collecting $2,000 a month rent. If it's a two family, you're talking $48,000 in rents, even if they had an $800 increase. They're still generating $48,000 and not living in our neighborhoods. You, the city councilors and the mayor, have before you an opportunity of a lifetime. If you adopt Mass General Law, Chapter 59, Section 5C, the owner-occupied real estate tax exemption, the people would benefit greatly. Now, I don't have all my information because of other circumstances that I had no control over. However, I have a packet from the assessor's office that was given out a week ago, last Wednesday, and it states the communities and cities and towns that give out this owner-occupied exemption. And we're talking, as I said, Boston, Chelsea, Everett, Somerville. And the numbers I'm seeing here that they're saving on real estate tax bills, like the lowest is like $1,400 a year, and that is in Chelsea. And that is where the interim director of the assessor's office, Mr. Ken Stein, who's here this evening, was working in that department. And I just found out this evening that the owner-occupied exemption was in effect prior to him working there in 1999. Wow, this has been around since the millennium. This is over 17 years. If we're losing $1,000 a year for the average homeowner, and I'm talking nine out of 10, if you live in the house, that's 90%, 900% Batten average. That's incredible. And furthermore, if that 10th person has an increase, it may indeed be less of an increase if we were not to adopt this wonderful law that was thought up by Massachusetts legislators. Finally, they come up with a solution to keep maybe the seniors to be able to afford to live in their town. because the real estate taxes are just too much for them to carry. And furthermore, I don't want to get off track, but the gentleman, Mr. Ken Stein, the interim assessor did say, Chelsea's been doing it since 19, prior to 1999. That's a lot of thousand dollar bills every year. I don't understand why this is not being done here. But in closing, lots of people, including City Hall employees, especially actually, asked me, why not here in 02155? I replied, I'm not sure. So I spoke to Bernie Sanders, and he said, Andrew, the system is rigged. He said, the political donations come from not you, with the empty two-family home on Cushing Street, it comes from the well-to-do, a la the corporate world, businesses, and the like. I hope he's wrong, because we must save the middle class from becoming extinct. If we're gonna have a society worth a damn, please give the average homeowner 90% of them, a 1,000 plus, who knows how much, can't get a straight answer. Sad. Give them a nice present for Christmas for the first time ever in history, and go to 155.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion to accept,
[Sorrell]: Name and address of the record. John Starella, 20 Metcalf Street. Mr. President, this city council continues to kick this can down the road. Through parliamentary maneuvers, they push this forward and don't deal with the question. But someday, I wish one of them would explain to me why they continue to favor millionaire owners who don't live in Medford, who are collecting as much as $36,000 a year in rents, but they will not help the owner-occupied residents of Medford. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Neist.
[Adam Knight]: Move the question.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the question, number three, to select a residential exemption. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo? Nay. Councilor Falco? No. Councilor Knight? No. Councilor Lococo? No. Vice-President Mox? No. Councilor Scarpelli?
[Richard Caraviello]: No. Vice-President Caraviello? No. Seven in the negative, motion fails. Number four, to select a small commercial exemption. Mr. Stein?
[Kenneth Stein]: The Small Commercial Exemption is another tax-shifting program which shifts tax within the commercial and industrial class only. It's a program that needs to be adopted well in advance of the setting of the tax rate because it requires application, it requires certification from the Department of Workforce Development, and serves again to increase the tax rate to make up for anything that is exempted. It says the With the approval of the council, may grant a small commercial exemption to all commercial industrial properties occupied by businesses with an average annual employment of no more than 10 people and assessed value of less than a million dollars. The exemption may not exceed 10% of the assessed value. And to qualify, the director of the Department of Workforce Development must certify that it has an average annual employment of 10 or few people, et cetera, et cetera. This is something that can be done, but it would normally be begun and analyzed during the summer months and prepared as part of the recap submission against a tax shift. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo to move the question, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Councilor Dello Russo. Nay. Councilor Falco. No. Councilor Nay. Councilor Leopold. Mr. President, just if I could.
[Michael Marks]: I believe it's only appropriate, Mr. President, that, and I brought this up during the tax discussion, is that the annual receipts that go into when we set our tax rate, every year we estimate what we're going to bring in in receipts. And that number is then added to the recapitulation of what happens within our budget. And the estimated receipts is usually a lower number, what we expect to bring in, and the tax levy is usually a higher number. So every year, because we don't know what we're gonna bring in for receipts, we have to estimate and we look at the previous year. So I think it's only appropriate, because we asked for this information, Mr. President, and the assessor's office was kind enough to hand it to us. In 2014, we received $13,253,773 in actual receipts for 2014. we estimated that we were gonna bring in $12,392,303. So we were off, we were over our estimates by $800,000. The reason why I bring this up, Mr. President, is in my opinion, that when you have year after year of estimates that are far below the actual receipts, To me, it would say something about a community that the community is looking to have a surplus rather than to give actual numbers or closer to actual numbers. If you look at FY, FY15, the actual receipts that were received in FY15 was $16,000,414,434. What we estimated, and that's what we put in our estimation for total receipts, was $13,475,700. We were almost off by $3 million. And again, that should have been added to the receipts. bringing up the receipts, what we anticipate to take in, and lower the tax levy, which would lower the tax for every resident in this community. And some would say, well, it's not a lot of money. If you look at it, it really doesn't amount to much. But if you add it up over year, over year, over year, you would see that it would be a savings to the residents of this community. So for the past four years, and I won't go any further into it, Mr. President, our actual receipts exceeded the estimated receipts in each and every year for the past four years. So I think we have to do a better job, and this is something I brought up at the Committee of the Whole meeting, when we have our estimates and look at last year's receipts and say we did X number of dollars. For instance, if you look at excise, room tax. You know, we added a hotel in the community about a year and a half ago, although we decreased what we believe we're gonna be bringing in on room tax. It makes no sense at all. And the only sense it makes is to make sure that this community doesn't run into a deficit, but it doesn't really give, in my opinion, a strong number of estimated receipts based on year after year projections. And the same applies to the meals tax. The same applies to rentals and other fees in this community. So again, Mr. President, I will ask in next year's budget that the number of receipts be closer to the previous year's actuals, unless they can speak up and say what the reason is. If there's a legit reason, then I'd like to hear it. But year after year, to be underestimating and not giving the residents of this community somewhat of a break, to me is a shame, Mr. President, and shouldn't happen. I also think it's important, and we didn't bring it up this year and I know it's mentioned every year, when we talk about the minimum residential factor, It's important because we read this off all the time. Single family homes, the average value of $508,000 assessment will see roughly an increase of $179. That's an average. So some will be more, some will be less. Condos at a 384,000 assessment will see an increase of $113. Some will see more, some will see a little less. Two families with the average assessment at 610,000 will see $393 increase over last year. And again, that's average. In three family, based on a 749,000 average assessment, we'll see a $579 increase in their property tax bill. Commercial and industrial, we'll see a decrease, which hasn't happened in a lot of years, of $305, and that is an average. Some will get a decrease more, and some will get a decrease less than that. So I think that's important for the edification of people, Mr. President, that will see their bills go up in the upcoming tax fiscal year. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Mr. Vice President.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I missed Councilor Marks when he first started off because I was sending some paperwork that the messenger had, but I'm assuming that was paper 17793 we were just speaking about, the committee report? No, we haven't done that one yet. Why don't we take the committee reports up, Mr. President, move for approval on both, and then we can have this gentleman get a sign.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion from the Spencer to accept the committee report 17793. And 1794, Mr. President. And 1794. Seconded by Councilor Scavelli. Motion to accept the report of Committee of the Whole meeting December 6th, 2017 to review and discuss fiscal 2018 property tax allocation. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. 1779.4, report of the Committee of the Whole, December 5th, 2017 to review and discuss the Eversoil transmission project and grantable location. On the motion by. Move for approval. On the motion by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli.
[Adam Knight]: All those in favor? Aye. We already granted them the right to location. We already gave them the grant license. Just to adopt the committee report.
[Richard Caraviello]: All those in favor?
[Adam Knight]: Aye. Motion passes. Mr. President, motion to revert back to the regular order of business.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion by Councilor Knight to revert back to the regular business, seconded by Councilor Scapelli. Petitions, presentations, and similar matters. 17-796 petition for sign and denial reversal by Jason Perillo for back bay sign for Johnson Supply, 91 Hicks Avenue, Medford. OCD application 2017-21B exceeds allowable size and secondary sign. Councilor, Vice President Mox is the signed subcommittee chairman.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. We have the petitioner. Are you from the signed company or the petitioner? Yes. We have a gentleman from the signed company here. If he can just give a brief presentation, Mr. President.
[Jason Perullo]: Absolutely. I'm Jason Perullo with Back Bay Sign. I'll serve as representing Johnson Supply this evening. This property is a new tenant, this property at 91 Hicks Ave. It's a situation where the front of the property on Hicks Ave is shorter than the side elevation, which is on Mystic Ave, which isn't technically a street, but it functions much like a street. Pretty much all the business activity of this business is gonna be on that secondary elevation, the parking, the loading dock, the customer entrance. So that's why we proposed the larger sign to go on that secondary elevation. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I had an opportunity to speak with the gentleman. I've taken a look at the sign, and I'm very familiar with the site. I feel as though it's not going to have much impact on the quality of life or beauty of the neighborhood, and it certainly will help out the business owners. So with that being said, I'd move for approval on the paper.
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President. Mr. President of the box. It's important to note that this sign is not internally illuminated. That's correct. And it does point to where the location is, which is to the rear of the building. Exactly. The access. I too, Mr. President, have no problem with this sign and would move approval, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Vice President Mox for approval, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. All those in favor? Motion passes, thank you very much. Thank you very much, thank you. Motion by Councilor Knight to take papers in the hands of the clerk. Seconded by Councilor Locren. All those in favor? Motion passes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I'm sorry?
[Richard Caraviello]: Okay.
[Michael Marks]: Let him speak.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: Name and address of the record, please. My name is Matthew Page Lieberman. I live at 15 Canal Street, apartment 15. I just want to apologize for not getting in on the docket in time. But I'm here about some comments that were voiced last week at the school committee. OK. I know that this is. Can I make a.
[Richard Caraviello]: All the people that are mentioned are not here to defend themselves or make a comment, so it's something that we cannot discuss without all parties being present.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: I'm not prosecuting anybody.
[Richard Caraviello]: I'm not prosecuting anybody. We won't discuss this without everybody being here. And this should be discussed in executive session.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: OK. Councilor Knight. So executive session excludes the residents, is that correct?
[Richard Caraviello]: That's correct. There's people here that are not
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, if I may, the Attorney General put out a guideline and the guideline was relative to the open meeting law and the requirements thereof and the top ten reasons for why a public body can go into executive session. Rule number one is to discuss the reputation of character rather than the professional competence of any individual.
[Richard Caraviello]: I put the names down there that are part of the public record. He has a paper here that I don't think that's something that we should be discussing and I'm gonna move the paper out of order. Thank you. The people on here to defend themselves that are on this paper.
[Adam Knight]: Should we wish to go into executive to discuss the matter, we need to provide the parties that are subject to the discussion with 48 hours notice.
[Richard Caraviello]: Point of information, Mr. President? Before me here I have the open meeting guide from the Attorney General's office.
[Adam Knight]: Individual to be discussed in executive session shall be notified in writing by the public body at least 40 hours prior to the proposed executive session provided however the notification may be waived upon written agreement of the parties. I believe that the handout that came across the desk indicated that. I might not have read the handout. I just read the materials that he passed out when he came up. I guess I do because I read the papers that he gave us.
[Richard Caraviello]: You got the paper that you were given.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Are we speaking about the paper he gave us or are you speaking in general about politics?
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: I was just providing something that's part of the public record with that paper.
[Richard Caraviello]: We have it and it's for the council to do what they want with it.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: That the council can do whatever everybody wants, but there are some important things to understand about how this reflects upon the community.
[Richard Caraviello]: Okay, but again, there's people here whose reputations may be jeopardized here.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: Look, I don't want to violate the law. I'm not saying that this is a violation of open records.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: If you're going to name people's names.
[Adam Knight]: No, I have no interest in doing that. I have no interest in naming names. But there are some serious dynamics about what happened that need to be addressed.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I don't disagree if it's done right.
[George Scarpelli]: You mentioned that you wanted his public record, what you gave us, and that's what I find the issue, that's all.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: I'm only saying that I'm referring to something that's already in the public record. Okay, I haven't seen it. I haven't seen the public record, so I can't comment on it either. Thank you. Everybody needs to see a public record before people can discuss something that's already in the public record What is on public record the conversation that happened last week at the school committee? That's It's not on the public record if it happens with the school committee
[Richard Caraviello]: We have no record of that. I have not received any record of that.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: I put them all online. Everybody knows I've been doing it for three years.
[Richard Caraviello]: Online is not for us, a public record for us.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: We've never received anything in our... Okay, so what will it take to move this forward? Do I have to send emails to everybody with the links to the videos I put online?
[Richard Caraviello]: No, it's public.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: Again, he needs something else. Or do I have to get somebody to stamp it that it's a public record? You submit it to the clerk. that this week, I just have to get you to stamp it or something like this? It has to be received.
[Clerk]: I mean, my only suggestion is that this is subject only to the school committee that your petition should be to the school committee. Yeah, not to us. And the school committee themselves.
[Richard Caraviello]: They can make a difference to us.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: Are you saying the school committee would make it a public record?
[Richard Caraviello]: They can make it a public record.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: And that would be up to their discretion? That's up to their discretion. Can I say something without mentioning any of those people?
[Richard Caraviello]: If you're not mentioning any names.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: I have no intention of mentioning any of those people. I will say, though, that there are very many people who are upset about what happened. And I know that there are things that people are trying to take to address some of these dynamics in our community. I would just ask that anybody on this body, when anybody comes forward and asks for any kind of support, that people really honor it, that people try to figure out how can we work to make sure that things that happened previously don't happen in any of our bodies. Thank you for your opinion.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion to take hands from the clerk. Offered by Vice President Mox, be it resolved that the pavement at the entrance to 100 High Street Condos parking lot located on Route 16 be repaired in the interest of public safety.
[Michael Marks]: Vice President Mox. Thank you, Mr. President. This particular road, which is the entrance to the 100 High Street condos, their parking lot, is in deplorable condition, and I would ask that this paper be sent to the State Highway Department for repair of that roadway, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Vice President Mox, seconded by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. All those in favor? Motion passes. Offered by Vice President Mox, be it resolved that the two catch basins located at 16 Cook Circle be discussed. Vice President Mox.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. It's my understanding that on Cook Circle they installed two catch basins over the last several years to alleviate some of those things. the water concerns that they have up on the hill and what's happening right now is these catch basins are getting clogged with leaves and the rain runoff is going behind the homes on Cook Circle leading down to the backyards on homes that are on Lawrence Road. And it's eroding the hill that separates the homes on both streets and creating a concern. So I would ask that DPW take a look at ways that they can prevent the leaves from clogging up these two particular catch basins in front of 16 Cook Circle. Thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Vice President Mox. Seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All those in favor? Aye, motion passes. Records of the meeting of December 5th, 2017 were passed to Councilor Knight. Councilor Knight, how did you find those records?
[Michael Marks]: Mr. President, before we end the meeting. Vice President Mox. Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to bring up, I had the opportunity with some of my colleagues this past Saturday to attend the grand opening of our first ever dog park in this community. I know you were there, Mr. President. Councilor Lungo-Koehn, Councilor Falco were present at the time. It was a great event. There were dozens of dogs, both for the small and large dog park. I want to personally thank, again, Mr. President, a group of residents that got together with a particular need in mind, and that was to create an area where dogs could socialize and exercise some three years ago. And this particular group of residents found a $250,000 Stanton Foundation grant. They did the research and found a dog park architect who was instrumental in doing other parks around this particular area. The members of the PAWS committee, Patty Flynn, Jim Silva, Gary DeStefano, Diane Gittner, John Sardone, were all instrumental in moving this very important and well-needed dog park in this community. I want to thank Mayor McGlynn who who originally was the person that this dog park committee approached. The mayor saw fit to do a survey citywide, and that's how we came up with the location behind the McGlynn School. So I want to thank Mayor McGlynn for his foresight and vision on this. And I hope, Mr. President, for future needs in this community that citizen-driven participation will always be welcome. in this community, and I think this is a great example of what can happen when there's a need in the community and a number of citizens that need to address that.
[Richard Caraviello]: And you, Mr. Vice President, should be championed for taking the lead in this way back a couple years ago, and we at the City Council thank you for all your hard work that you did on this. Thank you. Seconded by Councilor. On the motion by Councilor Dello Russo to adjourn. Although, seconded by Councilor Falco.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: May I comment on Councilor Marks' brilliant achievement? Thank you. Councilor Marks, congratulations. You came through. I'm glad the dogs got their due. I hope someday the owner-occupiers get their $1,200 a year in real estate tax savings also. Especially when the seniors maybe can afford to stay and live in the houses in West Medford or South Medford. Thank you for listening.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion to adjourn. All those in favor? Motion passes, meeting adjourned.
[j-SvxIQDpRA_SPEAKER_12]: It's finished. Let's look forward to 2018.
[SPEAKER_50]: OK, let's jump from the business pages to the sports pages, or maybe this is sort of society pages. I'm not quite sure whether they have those in Indian papers. But when the Indian cricket captain gets married, it's national news.
[j-SvxIQDpRA_SPEAKER_12]: It is. And look, you know, weddings are a business here. They're one of the big businesses, one of the things of the recession. proof get bigger and bigger every year. And Indians, it's, you know, Bisanyan prizes, weddings and the other things, the topic of conversation at this particular point of time. And the marriage of Virat Kohli to Anushka Sharma, you know, this big Bollywood star marrying a big cricket star, has really grabbed the attention. It's taken some of the conversation about what's happening in the economy and people just looking at that, really. And I think it shows you the obsessions that people have with weddings. I mean, they had a secret wedding in Italy. There was rumors that they were flying off there. Then the whole country moved into a spin of weather. India's most famous couple were about to finally tie the knot. They have done so. So you'd think that that means that the talking is going to stop. That's the end of the story. But every day, it's still going on and on and on. what she wore, what the priest did. I mean, everybody now wants to wear what Virat Kohli was wearing, what she was wearing. Yeah, so weddings, big, big business, big topics of conversation here. Come on, let's get over it. Let's move on to something else now, India. Got to be better stuff to talk about.
[SPEAKER_50]: Rahul, thanks a lot. Rahul Tandon this morning in Kolkata. Now, didn't think I'd talk about this on Business Matters. Peppa Pig. Blamed for a lot of things. Having a temper, encouraging children to be naughty, fat shaming daddy pig. Shocking. And it seems the cartoon character avidly watched by millions of children around the world is causing trouble again because a doctor here in Britain is blaming Peppa Pig for giving people unrealistic expectations of their medical practitioners, Terry Egan reports.
[SPEAKER_16]: Dr. Brown-Bear, a GP who works alone and also appears to provide his patients with an excellent service. His prompt offers direct telephone access, continuity of care, extended hours and is always ready for a home visit.
[SPEAKER_60]: Dr. Brown-Bear speaking. Hello doctor, this is Madame Gazelle. A child is ill. Don't panic, I'll come straight away.
[SPEAKER_16]: Dr Catherine Bell wondered about the potential impact Dr Brownbear's actions could have on patient behaviour and, with her tongue firmly in her cheek, has looked at a number of cases, going on to examine their implications. In one instance, Dr Brownbear makes an urgent home visit to a three-year-old piglet with a facial rash. He reassures the parents it's nothing serious and offers a dose of medicine, adding that it's likely to clear up quickly. This case, suggests Dr Bell, is an example of unnecessary prescribing for a viral illness and encourages patients to attempt to access their GP inappropriately. Peppa Pig is broadcast in more than 180 countries and writing in the BMJ, Dr Bell suggests that the way primary care is portrayed is likely to be influential to many people all over the world. While Peppa Pig conveys many positive public health messages, such as encouraging healthy eating, exercise and road safety, she suspects that exposure to Peppa Pig and its portrayal of general practice raises patient expectation and encourages the inappropriate use of primary care services.
[SPEAKER_50]: Terry Egan reporting. Yes, the doctor rushing out to the house call reminded everybody of the 1950s. Catherine, it seems a bit unfair, doesn't it? You're trying to come up with an entertaining and slightly educational TV strip and suddenly everyone's holding you to account for, even somewhat tongue-in-cheek, as Dr Catherine Bell no doubt was, for making unrealistic demands.
[SPEAKER_71]: I think you're right, it's a little bit unfair, but I do have to say that granted I'm the daughter of a doctor and my children are his grandchildren and it's not unusual for us to be calling him in the middle of the night for something like a rash on one of my kids' faces. So maybe I inherently just expect efficiency when it comes to GP services.
[SPEAKER_50]: But you're going to tell me that your dad was exactly like Dr. Brown Bear, surely?
[SPEAKER_71]: I think Dr. Brown Bear is moral on my father, you know.
[SPEAKER_50]: And the thing is, Alexander, from a U.S. perspective, this is really interesting because this goes to the heart of things like Sesame Street, which have this early learning mission to explain from ABCs right through to cultural behavior. Absolutely a fascinating thing to write and perform.
[SPEAKER_79]: Yes, but as you can also imagine in the United States that trying to translate all of the issues around our healthcare market and, you know, why certain people have access to different things would be quite difficult in a children's show.
[SPEAKER_50]: Yeah, so we were wondering where Dr. Brown Bear would get, would say, you know, visa or MasterCard?
[SPEAKER_79]: Yeah, or when Dr. Brown Bear would actually be an employee of CVS or Walgreens or have a strange opinion about Obamacare.
[SPEAKER_50]: Yeah, we don't take that insurance. But Catherine, does this travel or do you think the translations into those multiple cultural contexts have to be equally sophisticated?
[SPEAKER_71]: I think, you know, at the end of the day, I remember my little girl loved Madame Gazelle, who was a teacher, and wanted to become a school teacher, just like I'm sure many children look at, you know, Dr. Brown Bear and want to become doctors. So I think maybe, I think we should just take it for what it is. It's a children's cartoon. They try and instill positive messages. I don't think we should be digging around too much for negative connotations.
[SPEAKER_50]: Okay. The digging stops here. Thank you very much both, Alexander Kaufman, New York, Katherine Young this morning in Hong Kong. It's been a pleasure having you along for the last hour. Thanks to you all for listening. The team is back same time tomorrow as Wednesday rolls into Thursday here on Business Matters. Bye-bye for now.
[SPEAKER_72]: This is the BBC World Service. Now, here's Harriet Gilbert to tell you about the next World Book Club.
[SPEAKER_52]: Agatha Christie's murder mysteries are popular across the world. We'll be discussing her most famous murder on the Orient Express. As a luxurious train lies stuck in a snowdrift, an American tycoon lies dead in his compartment, and Detective Hercule Poirot must uncover who did it.
[SPEAKER_72]: BBC World Book Club, from the 6th of January. You're listening to the BBC World Service. Our diplomatic correspondent James Landale was at the court to hear.
[SPEAKER_05]: As our defence correspondent Jonathan Beale reports from Mosul.
[SPEAKER_72]: Our Africa editor Mary Harper reports.
[SPEAKER_05]: Let's go to Hong Kong now.
[SPEAKER_46]: Time for business news. On our business desk is Andrew Wood.
[SPEAKER_72]: Available on the BBC iPlayer radio app. This is the BBC World Service, the world's radio station.
[SPEAKER_43]: At two o'clock GMT, welcome to the newsroom from the BBC World Service. I'm Jonathan Blake. The polls have closed in Alabama and America waits to see whether President Trump's man accused of sexual harassment can see off a democratic challenge in the crucial Senate election. Let's talk the message from the US Secretary of State to North Korea.
[SPEAKER_08]: We're ready to have the first meeting without precondition. Let's just meet. We can talk about the weather if you want.
[SPEAKER_43]: Crisis in Congo. A special report from our Africa editor coming up on the country's humanitarian disaster.
[SPEAKER_70]: I saw people with machetes, guns and clubs. They were beheading people, cutting arms and legs, slashing bellies.
[SPEAKER_43]: What scientists are learning about Jupiter's great red spot. And from A to B, research shows the insects can learn the most efficient route to travel.
[SPEAKER_42]: There are shortcuts that may initially appear tempting, but by taking them, you actually increase your overall travel distance.
[SPEAKER_43]: You're listening to the BBC World Service.
[SPEAKER_02]: Hello, I'm Neil Nunes with the BBC News. Results are keenly awaited in Alabama, a traditionally Republican state where votes are being counted in the election for a new U.S. Senate representative. President Trump's favorite candidate, Roy Moore, is hoping to secure victory and brush off allegations of sexual misconduct with teenagers. His Democratic rival is Doug Jones. Correspondent Gary O'Donohue explains what's at stake.
[SPEAKER_67]: not just a seat in the US Senate from the state of Alabama, but also the potential balance of power in the Senate in the longer term, also the question of what to do about those accused of sexual harassment and assault, how will they be treated in public life. And, of course, the question of Donald Trump. Will Alabama elect someone who's like him, an outsider, an insurgent, someone who's not necessarily politically correct, or will they go with a Democrat for the first time in a quarter of a century?
[SPEAKER_02]: The U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says America is willing to hold direct talks with North Korea without preconditions, saying, let's just meet. He said the topic would not matter, it could simply be about the weather, but the point was to lay out a roadmap for formal negotiations. McDonnell reports from South from Seoul.
[SPEAKER_39]: The United States Secretary of State was speaking at a think tank in Washington. Rex Tillerson said these initial talks could be about anything but that further discussions would require progress on the question of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons program. This appears to be a softening of America's position. However, he did also say that for this process to start, the U.S. would require a quiet period without fresh North Korean nuclear or missile tests.
[SPEAKER_02]: A White House statement said President Trump's views on North Korea had not changed. Firefighters in Los Angeles say a wildfire, which swept through Bel Air, one of the city's most exclusive neighborhoods, started in a homeless encampment. Investigators say the blaze began as an illegal cooking fire at a camp near a motorway. The United Nations Children's Fund, UNICEF, has warned that more than 400,000 severely malnourished children under the age of five in the Democratic Republic of Congo could die within months without emergency intervention. UNICEF said the crisis unfolding in the region of Kasai was due to a combination of violence, mass displacement of families, and slumping agricultural output. Jose Barahona, Oxfam's director for the country, says a lack of resources is making it difficult to offer help to people in many villages.
[SPEAKER_45]: Where we are, this is a very real picture of the situations we face. These people have not received anything. They are hungry. They have huge problems. They are asking us desperately for help. We have some resources that we have already committed in other villages. If we want to come here, we need extra resources.
[SPEAKER_02]: World News from the BBC. The United Nations Secretary General António Guterres has said continued subsidies of fossil fuel amounts to humanity investing in its own doom. Mr. Guterres told more than 50 heads of state gathered at the One Planet Summit in Paris, we are in a war for the very existence of life on our planet as we know it. Scientists say the region around the North Pole shows no sign of returning to its once reliably frozen state. The annual assessment by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says the rapidly warming Arctic indicates that its environmental system has reached a new normal. Here's Victoria Gill.
[SPEAKER_73]: While this past summer in the far north was cooler than in recent years, average air and sea surface temperatures continued to increase and the winter sea ice maximum, measured by satellites in March, was the lowest on record. As the ice melts, the region is darkening. Those white reflective surfaces are giving way to reveal darker earth and ocean beneath. which absorb even more of the sun's energy. The constantly and reliably frozen north, scientists say, could now be a relic of the past.
[SPEAKER_02]: An explosion at a plant in Austria has interrupted the flow of gas from Russia to Italy. One person was killed and 21 others wounded in the blast at the facility in Baumgarten. The incident prompted Italian officials to declare a state of emergency for energy supplies. Scientists in Britain have suggested that bumblebees are much more intelligent than previously thought. In a study, the bees were given the task of finding the most efficient routes between different sources of food. They were also tempting traps thrown in to trick them into increasing the distance they travelled. At first, the bees fell for the inducement, but then, far from bumbling, they learned to refine their flight paths between flower feeding stations. That's the latest BBC News.
[SPEAKER_43]: You're listening to the Newsroom from the BBC World Service. I'm Jonathan Blake, and in the last hour, polls have closed in Alabama in what could be a pivotal election for the US Senate. The Republican candidate, Roy Moore, who's denied accusations of child abuse, has been publicly endorsed by the US president. The Democratic Party hasn't won in the state in more than two decades, but many think its candidate, Doug Jones, has a real chance. From Birmingham in Alabama, Nick Bryant reports.
[SPEAKER_44]: Just when he thought that American politics couldn't get any weirder, Judge Roy Moore arrived to vote on horseback. He's come to personify the polarization of this manic age. To his female accusers, he's a sexual predator who molested teenage girls in his 30s. To his fans, he's a crusading conservative evangelical, a firebrand populist in the mold of Donald Trump.
[SPEAKER_21]: I want to make America great again. with President Trump. I want America great, but I want America good, and she can't be good until we go back to God.
[SPEAKER_44]: In the face of these allegations, his supporters have adopted the new default position of the politically embattled. They're crying fake news.
[SPEAKER_27]: That's nothing but a bunch of fake news. And they've already been proven false. If they were really true, why didn't they come out before now?
[SPEAKER_44]: Though many senior Republicans have refused to back Moore, including Alabama's highly respected Senator Richard Shelby, he has a cheerleader in Donald Trump, who's made automated calls on his behalf.
[SPEAKER_31]: Hi, this is President Donald Trump, and I need Alabama to go vote for Roy Moore. It is so important.
[SPEAKER_44]: For the president, it's morally uncomplicated. He wants Alabama to send a Republican, not a Democrat, to the Senate. This contest is so much more than just a Senate race against a Democratic candidate, Doug Jones. It's a battle for the soul of the Republican Party. between the establishment and more radical ideologues who've become such a force in recent decades. It's a test of whether any allegation is disqualifying in modern-day American public life, and also the extent to which the Trump presidency has changed behavioural norms.
[SPEAKER_43]: Nick Bryant on the race and what's at stake in Alabama. At the moment it's too close to call. We are expecting some results from various parts of the state in the coming hours. These voters cast their ballots in Montgomery, the capital of Alabama.
[SPEAKER_34]: Right now, I'm hoping to help Doug Jones become the new United States Senator.
[SPEAKER_01]: I believe that my vote can make a difference. And if everyone come in together and collectively put in their vote for their candidate, we can have the right people in power.
[SPEAKER_12]: Voted for Rory Moore, Republican. I believe that he stands for the values that I was brought up with. And I believe that the generation that we're in right now, we need a lot of more. I voted for him because I believe he believes in the right thing and he also believes in God. And I think he'll help everybody education-wise and medical-wise, what he says.
[SPEAKER_43]: Let's go to our correspondent watching the results in Washington, D.C., David Willis. David, any indication yet of what the result may be?
[SPEAKER_19]: Well, the polls closed just over an hour ago, Jonathan, and it is still too early to call. With 12 percent of the vote in, the cable news network here, CNN, is reporting 50 percent in favor of Roy Moore, 48 percent for Doug Jones, the Democratic contender. So it really is very, very tight. And the polls in the last few weeks, of course, have put these two candidates absolutely neck and neck. The Democrats have been working hard to get out the black vote in places such as Birmingham. And the fear amongst Republicans, of course, is that the conservative white voters who would normally vote en masse for Roy Moore might be tempted to stay at home in the light of the allegations against him, those lurid allegations of sexual misconduct. Turnout could be the key here and the early indications are that it may well have been higher than expected, Jonathan.
[SPEAKER_43]: Normally, a Senate race in the Deep South wouldn't even, well, certainly wouldn't get the amount of coverage that this one in Alabama is. Remind us why this race is being so closely watched.
[SPEAKER_19]: Well, you're absolutely right. What's astonishing about all this is that a Republican victory in a state such as Alabama should have been a slam dunk for the Republicans. Alabama hasn't elected a Democrat to the Senate for 25 years. But the allegations against Roy Moore have turned everything on its head, basically. Senior Republicans have been divided over whether to support him and protect the Senate majority, that narrow Senate majority, or shun him because of the sexual misconduct allegations and what they could mean in next year's midterm elections. President Trump, of course, has gone from tepid support from Roy Moore to more full-throttle support for him in recent days and a victory for Roy Moore would in a sense help establish President Trump's authority over a Senate that at times hasn't been completely compliant as far as he's concerned.
[SPEAKER_43]: David Willis in Washington, D.C., watching the results come in from that key Senate race in Alabama. We'll have more as we get it on whether we can draw any conclusions at this stage as to the possible result. But for now, we will move on, but stay in the U.S. because the Secretary of State there, Rex Tillerson, has urged North Korea to come to the negotiating table. With tensions high over the country's nuclear program, Speaking in Washington, Mr. Tillerson said the countries could meet with no preconditions.
[SPEAKER_08]: We're ready to talk anytime North Korea would like to talk. And we're ready to have the first meeting without precondition. Let's just meet. We can talk about the weather if you want. We can talk about whether it's going to be a square table or a round table if that's what you're excited about. But can we at least sit down and see each other face to face? And then we can begin to lay out a road map of what we might be willing to work towards.
[SPEAKER_43]: Well, previously, the US has demanded that North Korea disarm first, the White House saying that this is not a policy shift and that the president's views on North Korea have not changed. Our correspondent at the US State Department, Barbara Pletusha, gave us her assessment of Mr. Tillerson's speech.
[SPEAKER_36]: He said, let's just meet and talk. We just have to sit down face to face, get to know each other and put things on the table. He said, it's not realistic to say that you can only talk about containing the nuclear program because, of course, Pyongyang is too invested in that. So we need to, you know, see what they want to put on the table and whether we can discuss that. But he said, ultimately, the U.S. cannot accept a nuclear armed North Korea because it has a record of selling weaponry And it doesn't abide by the rule of law, so it would just be too dangerous. But still, it was quite a strong, I think, diplomatic offering to North Korea.
[SPEAKER_43]: And how much of a policy shift is this by the US? Because it's in stark contrast to a lot of the tough talk we've heard, certainly from the president.
[SPEAKER_36]: Yes, the tough talk has contrasted with Mr. Tillerson's talk, but the policy, I think, has been the same, which is a diplomatic one that's been emphasized over and over again. And Mr. Tillerson's approach has been to try to rally international support to isolate North Korea, and he says that there's been quite a lot of progress on that. He said that sort of process was reaching a zenith, he said. But in terms of offering talks without preconditions, he's never spelled out what the preconditions would be before But I think it's probably a shift in that he's basically saying the US is ready for talks of any kind, at least to begin with. It doesn't necessarily have to be about the nuclear program. The thing that is the same, though, is that he spelled out that the goal was the same, and they've always been clear about the goal, which is that North Korea, in the end, would not be acceptable for it to have nuclear weapons.
[SPEAKER_43]: Rex Tillerson and Donald Trump have had a little bit of a rocky relationship. It wasn't all that long ago that there was talk of the Secretary of State being replaced. Is his future certain at the moment?
[SPEAKER_36]: Well, I don't think anything is certain, but certainly those reports were denied by Mr. Tillerson. He said they were laughable previously to the press. He said, you're always telling the wrong story, you need to get some new sources. So he has previously dismissed them. Mr. Trump has also, since those reports come out, has expressed some confidence in him. I think there are tensions between the two that's been, I think, pretty widely reported, and they are quite different people, and they have different approaches to policy as well. But certainly from the speech that Mr. Tillerson gave when he talked about everything he'd been working on in the year, and then he mentioned that he was planning to travel to South America in the new year. We know he's planning to travel to Africa. So he certainly sounded like a man who expected to continue in his job for at least a while longer.
[SPEAKER_43]: Barbara Pletasha. Now to a humanitarian crisis unfolding in the Democratic Republic of Congo. The UN is warning that at least 400,000 children are suffering from severe acute malnutrition. The crisis is at its worst in the central Kassai region where fighting erupted last year between local groups and government troops. 3,000 people have died. Our Africa editor Fergal Keane travelled to Kassai and sent this report.
[SPEAKER_58]: We're with a Pakistan Army patrol and we're moving along a dirt track outside the town of Chengulu and going in the direction of what we're told is a mass grave containing the bodies of people who were killed here. We're just dismounting now from the vehicle. It's somewhere near here. Walking along a narrow track, which is largely overgrown. There's high grass and different kinds of bushes all around me. And down here at the end, I'm told, is a mass grave. Nobody knows exactly how many people are in it, but it's men, women, and children. and they were dumped here by the military and have come to this small depression where you can see bush was cleared away, ground was dug up and there's human clothing here, man's trousers reaching out of the earth. A local woman approached us to say her 12-year-old son had been killed, and she'd witnessed the army dumping bodies. The violence began when long-simmering resentments exploded into rebellion after security forces killed a chief, Kamina Ansapo, who'd rebelled against the government. The Kabila regime was trying to entrench its hold on an area known as an opposition stronghold. The chief's followers struck back, killing all they regarded as collaborators of the state. There were mass beheadings, schools and clinics were burned. The government responded with pitiless violence, killing militiamen and turning its guns on civilians accused of supporting the rebels. I spoke with numerous survivors of the violence carried out by the state and the Banamura militia, which it supports. I've come to the Ebenezer Church on the outskirts of the town of Chicago. When I say church, it's basically tin shack. a large open-air tin shack, crowded with children. I've never seen so many children in a displaced environment and that backs up the statistic. Out of an estimated 1.5 million people who were displaced, over 800,000 of them were children.
[SPEAKER_70]: I saw people with machetes, guns and clubs. They were beheading people, cutting arms and legs, slashing bellies. I had to climb over dead bodies to escape. I had four children, but could escape with only one. The other three were killed.
[SPEAKER_58]: The women at the church managed to escape, but others were abducted. I met a mother and her 15-year-old daughter who were taken by the Banimura militia to isolated farms.
[SPEAKER_15]: We had left our village in April and were taken as slaves on the farm the same month. It's difficult to count how many times I was raped because it was during so many months. I did not know where my daughter was. She was released after I escaped. They told her, go now, for your mother has escaped and can get us arrested. Only then, when she joined me in Chicapa, did I discover that she had been raped too.
[SPEAKER_58]: The UN peacekeeping force is just under 20,000 troops, but is being cut by 3,000 under American pressure, and all at a time when violence across the Congo is mounting amid widening political instability. In Kassai, where the dead are cast into rivers, into mass graves, there's no real peace to keep, only a daily effort to hold back the forces of chaos.
[SPEAKER_43]: our Africa editor Fergal Keane in the Democratic Republic of Congo. You're listening to the BBC World Service. Neil has the headlines.
[SPEAKER_02]: Vote counting is getting underway in Alabama after polls closed in a highly charged contest to choose a new US senator. The US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says America is ready to open talks with North Korea without preconditions.
[SPEAKER_43]: The story now of a three-week-old baby girl in Britain who was born with her heart outside her body. After three operations to place her heart back in her chest, she has survived. Our medical correspondent Fergus Walsh met her family and doctors at the hospital in Leicester.
[SPEAKER_23]: Good girl. Yeah. She's a beautiful girl.
[SPEAKER_53]: Proud parents bending over the cot of their three-week-old daughter, Vanellope. She was born with a very rare condition where the heart grows outside the chest. Her chances of survival were put at less than 10%. But mum, Naomi Findley, and dad, Dean Wilkins, say she's a fighter.
[SPEAKER_23]: more strength than I could ever imagine.
[SPEAKER_17]: She came out kicking and screaming.
[SPEAKER_23]: And then she gave all the surgeons agro, didn't she?
[SPEAKER_17]: It was a beautiful moment, wasn't it? Absolutely beautiful. If you saw when she was first born, to where she is now and what they've done, it's... It's beyond a miracle, isn't it?
[SPEAKER_53]: Doctors at Leicester's Glenfield Hospital say Vanellope has defied the odds. Consultant paediatric cardiologist Frances Bulock says her prospects have greatly improved.
[SPEAKER_56]: You know, her heart is covered by skin, hopefully sealed away from the environment. She's still on a breathing machine. She's still got drains in to take fluid away. She's got a long road ahead of her. It's not done, but I think they're much better than they were.
[SPEAKER_53]: Phenelope has no breastbone and will need more surgery to create one in years to come. Doctors are considering using material from a 3D printer or something organic that would grow with her.
[SPEAKER_43]: Fergus Walsh, the Great Red Spot on Jupiter is the biggest storm in the solar system and we've known about it for more than 150 years. We also know that it's wider than the Earth with wind speeds up to 650 kilometres an hour. Now NASA says its space probe DUNE has discovered more about the Great Red Spot. Our correspondent Jonathan Amos is at the American Geophysical Union meeting in New Orleans where the agency has been presenting its findings.
[SPEAKER_40]: We've been observing the Great Red Spot on Jupiter probably since the invention of the telescope. Yes, we've got records 150 years back, but probably, you know, we've been seeing it for something like 400 years. That's extraordinary. If you think about hurricanes on Earth, they last, what, a couple of weeks? And then you think how long the Great Red Spot has been going. Now, why is that? What drives it? And that's one of the mission goals of Juno, is to try and understand it. And one of the first things it had to find out was just how deep its roots are. Was it a feature that was just at the surface of the planet, or did those roots go deep, deep down inside? Well, we know the answer to that question, or partially the answer to that question, because Juno has this microwave radiometer that can sense heat inside the planet, and it can see that the roots go down at least 350 kilometers. Now, that may not be the bottom of the Great Red Spot. It may go down further, and if it can do some gravity measurements over the coming months, then we may well find out that this storm extends, you know, over a thousand kilometers down inside the planet, which would be quite extraordinary. Now, if you go back to the formation of the solar system four and a half billion years ago, it's almost certain that Jupiter was the first thing to form after the Sun, sort of sucked up everything else that was around. If you took all of the other planets, the comets, the asteroids, all of the other bits of debris apart from the Sun, you could fit it all inside of Jupiter. So unless you understand how Jupiter works, you don't really understand how the rest of the solar system works. So in many ways, this is one of the most important missions that NASA has ever undertaken, to reveal the great secrets of this amazing world.
[SPEAKER_43]: That's Jonathan Amos on new discoveries about Jupiter's great red spot. It is two years since the Paris Climate Agreement was signed and the question now is how to pay for it. Representatives from around 50 countries are meeting again in the French capital. Major investors have vowed to move away from the fossil fuel industry to try to reduce global warming. Roger Harabin reports.
[SPEAKER_06]: It's governments which set policies for cutting greenhouse gas emissions, but it's typically business and financial institutions which make those policies happen. In Paris, more than a thousand firms and financial bodies pledged themselves to a low-carbon economy. The commitment from the World Bank was the most eye-catching, with its promise to stop funding exploration in oil and gas. Its president, Jim Yong Kim, said the time was right.
[SPEAKER_57]: We're now seeing that the price of solar has gone down so much, the cost and size of batteries has gone down so much. that we think that energy needs can be provided by other means and the science of this is just changing so quickly that we want to get out ahead and we don't think that we need to be in the upstream oil and gas business anymore.
[SPEAKER_06]: There was a big announcement, too, from the French insurance firm AXA. It's going to quadruple its investment in green technologies, sell its shares in coal, and phase out insurance cover for new coal and oil sands projects. Earlier, the oil giant Exxon announced that it would publish reports on the impact of climate change policies on its huge reserves of fossil fuels. Some think these might look a liability in years to come. After today's initiatives, though, came a reality check by environmentalists. They said the pledges still weren't enough to save vulnerable communities from the effects of a heating climate.
[SPEAKER_43]: You're listening to the Newsroom from the BBC World Service. Neil has some other stories from our news desk.
[SPEAKER_02]: In a high-profile court case in Egypt, a pop singer, Shaima Ahmed, has been jailed for two years for making a raunchy music video, Ellen Johnston reports.
[SPEAKER_04]: The video that got Shaima into trouble featured her dancing in lingerie. She flirted with a classroom full of young men and ate a banana in a sexually suggestive manner. The video would have been regarded as racy anywhere in the world. In socially conservative Egypt, it provoked indignation and a torrent of criticism. Sheymer was charged with inciting debauchery. She denied the allegation, but she apologised, and when she came to court, she cut a much more modest figure, appearing in a face veil.
[SPEAKER_02]: New research indicates feathered dinosaurs were covered in ticks, just like animals today. Parasites similar to modern ticks have been found inside pieces of amber from Myanmar dating back 99 million years. And the co-founder of the global hairdressing chain Tony and Guy has died at the age of 75. Giuseppe Tony Mascolo, an Italian, established the first of his salons in London in the 1960s with his younger brother, Gaetano, known as Guy.
[SPEAKER_43]: Thank you, Neil. Now, when it comes to navigating, bees, it seems, do not bumble.
[SPEAKER_05]: To tell us more, here's Richard Hamilton. It's known as the travelling salesman problem, a benchmark question in computer science that poses the question, given a list of cities and the distance between each pair of cities, What is the shortest possible route the salesman needs to take in order to visit each city and then return to his original starting point? The scientists gave the bees the travelling salesman problem, except they used flowers instead of cities, to see if they could solve it. They tried to trick the bees by offering them shortcuts between individual flowers that increased the total distance they travelled. At first the bumblebees fell for these tempting traps, But after a while, they gradually began to refine their flight paths, thus reducing their overall distance. The lead researcher is Dr. Joe Woodgate from Queen Mary University of London.
[SPEAKER_42]: What we discovered is that there are some arrangements of the feeders that they're trying to travel between. in which there are shortcuts that may initially appear tempting, because it means that you can get to another flower in only quite a short time. But by taking them, you actually increase your overall travel distance. And what we found here is that the bees, in fact, didn't learn to ignore the shortcuts. They seem to have a very strong preference for taking the nearest possible route to a feeder. But what we discover is that they do have flexibility. They're not bound to only ever go to the closest feeders.
[SPEAKER_05]: Dr. Woodgate believes that this study could also provide insights into analogous problems in the fields of robotics and artificial intelligence. He also says that understanding how bees search for food and use the landscape is crucial to managing the risks posed by increased agricultural activity, environmental degradation and habitat loss.
[SPEAKER_43]: That was Richard Hamilton reporting. You've been listening to The Newsroom from the BBC World Service with me, Jonathan Blake.
[SPEAKER_54]: Starvation stalked the Australians. It hid in each man's every act and every thought.
[SPEAKER_52]: Richard Flanagan talks about his Man Booker Prize winning novel, The Narrow Road to the Deep North.
[SPEAKER_54]: It was something that grew in me like a boulder till it was almost choking me. And I felt I had to write it.
[SPEAKER_52]: A story inspired by the life of his own father.
[SPEAKER_54]: I felt a second utterly illogical thing, that if I didn't finish the book before my father died, I would never finish it. That took him 12 years to write. He asked me how it was going and I told him that it was done. And he passed away that afternoon.
[SPEAKER_72]: World Book Club with Richard Flanagan at bbcworldservers.com slash worldbookclub
[SPEAKER_76]: Coming up, President Trump's campaign to make America great again was an effective but very divisive campaign. US citizens might talk about America as the greatest country on Earth, but it's a problematic word for Latin Americans who consider America to be a continent, not a country. What does the region's history teach us about identity and politics of America in the Americas? Join me, Katie Watson, after the latest world news.
[SPEAKER_02]: BBC News with Neil Nunes. Results are keenly awaited in Alabama, a traditionally Republican state, where votes are being counted in the election for a new U.S. Senate representative. The Republican Roy Moore is hoping to win and brush off allegations of sexual misconduct with teenagers. He has President Trump's backing. Mr. Moore's rival, Doug Jones, wants to be the first Democrat in a quarter of a century to win the seat. The U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says America is willing to hold direct talks with North Korea without preconditions. He said the topic would not matter. It could simply be about the weather. But the point was to lay out a roadmap for formal negotiations. The U.S. has previously demanded that the North must first disarm. UNICEF has warned that more than 400,000 severely malnourished children under the age of five in the Democratic Republic of Congo could die within months without emergency intervention. It said the crisis was due to a combination of violence, mass displacement of families, and slumping agricultural output. U.S. artists say the region around the North Pole shows no sign of returning to its once reliably frozen state. An annual study warns that the Arctic is traditionally the refrigerator of the planet, but the door has been left open, leaving the cold to spill out and cascade through the northern hemisphere. One of the largest annual pilgrimages in Latin America has been marred this year by the death of at least 11 pilgrims in a motorway crash between Mexico City and Puebla. The victims were honoring the Virgin of Guadalupe. Scientists in Britain have suggested that bumblebees are much more intelligent than had previously been supposed. The bees were given the task of finding the most efficient routes between different sources of food and, far from bumbling, learned to avoid tempting traps and to refine their flight paths between flower feeding stations. BBC World News.
[SPEAKER_48]: We are going to start winning again.
[SPEAKER_76]: I'm Katie Watson, and this is Make America Great Again.
[SPEAKER_31]: We are going to make America so great again, maybe greater than ever before. I love you all.
[SPEAKER_76]: President Trump's campaign to make America great again was clearly effective, but pretty divisive. It's not uncommon to hear people from the U.S. say that America is the greatest country on Earth. But for the millions of people living south of the U.S., the word America is problematic. I've lived in Chile, Mexico, and now Brazil, and the view is shared across the region. But although the U.S. considers America a country, for Latin Americans, it's a continent. It's not a question of being oversensitive. It's about being politically and geographically correct.
[SPEAKER_11]: It's one and the same. Am I wrong? Is the U.S. different from America? Is that something different?
[SPEAKER_35]: First of all, America is a continent, not United States only. There is some degree of confusion on that.
[SPEAKER_76]: After the election of President Trump and while I was living in Mexico, the issue became more pronounced and highly politicized. I wanted to find out why and how the word America became synonymous with the US to many, but at the same time excluding so many more.
[SPEAKER_78]: There are some in the United States who share this idea of solidarity, who believe in a fundamental brotherhood of American republics, but they're really in a minority.
[SPEAKER_76]: So I started my journey on a baking hot day in Washington, D.C., underneath one of the most famous museums in the U.S., in a tunnel.
[SPEAKER_47]: We're in the Madison Building now, and where we're going is over to the Exploring the Early Americas exhibit, and we're going to take the tunnel underneath the street in order to get there.
[SPEAKER_76]: This is the Library of Congress. It houses what's known as the Birth Certificate of America. And when I say America, I mean what we now think of as North and South America, the whole continent.
[SPEAKER_47]: So this is the Exploring the Early Americas exhibit. So this is where we display our archaeological objects and basically really tell the story of the earliest Americas, the pre-colonial Americas.
[SPEAKER_76]: After walking through a huge marble hall, we came to a quiet, dark corner of the museum, the home of a map known as the Waldseemüller.
[SPEAKER_47]: I'm John Hessler. I'm the curator of the J.I. Kislak Collection of the Archaeology and History of the Early Americas at the Library of Congress.
[SPEAKER_76]: Behind glass, very dim light, there is a map with 12 sub-maps, if you like.
[SPEAKER_47]: Basically, we're looking at the only surviving copy of the 1507 map by Martin Waldseemuller. The map itself is a real radical vision of the geography of the world. It's the first map that pulls the New World off of Asia. It also is, of course, the first map that names America.
[SPEAKER_76]: It also shows America being a continent, not a country.
[SPEAKER_47]: It does. It shows America being a rather large continent. And up on the top of the map, there are two portraits, one of Ptolemy, who's the ancient Greek astronomer, and the other one of Amerigo Vespucci. And so, Waltseemuller, he was an explorer and was one of the first people to sail off to the New World, one of the first people to make landfall on the actual main continent. In naming it after Vespucci, it's not Amerigo, it's America, and he uses America because the other four continents, Africa, Asia, and Europa in Latin, are all feminine, so he has to feminize Vespucci's Amerigo to make it America. When you look at it, you feel as if you're looking at the modern world as opposed to the ancient world. In the little piece of writing on the right-hand side, there's a long text in Latin, and to paraphrase what Walter Mueller says, he says, if you're looking at this map for the first time and you're unfamiliar with the new discoveries, don't be concerned or upset about what you see, because this is how you will come to see your world in the future. The way people kind of envision this is that Columbus discovered America and Vespucci sold it. When did the concept of America then shrink? After this, Waltie Muller's map gets lost for some time and then you'll see a little bit later Ortelius, a famous Dutch mapmaker. will basically separate it into a North and South America. And so he will basically begin separating it, and it is really from him that you begin to get this proliferation in the mid-1600s of America as a name appearing on maps. The landmass appears in 1508 and in maps that follow it, but the name really doesn't grab on until the real mid-17th century.
[SPEAKER_76]: It's still quite far back, though.
[SPEAKER_47]: It becomes North and South and the whole continent sort of blends into the Americas as opposed to just America.
[SPEAKER_76]: And why did the name America disappear? Why have we got the New World instead? No one knows. So the controversy of the word America started very early on. It's worth skipping forward to another important part of history here, 1823, and the beginning of what is now known as the Monroe Doctrine. Dr. David Sim is a U.S. historian from University College London.
[SPEAKER_78]: what changes in the early republic in the 1820s is the more conscious usage of the term south america to differentiate the area below the united states or up to the 1820s that term existed but it wasn't that common it comes into much more formal use in the 1820s and that's partly as a reaction to the successful American revolutions in South Latin American countries. It's partly also a product of the era of the Monroe Doctrine and a sharper differentiation between North America, which comes to be understood as the domain of the United States. We'll not talk about Canada. and South America, which is Catholic, which is Spanish-speaking. What becomes known as the Monroe Doctrine is a message articulated by President James Monroe in December 1823. It's part of his annual State of the Union Address. And he, in that address, talks about the distinction between the old world and the new world. The old world, he says, is monarchical, is Eurocentric, is riven with violence and conflict. and ambitious aristocrats and monarchs. And in the new world, all ambitions for European colonization need to be resisted by Americans, meaning U.S. Americans, but also Americans as a whole. It's only really in the 1840s and 50s that it begins to be thought of as a doctrine, as a set of fundamental principles. And ironically, that's the point at which the United States becomes expansionist. The Monroe Doctrine becomes a tool to squeeze out other European ambitions in the Americas. Not so that Latin Americans can self-govern, but so that U.S. Americans can open up that space for U.S. American territorial expansion.
[SPEAKER_76]: The concept of Pan-Americanism, says David, is important.
[SPEAKER_78]: So, when Monroe articulates in December 1823, lots of Latin Americans are very excited, very pleased to see this. They think it's a moment when US Americans are embracing their Latin American brothers, are committed to building a kind of Pan-American Union to resist Spanish, French and British colonialism in the New World. And that's not really what Monroe is getting at. When Latin American representatives asked the U.S. government in the 1820s to make good that promise, to act on it, the Monroe administration and the John Quincy Adams administration, the Colossals, threw up their hands and said, you know, what are you talking about? We didn't make a commitment to defend you against Spanish monarchy. We were just articulating an idea. There are some in the United States who share this idea of solidarity, who believe in a fundamental Brotherhood of American Republics, but they're really in a minority. Pan-Americanism becomes associated in Latin America with two things really. One is a way of masking U.S. imperial ambitions. So the United States uses the language of brotherhood, it uses the language of Pan-Americanism. but really it's interested in extending its own economic and political interests. So Latin Americans use Pan-Americanism as a means to counter the influence of the United States. So it's a Pan-Americanism that excludes the United States. And that really takes off really from the 1840s onwards, after the war with Mexico, of course, 1846 to 1848. Pan-Americanism becomes, for many Latin American governments, a means of countering that aggressive northern neighbor. And Latin Americans are using Pan-Americanism as a way of resisting the juggernaut of U.S. economic and political might.
[SPEAKER_76]: So history shows us how much the U.S. has dominated the region. And when it comes to language, it's also made things complicated.
[SPEAKER_59]: Yeah, I mean, for a lot of people, this is America. And as the political discussion has been, it's more lately. This is America and make America great again has become a very popular slogan.
[SPEAKER_76]: Back in Washington, a short drive from the Library of Congress, I met Maureen Meyer. She's the Mexico and migrant rights director at the Washington Office for Latin America, which researches and advocates for the rights of Latin Americans.
[SPEAKER_59]: Though it certainly is a question of inclusion, and for people in Latin America, they view LGBT as a concept that goes beyond Latin America, but much more encompasses North America as well. What's your nationality though? That's where it gets tricky. I would say that I'm American. In Spanish though, I do not. I would say Estadounidense, which is a very long way of saying United Statesian, which doesn't really exist in English.
[SPEAKER_76]: And actually, when you're in Mexico, sometimes people will say, if you want to go to the American, they'll say the, you know, the Embajada Americana.
[SPEAKER_59]: No, and they also have a very odd way of talking about the Gobierno de Norteamerica, the North American government, which, if you look at it, would actually include Canada and Mexico as well.
[SPEAKER_74]: And Mexicans are the first to complain when people don't think they're part of North America.
[SPEAKER_59]: So, I think there's a lot of language issues here. Make America Great Again should be making the whole region green again. But it goes beyond that to issues like the Monroe Doctrine. So the United States viewing Latin America as its backyard and that you were able to do a lot of things in the region because you could.
[SPEAKER_76]: So there's the context, but let's put it into practice. In Los Angeles, I asked a few people where they thought they were.
[SPEAKER_75]: Are we in the US or in America? Right now?
[SPEAKER_74]: That's a tricky one. This is kind of like a melting pot of everything. You know what I mean? This is just a spot. I feel like we're in Mexico.
[SPEAKER_75]: We're doing a story about the word America. So I'm just wondering, when you think about where you are, are you in America or are you in the U.S.? I think U.S. And why? I'm not certain why. Are we in the U.S. or in America?
[SPEAKER_11]: It's one and the same. Am I wrong? The U.S.? The United States of America? Is the U.S. different from America? Is that something different?
[SPEAKER_76]: I headed down to Venice Beach, a place which in many ways epitomizes the American dream, where the sun shines and anything goes. And where I stood on the bustling sidewalk watching skateboarders compete with t-shirt sellers was, in fact, Mexico just 150 years ago. It's a beautifully sunny day and I'm walking along Venice Beach. It's probably the most chilled out part of Los Angeles. There's white sand, tall palm trees. It's the epitome of U.S. culture. In fact, if you think of the word America, this might be what a lot of people think about. So what do those who identify as Mexican but have lived in the U.S. for years think of the use of the word American now? In a building set back from the beach, I met the charismatic Raul Hinojosa in his flat filled to the brim with artifacts from Mexico.
[SPEAKER_48]: You've never been here on the weekend? 50,000 people right in front of my place right here. I mean, it's this tribal coming together of this whole notion of beach, utopian, a dream. Frankly, I couldn't live anywhere else.
[SPEAKER_76]: Raul is a leading figure at the UCLA Department of Chicana and Chicano Studies and an expert on immigration from Mexico.
[SPEAKER_48]: It's a continent, of course, and especially here in California where people still have this historical memory that this was obviously Mexico and Spain before then, right? So we have a perspective that most of Latin America has, that there was this transition, that there was something before, and that it is coming back. The Reconquista is in a sense on its way. And that doesn't mean the land is going to be taken back, but that there's going to be a new culture, a new dynamic, That's actually probably the original America dream.
[SPEAKER_76]: So the idea that California is a much more real sense of the word America?
[SPEAKER_48]: In many ways, because it has lived all these various aspects, you know, of indigenous, of conquest, post-conquest, and this very advanced demographic transformation that's occurring.
[SPEAKER_74]: And I find that quite surprising, being Mexican, living in the U.S., how the word America has become so natural.
[SPEAKER_48]: The history of the term America as a definition for the nation really actually doesn't occur until the middle of the 19th century. I mean, before then, there wasn't even the United States as an identity. People in Latin America are much more obviously conscious of the term America when you refer to it to the United States. They're like, wait a second, we're Americans. We're in the Americas. When you get here, I mean, you now have a Chicano identity, right, which is an identity that emerged here in Southern California. So I wouldn't be surprised, you know, the Chicano, Latino young person today, and is extremely comfortable in even using the term American.
[SPEAKER_76]: So if Raul is right and California is as American as it gets, how do those in a very Mexican part of Los Angeles, Boyle Heights, feel?
[SPEAKER_75]: You could easily think you were in Mexico. You can hear the mariachis playing. They're serenading a girl who's celebrating her quinceañera, which is her 15th birthday party.
[SPEAKER_76]: She's in an elaborate red dress with a bouquet of flowers, dancing with probably what looks like her mother, and in tears. And this is a really important day for many a Mexican teenager. Here I met Evangeline Ordaz, a local with Mexican parents. She's a lawyer, housing activist and script writer. I wanted to know how people of Mexican descent in this Hispanic area have come to view themselves. In a cafe overlooking the Mariachi bandstand, she told me about growing up in East LA and her life, which in many ways epitomises the American dream.
[SPEAKER_28]: Well, we were raised with this idea of when they say American, they mean kind of this white mainstream sort of... American dream. American dream, white Anglo-Saxon Protestants, you know, the United States sort of co-opted this word. I think it wasn't until I got to college that I sort of like, I'm like, oh, well, wait a minute. No, America is this whole thing, this whole area from, you know, Canada to Chile.
[SPEAKER_75]: Do you feel that there is much more of a kind of Mexico versus the U.S., whereas when you talk about your mother being very much of a kind of border family, that your mother was that American in the true sense of the word, that she didn't really think of borders?
[SPEAKER_28]: We feel, I think there's Sort of belonging to both places or I should say this whole place like ignoring the border It's so crazy though, because there are places here in Los Angeles like where we're sitting That you walk down the street and you could be you know in Mexico City you could be in the estado de Mexico you it's like the signage the language the music and All the words are in Spanish. You're not accounting for the English, I guess. Right. All to say the immigrants have come and sort of recreated home here. Or maybe not recreated it, but uncovered it. Because we're sitting in a building right now that was built on a land grant. from the Spanish crown. The grant holder gave the land as a wedding gift to his daughter when she married an Anglo immigrant to Mexico, when this was Mexico. So in a sense, you know, the East L.A. that exists right now is really just an uncovering of those Spanish and Mexican roots. And sitting opposite a mariachi band, since we are in Mexico. Exactly, exactly. And that was like, you know, an attempt to truly create Plaza de Garibaldi in Mexico City, where, you know, the mariachis are known together.
[SPEAKER_76]: I'm in Plaza Garibaldi, in the center of Mexico City, in the heart of Old Downtown. Now, this was the place that Mariachi Plaza in Los Angeles was modeled on, but they're very different. Here, it's a very open, big square. There's no mariachi bandstand here, but what the two places do have in common are the number of mariachi bands dressed in their black suits and carrying guitars, all waiting for people to come along and pay. pay them to play a song. I went to meet a former Mexican president who's been very vocal about Mr. Trump. President Vicente Fox has gone on television and social media frequently mocking Mr. Trump, his comments about making Mexico pay for a wall between the two countries, and his audience has been very receptive.
[SPEAKER_35]: Okay, first of all, America is a continent. not United States only. There is some degree of confusion on that. So with this in mind, I move to the concept of making America great. I think that is a very selfish, egoista proposal. I think the greatest leaders and the greatest mind have compassion and generosity as part of their thinking. I think the French president gave the correct answer. Macron. He said, let's make the world great.
[SPEAKER_76]: Trump wasn't the first person to talk about this making America great again, or using the word America.
[SPEAKER_35]: Yeah, but that's not the profound discussion. I think what it implies, the way Trump is putting it, is absolutely wrong. I know the US people I know the people of that great nation. I am part of that nation. My grandfather was born in Cincinnati, Ohio. If you're going to fight for United States' presence in the world, it has to be a compassionate presence. That's the United States we all know. That's the leader that moved in the last decades from being the imperial United States into a compassionate leader of the world. Hola, Donald. It is me, Vicente, coming to you from Mexico. Under no circumstances will we pay for this stupid, useless, racist money.
[SPEAKER_55]: Great again? America, la tierra de las oportunidades.
[SPEAKER_76]: Recent politics in the US has clearly touched a nerve, so much so that Corona ran a campaign addressing the problem. It starts off with Mexican actor Diego Luna talking about how angry the war makes Mexicans feel, but the message has a twist. Geronimo Avila is the man who created the campaign for the beer brand.
[SPEAKER_55]: So tell me, how did the campaign start?
[SPEAKER_03]: The campaign slogan is Desfronterizate, that it comes without frontiers. So most of the branding campaign was built upon the wall theme. At the end of the campaign, we decided to finish with a content that uses this campaign slogan of let's make America great again. But at the end, we wanted to end of this misconception that America is only the U.S. and not the whole continent. With that in mind, we made a manifesto of unity. It was not a political message. It was more like a positive message to the people, more than against Donald Trump.
[SPEAKER_76]: It went viral on social media. The advert was made in Spanish and English. Later I met up with my friend Jeronimo Perez Correa, born in the US but also Mexican. I asked him about his identity.
[SPEAKER_09]: I have dual citizenship. I am the proud father of two children who also have the double nationality. They were both born in the US.
[SPEAKER_76]: So do you see yourself as American or Mexican?
[SPEAKER_09]: I think I mainly see myself as being Mexican, but for certain things I do admit to being a bit of a hypocrite, because it does have many comforts to be American.
[SPEAKER_75]: You're talking about being American as in you're from the United States, whereas lots of Mexicans would also consider themselves American.
[SPEAKER_09]: When I talk about American, that is true. I do think of people that come from the U.S. And it does upset me, now that you mention it, when I ask somebody that's from the United States, I ask them, you know, where are you from? And they say, oh, I'm from America. But for some reason, I do feel that when referring to somebody that is from the United States, I call them American. Because in Spanish, I don't say Americano, I say Estadounidense.
[SPEAKER_76]: So it's like United States-ian?
[SPEAKER_09]: Yeah, United States-ian. It doesn't really work? Yeah, it doesn't really work. I'm able to enjoy the best of both worlds and for me that is a very privileged situation.
[SPEAKER_76]: It's a constant battle for Mexicans living and working in the US. Jorge Castagnetti is Mexico's former foreign minister.
[SPEAKER_07]: The Norteamericano thing is complicated because Mexico obviously doesn't know exactly where it is. It fits very well in Latin America, but when we in Mexico use the term Norteamerica, we're generally referring to the United States, and when we use the term Norteamericanos, we're certainly referring to Americans. At the same time, both geographically and economically, more and more and more so, we are part of North America. That's the whole discussion now about Trump. You really, you just have people in Mexico hating Trump. But that's about it. You haven't seen any demonstrations in the streets. You haven't seen any huge protests against Trump. You haven't had any real pressure on the government to be a bit more firm with him. My impression, quite honestly, is that there is just a feeling of humiliation and of resentment against Trump, but I haven't seen a rise of anti-Americanism in Mexico or of greater nationalism in Mexico.
[SPEAKER_76]: The whole debate about America, is it a continent or is it a country, points to something else. Historian Dr David Sim again.
[SPEAKER_78]: When we talk about US exceptions, the idea that the United States is in some way not just different, but fundamentally distinct from other nations, I think that's reflected in the way American history is talked about, not just in American schools, but in American popular culture. And therefore it maybe comes as quite a surprise when other individual countries claim to label America and it's kind of jarring. But I think it is a product of this kind of nationalist exceptionalist history where the United States of America comes to be not one republic amongst many, but the republic.
[SPEAKER_76]: Back on Los Angeles' Venice Beach, Raul looks out over the white sand and palm trees and leaves us on a note of optimism.
[SPEAKER_48]: The term America has a new resonance, right? I think people can start genuinely start talking about America out of the California experience in a way that, again, redeems that history. That's something that the United States population in general, I think people in California have already realized, that's a great asset. That's a great story.
[SPEAKER_76]: This is America, he says, in the best way. And he might be right. But for all the talk of America first and walls, for many, the rhetoric has made people focus on the cultural ties, not the divisions, and what American identity is all about. Make America Great Again was presented by me, Katie Watson, and produced by Sarah Trino.
[SPEAKER_72]: This is the BBC World Service, where science lives. For the creative.
[SPEAKER_47]: With drones, we can get blood anywhere in the country in 15 to 20 minutes.
[SPEAKER_13]: And the curious.
[SPEAKER_50]: When we looked at our twins, we found there were certain microbes that were always present in the skinnier twins than in the overweight twins. For our remarkable world.
[SPEAKER_72]: It's like releasing the valve on a pressure cooker. Science on the BBC World Service at bbcworldservice.com. And in 30 minutes, ocean stories.
[SPEAKER_20]: Tourists love the stunning islands of the Pacific Ocean, but the beauty is fracturing under man's influence. I'm Liz Bonnen and I'll bring you ocean stories diving into the biggest and deepest ocean of them all, the Pacific.
[SPEAKER_72]: That's in 30 minutes after Hard Talk on the BBC World Service, the world's radio station.
[SPEAKER_46]: Coming up after the news on the BBC World Service, it's Hard Talk with me, Stephen Sacker. Not so long ago, British food was the laughing stock of the world. Stodgy, badly cooked and flavourless. And Brits didn't seem to care. Well, that's all changed. is now a country seemingly obsessed with cooking, baking and fine food. Top chefs have become national, even international celebrities, and my guest is one of them, Marcus Waring. But are we now too fascinated with fancy food?
[SPEAKER_41]: I think that the world has changed and I think a chef cooking in a high street restaurant that's got 20 seats in and he's slaving away in the back of the kitchen with an open kitchen, that is as enjoyable in today's world as eating in a fine dining restaurant. It's all about what somebody wants from an occasion.
[SPEAKER_46]: That's Marcus Waring on Hard Talk after the news.
[SPEAKER_02]: Hello, I'm Neil Nunes with the BBC News. Initial results in Alabama's election for a new representative in the U.S. Senate suggest a tight race between the Republican and Democratic rivals. With more than half of the state having declared results, the Republican Roy Moore is slightly ahead of the Democrat contender Doug Jones. Gary O'Donohue explains what's at stake.
[SPEAKER_67]: not just a seat in the US Senate from the state of Alabama, but also the potential balance of power in the Senate in the longer term, also the question of what to do about those accused of sexual harassment and assault, how will they be treated in public life. And, of course, the question of Donald Trump. Will Alabama elect someone who's like him, an outsider, an insurgent, someone who's not necessarily politically correct? Or will they go with a Democrat for the first time in a quarter of a century?
[SPEAKER_02]: The U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson says America is willing to hold direct talks with North Korea without preconditions. More now from Barbara Platasher.
[SPEAKER_36]: Secretary Tillerson said Washington was ready to talk whenever North Korea was ready, and about anything, even the weather. He said it was unrealistic for the U.S. to insist on negotiations only about containing Pyongyang's nuclear program because the regime was so invested in it. Previously, Mr. Tillerson had not spelled out potential preconditions. But his willingness for talks of any kind seemed to be an offer of a new diplomatic opening. He said this would only be possible if there was a quiet period without weapons tests, and he remained clear about the goal, that the U.S. ultimately could not accept a nuclear-armed North Korea. Mr. Tillerson also said the administration was in talks with China about securing Pyongyang's nuclear weapons if something happened to destabilize the regime.
[SPEAKER_02]: Mr. Tillerson's offer appears to be a change from previous demands that Pyongyang must first agree to give up its nuclear weapons program. But a White House statement said President Trump's views on North Korea had not changed. United Nations political affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman says North Korean officials told him they wanted to prevent war on the Korean peninsula. He said they made their views known during the first in-depth political exchange of views in eight years between the UN and officials in Pyongyang. Our United Nations reporter Neda Torfik has more details.
[SPEAKER_13]: Jeffrey Feltman said he'd spent 15 hours discussing how to prevent war. He urged North Korean officials to signal if they were prepared to discuss possible peace talks and offered the U.N.' 's help in that regard. He also emphasized the importance of reopening technical channels of communications, such as a military-to-military hotline to reduce risks. Officials in Pyongyang didn't offer any commitments, but agreed the discussions should continue. Mr. Feltman said he'd left with the door to a negotiated solution ajar and fervently hoped the door would now be wide open.
[SPEAKER_02]: The United Nations Children's Fund UNICEF has warned that more than 400,000 severely malnourished children under the age of five in the Democratic Republic of Congo could die within months without emergency intervention. UNICEF said the crisis unfolding in the region of Kasai was due to a combination of violence, mass displacement of families and slumping agricultural output. A baby who was born with her heart outside her body has survived in what's thought to be a first in Britain. The baby, Vanellope Wilkins, who is three weeks old, has undergone three operations to place her heart back in her chest, Fergus Walsh explains.
[SPEAKER_53]: Vanellope was born with a very rare condition where the heart grows outside the chest. In most cases, babies are stillborn and Vanellope was given a less than 10% chance of survival. But after three operations, surgeons have succeeded in putting her heart back and covering it with skin. Phenelope has no breastbone and will need more surgery to create one in years to come. Doctors are considering using material from a 3D printer or something organic that would grow with her.
[SPEAKER_02]: Scientists say the region around the North Pole shows no sign of returning to its once reliably frozen state. The annual assessment by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration says the rapidly warming Arctic indicates that its environmental system had reached a new normal. The report said the winter sea ice in March was the smallest extent on record and the rate of change was increasing. The United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres has said continued subsidies of fossil fuel amount to humanity investing in its own doom. Mr. Guterres told more than 50 heads of state gathered at the One Planet Summit in Paris, we are in a war for the very existence of life on our planet. BBC News.
[SPEAKER_46]: Welcome to Hard Talk on the BBC World Service with me, Stephen Sacker. My guest today belongs in an elite club which didn't exist a generation ago. He is a celebrity chef with a portfolio of television work, books, a media profile, oh, and a string of restaurants, including one bearing his name that has two Michelin stars. Marcus Waring began life bagging up potatoes for his father, who was a fruit and veg trader. Now he cooks for an exclusive clientele, including the Queen. His story reflects a fundamental change in British culture. Fifty years ago, the country's cuisine was a laughingstock. Stodgy, bland and flavourless. Now, Brits watch endless cooking and baking shows on TV. Chefs are lionised and the country seems fascinated by fancy food. But is that healthy? Or are there still some dodgy things going on in the British kitchen? Well, Marcus Waring joins me now. Welcome to Hard Talk. There are an awful lot of chefs in the world, only a very few elite top chefs. What distinguishes the very best from the rest?
[SPEAKER_41]: I think, first of all, it's a mindset. It's a work ethic. And I think there is a type of sacrifice that a top chef has and wants to sort of drive themselves as an individual to excel. head and shoulders above everybody else. A lot of advice that I've ever had through the years coming through the ranks was, and it came from my father originally, was to stand out from the crowd.
[SPEAKER_46]: And to do that, you need to do something different. Most of the great chefs around the world started as apprentices to other truly great chefs. And if we look at your CV, you work with Albert Roux. You've obviously famously worked a lot with Gordon Ramsay. They're both, in their different ways, great chefs. So did you acquire skills and knowledge directly from them?
[SPEAKER_41]: Oh, without a doubt. Your travels, your working in kitchens is the foundation of who you are as a chef. The most important thing about being a good chef, or trying to be a good chef, or someone who's going to be a little bit different, is working with some of the best chefs. And when you work through all the different kitchens, you're inspired, you're energized, but you're also gathering knowledge, education, and discipline. They're leaders of examples, and they're leaders of their industry, and they have something to offer. They may not tell or talk to you every day. They may not tell you an idea or recipe, but you have to go into their kitchens and feed off their energy, like a big battery that you're just sucking everything out of it. You store it while you're training. You go and train more. You put it on the shelf. You go and train in another kitchen. You put all that information on the shelf. And then when you become a head chef, you bring it all down, and you use all that experience.
[SPEAKER_46]: I've got, as it happens, your menus from last night here at Marcus, your flagship two Michelin star restaurant. And therefore, I'm looking at this, I mean, it all looks delicious. I notice a very big emphasis on British produce, you know, from starters of wood pigeon and Portland crab and glazed ox tongue with Dorset snails through to your mains. Herdwick lamb, one, Cumbrian rose veal neck, another, grouse, all of this very, sounds delicious, but very British. Yes. So what, you know, this who am I question, what are your menus saying about who you are?
[SPEAKER_41]: So the way I look at my restaurants, and because the way in which industry has changed, and farming, and the way in which we receive our produce, I look at the UK, the United Kingdom, as my local community of food. Because I could put an order in this morning in Scotland and get it tomorrow morning. Things move very quickly now around the country. So local, United Kingdom. Then I spread further afield into Europe for other different types of produce that are better, or farmed better, or just taste better. And we're always searching for something really nice. But I don't like to go too far across the world to gather food produce. this idea of food miles matters to you? Very much so. I think now in the world we need to be very careful that we're not purchasing too much from all over the world. I don't, you know, have Japanese flavors through my menu. I don't have curries going through the menu. There's certain things that I don't need to put in to this menu because it's not really a reflection of me as a person. I've never trained in lots of different cuisines but I will never experiment them on my menu. So the reflection of the menu and the ingredients that you've talked about are about a local lad from the northwest of England using the produce of this fabulous country, this island that we live on.
[SPEAKER_46]: I love it. The phrase, a local lad from Southport, wasn't it, in the northwest of England with a dad who was a market trader. It's a great story. Does it sit uneasily with you in any way, that here we are in the very poshest, most expensive part of London, and all this fabulous food you're serving, it comes at a price. Your tasting menu is £120 or roughly $140. Your a la carte, I imagine, a main would be £60, £70. Just a bit less than that. But these are big numbers. This is out of the reach of most people. For a local lad from Southport, does that bother you?
[SPEAKER_41]: No, it doesn't bother me because I think it's not about all men being equal. It's about a matter of choice. And I think what we do offer is choice. There are tasty menus, there are a la carte menus, but there are also very good, reasonable lunch menus. The wine is if you're choosing. You can come to this restaurant and spend the same amount of money on a glass of wine than you would in a good bar or a good pub. It's all a point of choice. So with the thousands of bottles that we have on our menu, when you come here, there is something for everybody. So I don't look at it as this is a rich man's room or we're in Knightsbridge. Anybody can come to my restaurant. You can have some tap water, you can have a glass of house wine, and you can have a lunch menu. And for two people, you could be out the door less than 100 pound, if that's how you wish. But it's your choice to come and spend the value that you want to spend. Isn't it nice, even from a northern lad, to maybe come with your girlfriend or your wife and dress up and come to Knightsbridge, come to London, do something different? We're not on everyone's doorstep. We just happen to be in the heart of London. I sort of love it. I'm proud to have worked my way from there. It didn't arrive on a silver tray.
[SPEAKER_46]: It was a lot of hard work. And what about food snobbery? I mean, you have two Michelin stars. Not many chefs around the world do. But there is something about this whole sort of fetishization of the Michelin star which sticks in some people's throats. Do you sometimes feel that it's the wrong way to really judge the quality of food and restaurants?
[SPEAKER_41]: No, I don't. I think Michon are very, very important and very present. I think their history determines how good they really are. They are judging chefs as a guide and they're giving you a point of recognition and they're giving you an accolade. It's not something you ask for. it is given to you as almost a gift of your standards of what you do.
[SPEAKER_46]: Yeah, but it puts you under enormous pressure. I mean, some chefs have started saying to Michelin, even if they've had in the past one or two stars, they're now saying, I don't want to be part of your network. I don't want to be judged by you anymore. The pressure is too constant. It's too immense. The things you require of us in terms of the level of service, the presentation are just actually making us a restaurant we don't want to be.
[SPEAKER_41]: I completely disagree because I don't think it's the Michelin that are putting that pressure upon the chef. It's the general public and the expectation of the general public. In the last 10 years, social media has become a big part. Everybody in your restaurants now can post their thoughts of the dinner, of the experience that they're eating. So I think it's more than just me.
[SPEAKER_46]: Every person at your table is now a reviewer. Exactly.
[SPEAKER_41]: They can post something on the internet. Does that scare the hell out of you? Oh, no. No. It's a challenge. It sets standards. It even tells me what my restaurant's doing when I'm not here. You've got to embrace technology. You have to embrace it. Even if I don't like it and do it as well as the next chef. I do have a team of people around me that can advise me and show me how to move forward. But if I look down on that process and I look down and say Michelin delivers pressure, then I'd be a nervous wreck. And you must always turn that pressure into positive thinking and positive energy and enjoy your job. go back to your roots, think about those ingredients, stop worrying about what everyone's saying about you.
[SPEAKER_46]: The late A.A. Gill, I don't know if you knew him, but he was one of Britain's sort of best-known restaurant reviewers, and he rebelled against the Michelin spirit, the sort of smart, formal dining that it seemed to encourage. He said this, he said, the guide appears to be wholly out of touch with the way that people now actually eat. It's still rewarding, fat, conservative, fussy rooms. Maybe he meant rooms like this, that use expensive ingredients with ingratiating pomp to serve glossy plutocrats. Is that Marcus?
[SPEAKER_41]: No. Absolutely not. And I don't think fine dining is that. I think there are a lot of our food writers and our critics, maybe, that don't see the fun or the luxury or the enjoyment in fine dining because it is a homage to the chef. And I think that the world has changed. And I think a chef cooking in a high street restaurant that's got 20 seats in and he's slaving away in the back of the kitchen with an open kitchen, that is as enjoyable in today's world as eating in a fine dining restaurant. It's all about what somebody wants from an occasion. And if I'm going to set up restaurants in this hotel, it's a five-star hotel. It is known all over the world. There's a level of luxury that I have to provide and I want to provide.
[SPEAKER_46]: It strikes me that as you've become more successful, like so many, many top chefs, you've developed the brand. You've become a TV personality. You're on the British MasterChef show, which has made you enormously popular in this country. You also have opened other restaurants in central London. So now you've got a stable of three. It all means that you are not every single lunchtime and dinner actually in the kitchen here at your number one restaurant doing it yourself. Now it strikes me that when people come here and they, as we've discussed, do pay a substantial amount of money for food from the Marcus restaurant, they expect Marcus Waring to be slaving away in the kitchen. I think life has changed.
[SPEAKER_41]: And up until four years ago, when I revamped this restaurant, I was in this kitchen every single day. I never looked for television. It came and found me. I never, ever woke up and wanted to write a cookery book. And I never, ever wanted or needed to open two other restaurants on top of this. I was very satisfied with what I had. So why did you do it? Why did you stretch yourself? Because I found that I had some very talented people underneath me that I had to find opportunities for. And what I see is, having those other restaurants and coming out of the restaurant, I've created opportunities for very talented people to become bosses within their own right, within my stable.
[SPEAKER_46]: But what if you stretch yourself too thin? What if the standards at this restaurant, to be honest, are not quite as good when you're not here? I come back.
[SPEAKER_41]: I say goodbye to television, I say goodbye to books, and I do the job that I'm paid to do, which is cook. The rest is just purely a luxury item that is added onto my life.
[SPEAKER_46]: Interesting you talk about the team. There has been a lot of discussion recently about the workplace temperature in top kitchens, and there is a lot of discussion about, and there's no other word for it, bullying and abuse that happens in kitchens and is often driven by the character of the number one chef, which in this case, of course, would be you. Have you bullied your staff in the past?
[SPEAKER_41]: I think bullying is a word that is dressed up in many different ways. I was born in the 70s and bullying was something that was done in a playground. It was a fight, it was a push, it was verbal. I don't think that happens in kitchens. I've never experienced it myself in kitchens. raise my voice, raise my voice, swear, shout and drive people very very hard through hard service, yes I've had it done to me and I have done it to my staff in the past.
[SPEAKER_46]: There have been serious incidents in kitchens, I'm just looking at an incident in France where a station chef deliberately and repeatedly scolded his kitchen assistant There were other incidents that came into light after that, with sous-chefs and assistants recounting tales of abuse ranging, and I'm quoting here from a slap, sounds absurd, but it's not, a slap in the face with a wet fish, being stabbed in the calves with a kitchen knife, all sorts of different burning incidents. One ex-kitchen assistant told a report into this in France, because they took it very seriously, he said, quote, these torturers must be told that they are destroying lives. What the heck is going on in some of these kitchens?
[SPEAKER_41]: I think these are very few instances that are overshadowing a fabulous industry that's bigger than a handful of incidents or many, many more. There are millions of people working in our industry and there are thousands and thousands of kitchens just running through London alone. I think the kitchens are pressure cookers. What has changed, and this is something we really must focus on, is that the kitchens have become very much open places now. and the chef is very much part of the front of service as well as the back. Chefs are now delivering food. So I believe that the way in which we've changed... You actually come out here of an evening and... We can come out, any of my chefs can come out here and speak to customers, but what's changed is we the chef have now neutralised error in kitchen. The pressure cooker of a kitchen was driven by Hard cookery on top of a hot stove and inside the oven it was all cooked last minute So the science of food has allowed us to change the way in which we cook So we're actually taking sometimes the training out of our young chefs to actually make the job easier Because there's so much choice and there's so few people wanting to necessarily work in our industry. Maybe that's because you don't pay them enough as well. That's wrong. We do pay them very well. We pay our staff minimum and above the minimum wage.
[SPEAKER_46]: But that seems a bit, you know, minimum wage is a bit of a low bar you're setting yourself.
[SPEAKER_41]: Minimum wage though is a point of if you work an eight-hour day you're going to find it tough to survive. You know, some of my chefs in the kitchen do much, much longer days and can earn anything up to £25,000, £30,000 and be a commie chef, which is practically just above about being a trainee chef.
[SPEAKER_46]: Yes, they'll put in a few... But the average wage in the UK is £27,000. You're saying if they work ridiculously long hours, your guys might just get to that sort of threshold. And yet you're one of the most luxurious restaurants in all of London.
[SPEAKER_41]: But then we are also delivering a standard. This is a school of education as well as a job. And I think the difference, and we must identify this, is that you do not come into fine dining just for a job. You have to want to be here. The key thing here is choice. And everybody that wakes up in the morning in this part of the Western world can have a choice in life. You can either get out of bed and go and look for a job. You can work as many hours as you like and you can pretty much never ever be out of work. But don't work in fine, fine dining at the top end if you want an easy life because it doesn't exist.
[SPEAKER_46]: Brits, British people, spend three billion pounds a year on ready meals. Now that's six times more than in Spain. We still, whatever we do, when we switch the telly on and watch you cooking up fine food, we then go to the shop and buy a ready meal.
[SPEAKER_41]: We're buying ready meals for one reason and one reason only. They're there sitting on the shelves already available, there's more of them, and people are working harder and have less time and maybe don't want to cook when they get home. School's finished later, the school runs different. Everybody's lifestyle is changing, social media is changing everything, but if you want to look at food, go to supermarkets, There's your problem of obesity. There's your problem of convenience.
[SPEAKER_46]: It's interesting to me that you talk about the obesity problem and you say that you believe you're part of a culture which is beginning to respect and understand food much better. But you actually opposed your fellow top chef Jamie Oliver when he campaigned so long and hard For a sugar tax to be put on, for example, the sugary drinks, the pop that so many kids still consume, you seem to think that was a very bad idea. Why?
[SPEAKER_41]: I don't think it was a bad idea. My concern is what happens to that tax. I think what Jamie Oliver has done over the years has really opened a lot of people up to how we cook at home. And he's made people aware of lots of different things. He's the one that put all the petitions together. He's the guy that went to Downing Street and made a campaign for better quality school lunches for kids. You can't just stop at the door of Downing Street, get the tax on there and then maybe just stop.
[SPEAKER_46]: But his point about the tax isn't so much What we do with the tax money is to send a price signal to people that they shouldn't be buying all these very sweetened fizzy drinks. And if the price goes up a little bit, hopefully... They'll still buy them. Do you think they will? Yes. Alcohol will go up in a bubble. But you see, if I may say so, you seem to have a view that government and the authorities have no role to play in changing people's habits. You said this not so long ago, you said It's not the responsibility of government, but of parents. We're all human beings. We can all read and write. Let's not blame the government. There are only two people to blame for the obesity crisis. Mum and Dad. Yeah, but doesn't it start at home?
[SPEAKER_41]: Why should the government be responsible for what people purchase in a shop? Why should we hold the government responsible? for our choices. They're not our teachers, they're not our guardians, they do a completely different role and a hard role at that. And quite honestly, I think they've got more important things to worry about with the economy and with Brexit and what they're going to do with our taxes.
[SPEAKER_46]: than worry about what we are consuming at home. Is Brexit worrying you as a restaurateur? Is it going to change your business?
[SPEAKER_41]: Yes, on many ways. I voted to remain. I've learned more about Brexit since we voted to leave Europe. I wish it had been the other way around. But I'm really excited about the choice of leaving. I was shocked the morning I woke up and I heard the result. After 24 hours of thinking about it, it was a, do you know what, we've just got to get on with this now. The Congress has made a decision, let's do it. So what is the positive we can drive from leaving Europe? And that is that we have to potentially build our own future. Why I voted to remain was purely from the employment point of view.
[SPEAKER_46]: Well I was going to say there are restaurateurs already going public saying that they are losing staff. There are people saying the double whammy of losing key staff who are heading for home or not applying for jobs that have become vacant from Europe. The pool of talented European staff who are available to British restaurants is diminishing. But also the pound is much weaker and that's affecting you as you import some of your foodstuff. So it's a double whammy and some restaurateurs are saying they may have to close?
[SPEAKER_41]: From a point of view of what we purchased, unfortunately the customers are going to probably get a hit on that because you have to pay your bills, you have to pay your wages, but there's a really interesting twist to not having more of the European community coming to the UK to work and that is that we the Brits have got to get out of bed and work maybe a little bit harder and I think it's going to make us better employers and I think we need to change our approach a little bit more because what quality we have we're going to have to really take good care of it and secondly
|
total time: 13.3 minutes total words: 1784  |
total time: 9.37 minutes total words: 1565  |
total time: 4.62 minutes total words: 832  |
total time: 3.88 minutes total words: 583  |
|
total time: 6.91 minutes total words: 1504  |
total time: 1.74 minutes total words: 229  |
total time: 16.56 minutes total words: 2365  |
|