[Clerk]: Good evening, everyone. Ninth regular meeting of the Medford City Council, February 27th, 2018. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Vice President Dello Russo.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Falco. Present.
[Clerk]: Councilor Knight. Present. Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Present. Councilor Marks. Present. Councilor Scarpelli. Present. President Cavill.
[Richard Caraviello]: Present. Please rise and salute the flag. I salute 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. Motions, orders, and resolutions 18097, offered by Councilor Marks, be it resolved that the City Council broadcast scrimmage be as discussed. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. It was roughly, I think, five or six months ago that this City Council unanimously put forward a motion to request that the broadcasting equipment here at City Hall be updated because of the age of the equipment and the fact that the broadcast itself wasn't going out properly to residents of this community. Shortly after that, Ben Brown, who is the Method Community Media Station Manager, reached out to us in November 30th, and this is his email, Mr. President, to us. I'd like to just read part of it, if I could. It's addressed to the council, and it's regarding the Alden Chambers video upgrade, meeting rooms, and video install. It says, hello, I've received a detailed quote to first upgrade the cameras and broadcast equipment in the Alden Chambers, as well as to install cameras in two meeting rooms in City Hall for the web streaming of meetings. In the first portion of the proposal, the quote details installation of four new cameras, as well as the installation of all new TV equipment in the control room. There are a few reasons why this would need to be such a large upgrade. But the primary one is that the existing equipment at the Alden Chambers is so far behind that new equipment can't interface with the old. So Ben did his homework and came up with a cost to upgrade our broadcast equipment of a cost at $39,707. He then went to go on to alert us about the web streaming that this council has met on. I know Councilor Falco has discussed this on many occasions, to install cameras not only here in the council for transparency, but also in the other rooms in the building where we might have board and commission meetings. And we had several meetings on this and discussed it and was part of the recommendation when the council voted on it to request that Ben also look into the cost to add these particular cameras in the rooms. So on that part, he says for the meeting rooms we would be installing a single camera mounted in the corner of the room. as well as two removable microphones that would sit on the table. These would interface directly with the Acela streaming equipment. The cost for web streaming is $7,058. So if you combine the broadcast equipment, which is our equipment here for government channel of 39,707 and 7,058, you come out with $46,765 to accomplish this. He also goes on to say, for future consideration, the Alden Chambers system could incrementally be upgraded going forward to prevent such a large upgrade in the future. The standards that are quoted should be around for another 15 to 20 years, which would allow for things to be swapped out rather than rebuilding from the ground up. I thought that was very helpful to receive that. You know, we've been talking about transparency, this council, for a number of years. And I find it ironic now what's going on in this community and the lack of transparency that's taken place. And here we are as a council, been asking just if we can upgrade our equipment so people that are unable to come to these meetings can view the meetings and see what's going on in city government. You know, we had for approximately three and a half to four years no cable access when it comes to government channel, I shouldn't say government channel, community access channel. And yet, the rate payers were paying a franchise fee each and every month to operate not only the government channel, the school channel, and the community access channel, but we only got a portion of that. So there was surplus money left in the account, hundreds of thousands of dollars, and all we're asking for is a small amount to make sure people can view what's going on in government. We all talk about it. The second part of it, after that November correspondence we received from Ben Brown, the station manager, Councilor Longo responded back to the email and said that she received a number of complaints and that people can't hear the meetings and see the meetings and etc. Shahb Khan, who's our Chief Procurement Officer, came back and said, I agree. This vendor is on a state contract for video equipment. We must need to find the funds. Without this equipment, the software we bought for the streaming of meetings will not be of any use. So apparently we have the software for streaming the meetings in these other rooms, but we don't have the equipment to stream it with. So that was the Chief Procurement Officer stating that. And then recently, we got a final email from Ben Brown, the station manager. This is dated February 21st, 2018. And it's to Jen Dever, Ed Finn, Lauren Felch, the city council. It says, good morning. I've received extensive complaints about the quality of city council broadcast. And these quality issues are directly related to the age of the equipment that's in the room broadcasting the meetings. I'd really like to move forward with the installation of new equipment to settle this issue. Is there anything we can do to move forward with this purchase order? So here we not only have the council, we not only have residents that are contacting the station manager, contacting the council. I'm sure contacting the administration. And yet some four or five months later, we still are in the same position that we were five months ago. There's money there in the cable account to attend to this very important issue. And I would ask Mr. President, we took a vote already as a council, sent it off to the mayor. And I would ask again that we reinforce that vote and ask that the mayor allocate $46,765 to renew the broadcast equipment here at City Hall and to also purchase the web streaming equipment that's needed to not only view boards and commissions when they have their meeting, but also Committee of the Whole meetings and other pertinent meetings that are taking place here at City Hall that residents really should know what's going on, Mr. President. It's a small amount to pay for transparency. You know, I think that word's overused nowadays, but let me tell you, Mr. President, it's true that the lack of transparency in this community is astonishing. And this is only one aspect that we've been asking for for years to make sure that people can view these meetings. And you see what happens when people aren't forthcoming with information and a lack of transparency. You see what happens in the community, Mr. President. So I would ask that that be done in a roll call vote to the city administration.
[Richard Caraviello]: I'll let you know that I did speak to the mayor about that, about taking the funds out of the cable account where we have money. And she would look into it and get back to me. That was maybe about two weeks ago.
[Michael Marks]: Right. She's been looking into it for at least six months now and four years prior.
[Richard Caraviello]: I did, um, I did bring that to her attention. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. And I want to thank Council Marks for bringing this forward and placing it on the agenda again. I know, like he mentioned, we've been discussing this and I thank Ben Brown for bringing this forward to us repeatedly over the last several months. This is something we've been voting on and requesting for years now. The amount of, Email complaints I get even just during a council meeting saying, I can't hear you, it's fuzzy, you can't see your faces, it's blurry, the sound is off, the microphone's not working. I mean, every week it's something else. And I almost thought it was such a different issue every week. I always thought, oh, they're just doing it on purpose. We have such an issue on the agenda, that's why you can't hear us. But really, the equipment, like Ben Brown says, is so old and so outdated, We need to replace this system as we do, you know, you're trying to watch the school committee meeting that started at five and you can, I mean, that's all you see on posting on Facebook is what are they saying? You can't hear them. How can you have a public meeting where there's important information being discussed week after week without being able to hear the people that are speaking and the residents who are coming up with concerns and questions and the viewing public who wanna hear, who wanna know what's going on and we just don't have that. And I thank Ben Brown for pushing the issue, because he's pushing it to the mayor and to us at the same time, rather than sitting back and saying, my hands are tied, the mayor doesn't want to do it. Well, this is something that needs to be done. If there's funds in this account, like Councilman Mark said, that we've been taking from the ratepayers for years without cable access. There is enough money to do the system over and do it right. This is a vote that we've taken before, and we need to take again. It's something that really needs to get done, especially in the times that we're in. So I move a second approval, and hope my colleagues will vote in agreement, and we get this done immediately. I don't buy it that we'll look into it, that the administration will look into it. We've been hearing that for years. Enough is enough.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilwoman McCray.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. I really don't think there's anything to look into. At this point in time, the council has unanimously voted on multiple occasions to upgrade the camera equipment. We have a quote from a community media center manager that tells us what it's going to cost. They've had this quote for an extended period of time. I don't understand what the delay is, Mr. President. So with that being said, I support this resolution wholeheartedly. And I look forward to seeing some fruits of our labor on this topic. I thank the Councilor for raising the issue. Thank you, Councilor. Now, Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I thank Council colleague for bringing this forward. I think it's a very important issue, especially with regards to transparency. I know I've talked about transparency many times since I've been elected and I think the key, one of the keys is having upgraded equipment and making sure that everything works here. We should be making it easy for people to get involved in their community, to watch meetings, to come to meetings, to, you know, when I made the resolution for legislative software, I mean, that is a software that will fill meetings in the city council meeting room, the Richard Lee reading room. You know, that is key for those meetings to be taped and people can watch the boards and commission meetings and it'll help a great deal with regards to transparency. We should be making it easier. We should be trying to promote community engagement. We want people to get involved and that this year will go a long way in making that happen. So I support the resolution as well. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you Councilor Falco. Good evening. Name and address of the record, please.
[Joe Viglione]: Joe Villione, 59 Garfield Ave. And this is something that we have brought up years ago, starting with the finances, which I believe the city council must oversee. So the government channel money, correct me if I'm wrong, I believe it goes to three salaries at the high school. So this money, if we recall, there was a problem with the VHS player of the city council, which was at the firehouse. And if people didn't want to see the current council meeting, I was on your side, guys and gals. If someone didn't want to see a council meeting, they just let the VHS tape play week after week after week. We couldn't get, what was it, $400 we needed? So we finally got a DVD player. Wow, lo and behold. So you have to look at the finances of access. Because what I'm afraid of is that this money will come out of the public money. Because 60% goes into the general fund. There's very few cities and towns in Massachusetts that have this dilemma. 60% goes into the general fund. 20% goes to public access. The other 20% pays for teachers. I believe that 20% is the city council's money. Let the teachers be paid in an appropriate way by the city. Take that money back retroactively. Ask for a million bucks for the past five years of this money going to pay for teachers and have that pay for the city council. Then you can do what I suggested when I taped in room 207. And I know Councilor Falco likes this idea. I know Michael Marks likes this idea. I know Brianna Lumbo-Kern likes this idea. Yet three councillors said on the camera that it was creepy to do Facebook Live. Creepy. For transparency. Thank you, Councilor Falco, for transparency through the chair. That's what we need. That's what Facebook Live does. But why should citizens do it when we're paying for public access TV? You know, Ben Brown is not the saviour. Four months, we had four people on the Facebook page. So this kid, Bob Hague is the guy at Access AV. I've been doing this since 79. I'm sure we can get the prices down even better if we have someone who's been in the game a lot longer than Mr. Brown. I'll do respect to him. So yeah, we need room 207 wired. We need to get that money back. I want this city council to scrutinize where every nickel of the public access money is going. and also look into the money from TV3 Medford where the newspaper had 38K they couldn't account for. Get that 38 grand, there's your money. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Falco. Did you recall a roll call vote? Councilor Marks has requested a roll call vote. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Vice President De La Rosa. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. It was a cameo.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, nine in the negative, a motion passes. 18-098 offered by Councilor Marks, be it resolved that the Medford School Committee immediately review and revise the Medford Public Schools rental policy to only permit school and community-sponsored events until there is a complete public safety review. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I bring this issue up tonight, Mr. President, Because it's an issue that's been near and dear to me for several years now, and one in which I've discussed during budget times with the superintendent of schools, one in which I have debated the superintendent on, and one in which I believe firmly that in order for us to have a secure school facility, we must revisit our facility rental agreements. And I bring this up, Mr. President, because recently I took it one step further and took a look at the current Medford Public Schools facility rental agreement. And I went through it with a fine-tooth comb. And I was surprised to see a number of things, of which I am going to speak about tonight. I think when we look at a rental agreement, although it's stated in the policy that it should be used for community services and so forth, It's a valuable asset, which I agree. It also states in here that it should generate revenue. And to me, revenue is a side effect of us as a community and what we do with our buildings. And to me, the security of our faculty and our students should be the number one priority over revenue, over anything that's happening in our school system. And under this current facilities rental agreement, I don't believe it addresses security at all. And it doesn't mention at all the security of our buildings, the security of our students, or our faculty that are in these buildings, Mr. President. If you would indulge me, I'd like to read certain sections of this. And the reason why I'm doing it is, I know, I believe it was last week, the school committee voted to take a look at their policy. on rentals. And I don't want to say I told you so, but for the past five years I've actually voted against city budgets because of this very issue. The past five years I've had a dialogue and discussion with the superintendent And he assured me over and over again, my colleagues were present for a lot of this, that he would indeed look into this and see if there was a shortcoming within our rental agreements and how we can improve it so that our students are safe within our buildings, that our faculty are safe. And I'm very disappointed that in my discussions recently with the superintendent, that none of this was addressed. And this is only one part of school safety. I don't want anyone to think that if we iron this out with rentals, that now we have a safe school building. There's policies, there's procedures, there's lockdowns, there's oversight, there's a lot else that takes place within our buildings to provide security. And this is one component, but a very important component. So the first page of the facilities rental agreement, and by the way, this is, anyone can go on the city public school website and pull up this agreement, the Connor box just put in at the top, rental agreement, it'll pop up this particular agreement. One information, Councilor Knight.
[Adam Knight]: And I apologize for interrupting, Councilor Marks, I'm just hoping that when you're done with the document, we can have copies of it made by the city messenger for a packet this evening.
[Michael Marks]: Sure, mine has personal comments on it, so I'm not gonna share mine, If you could email me the link, I'd appreciate it. We can get this on the city website. So at first it states, Mr. President, procedure for use of school facilities. It says rental applications should contact community schools for facilities and the pool coordinator for the pool. Or in the case of other facilities, the secretary of the school at which the facility is located to determine if the facility is available. Once an individual organization has determined facility availability, and has decided to proceed with the rental, the rental procedure at Medford Public Schools should be followed. And the very first thing says, you should go and complete the facility's usage request. And you can go right online, I printed it out, it's a two page request form. The request form asks for a name of applicant. That's a pretty fair question. Name of organization, your mailing address, your phone number, your email address, the city in which you reside. And the date requested, days of the week, the entrance time of the facility, and the exit time of the facility. The start of the activity, end of activity. And then you just have to sign it, leave a deposit. I believe it's a 25% deposit on whatever the cost is. And then at midway down on the page, apparently the Medford Public Schools is open for rental. It says organizations using school facilities must adhere to the time approved. And then it goes on to say the school requested. So under this application, you can request to rent Medford High School, McGlynn Middle School, Andrews Middle School, the Brooks Elementary School, the Columbus Elementary School, and the Roberts Elementary School. Then it asks you, within those particular schools, what facility would you like to have within those particular schools? You can have the Marsha Karen Theater. You can have Lecture Hall C2. You can have the McGlynn Theater. You can have MHS Foyer. You can have Lecture Hall C3. You can have classrooms, Library Media Center, Brooks Elementary Gym, Columbus Elementary Gym, McGlynn Gym, Andrews Gym, Roberts Gym, Medford High Gym, Andrews Middle School Cafeteria, Batting Cages, Pool, MHS Cafeteria, Lecture Halls, Batting Cages, Edgeley Field, La Conte Rink, In other, you can put in other. Maybe you can write, I'd like to rent the mayor's office. I don't know, it says other. Maybe that's, so you can request whatever you want to rent in this community. The next section is equipment services needed. Do you need a custodian? you check it off. Food service, you would check it off if you need it. A house manager, you would check it off. Theater technician, a microphone, overhead projector, video, LCD. Not one question about security. Not one question. And in my opinion, it shouldn't be a question, Mr. President, It should be mandatory that if you're renting out public schools, that Medford Public Schools provides the security on behalf of our community to safeguard our building that we have millions of dollars invested in, and also on behalf of students and faculty that have to attend these buildings the day after we have people from outside the community using our facility. It only makes sense. It also should be a requirement to have a supervisor. And as I go on to the next page of this, it should be mandatory that the Medford Public Schools says not only will you be required to have security, but you also will be required to have a supervisor that'll be supervising the event that's going on. Making sure that you adhere to the rules and the standards and the building codes and the capacity requirements that a community has. None of that takes place. So there's the first shortfall within renting our buildings. No security requirement. It should be mandatory, Mr. President. The next part of this, it also states, and this is back to the procedure for use of the school facilities, says the building principal and where applicable, the fine arts media director or designee, athletic director for fields and gyms, food service director will review and sign the application for the rental of the facility for the purpose stated and then forward it to the superintendent for final approval. Not one sign off by security, not one sign off. How do you not include security in this day and age? How do you not safeguard our buildings? How do you not mention that? How is that not a requirement? When I go to the principal, the principal says, yeah, it's available on the 30th, that Friday, you can use the building. And he signs off. The next step should be, it goes to security. whether it's Chief Sackle or the head of security at Medford High School. And they should sign off and see what the number of people are required, what they're doing in the event, what does the event call for? Does it need more than one security personnel? Does it need more than one supervisors? Another omission in this particular rental agreement, Mr. President, a very alarming omission. The conditions of use. All users shall agree to hold the Medford Public Schools, the city of Medford, the Medford School Committee, the superintendent of schools, their agents, officers, and employees harmless for all property damage or personal injury, including death resulting from the negligence of users relating to the use of the facilities, grounds, equipment, or furniture. Nothing about our students. Nothing about our faculty. They're saying, if something happens in that building, you're not going to hold the superintendent liable. God forbid, you ain't going to hold him liable, even though he signs off on it. You're not going to hold the school committee, who's responsible for this liable. So who do we hold responsible when we allow a 21-year-old, because that's what the agreement says, you can rent if you're 21, a 21-year-old to come in and rent to any one of our buildings, invite hundreds of people, and that's not a fabrication, it currently takes place now, hundreds of people with no ID, no quarry check, we don't know what purpose other than what's stated on the form they're there for, we don't know what they're leaving behind in these schools, And we don't have any security personnel to oversee this. Again, renters must be 21 years age or older to rent a school facility. No quarry check is required. Another omission. Right now, Mr. President, if I want to go up and put a local access show on Community Access, they quarry check me. If I want to go rent the McGlynn School, No quarry check, no security, and I can rent that building until I'm blue in the face. And I can invite whoever I want into that building and have access to all sections of that building. How is that security? We recently did a sweep because what took place? Are we going to do a sweep every weekend after these renters are gone? It doesn't make sense. The policy doesn't come from a standpoint of public safety and security. It comes strictly from a financial standpoint. And we're not that hot up as a community. We don't need it, Mr. President. We don't need the additional burden, aggravation, and security concerns throughout the entire community. If you want to hold a city event, fine. Sponsored by the city. If the schools want to put on an event, that's fine in their building. I'm not talking about school events. The superintendent was here two weeks ago or a week ago, and he said, well, what about the Cub Scouts? I mean, come on, Mr. Superintendent, we're not talking about the Cub Scouts in the community. We're talking about renting our buildings to organizations or groups or individuals that we know nothing about. We don't know what their intent is, we don't know what their purpose is, and we can't control them under this current agreement. It goes on to say, Mr. President, The user may not allow attendance at any event to exceed the rated capacity at a method facility as determined by the applicable fire and safety codes. Where is that in the policy? Where is it asking for the application? I just showed you that. Where is it asking to put a number? How many people will be here? I don't see it. So that's just language in there. It's meaningless. The sponsoring organization must take responsibility for ensuring that only the facility noted on the application are used and that the remaining parts of the building are not entered. That's like giving the fox the key to the chicken coop. Here you are, renter. You're only supposed to be in the cages. No one watching you. Don't go in any parts of the building. You're not allowed anywhere else in that building. We're going to hold you responsible, Mr. Renter. Makes no sense. This is when we need security up there. This is when we need a supervisor up there to monitor our facilities and making sure they're maintained in a safe and adequate fashion, Mr. President. No individual will be admitted to the school building before the arrival of an adult supervisor. So until that 21-year-old gets there, no one's going to be admitted. who must be at least 21 years of age, and no individual may remain in the building without such supervisor. Putting a lot of emphasis on these renters. These renters are now self-policing. They're responsible now for everything. Custodians have been given special instruction to enforce regulations strictly. Another responsibility for our custodians. The superintendent said that he used them to sweep areas for bombs at the high school. Now we have them overseeing all our facilities to make sure there's adequate people responsible that should be there for the building itself. The applicant will be responsible for all attendees involved in the function, i.e. participants, observers, and anyone who enters the building when it is under the control of the applicant. He's solely responsible. Any given Saturday, you can go up to high school, and there's events up there, not gonna mention names, that have 600 or so people that attend the event. It's well attended, and it's been going on for years, and it's a great event. But there is no supervision other than this group. They supervise themselves. They have access to every classroom. They have access to the cafeteria, the intercom system, all the lecture halls, you name it, they have access to it. They even have rooms under their own lock and key. That's how big the high school is. They will give them a dedicated room. Here, you can store stuff in this particular room at the high school. Welcome to Medford High School. We'll do anything we can to keep you as a renter. Security need not apply. Then it goes on to say, the custodial staff shall have no responsibility. So before they had a responsibility to make sure that someone was 21 that was there present. The custodial staff shall have no responsibility to the user group beyond coordinating access and assisting in the location of electrical outlets and light switches. No other responsibilities. So if the superintendent says, well, they're the eyes and ears when we have a function, and they're out there to make sure things are happening, not according to this policy, they have no responsibilities. Those who use school facilities must actively supervise all participants and attendees and enforce this rule. They're responsible, the renter, for enforcing the rule. Doesn't sound like a safe environment to me, Mr. President. Doesn't sound like a place that I would feel comfortable after using to allow our children, Mr. President, to go back into these buildings, knowing that we don't know what was brought into these buildings. We don't know what was left behind. Maybe something was mistakenly left behind that could cause injury to a first grader, a second grader, a third grader. We don't know. And we'll never know under this current policy. I would ask, Mr. President, that my resolution, which states that the Medford School Committee immediately review and revise the policy to the Medford Public Schools rental to only permit school and community sponsored events until there is a complete safety review, also be amended to include mandatory security personnel and school building supervisors to be present at all Medford Public School facility rentals. And at that point, Mr. President, I would hope that the school committee does their due diligence and homework to make sure that we don't have to worry when a building's rented on a Saturday or a Sunday, that when our students show up on a Monday, that that building is secure. And as far as I'm concerned, and this may sound like a hard approach, I don't think we should be renting our buildings. I really don't think we should be renting our school facilities. If you want to rent the pool at the high school or the gymnasium, they have security up there. They have someone that's in the front that acts as a supervisor. It's a community schools concept. I'm all in favor of that. But to wholesale rent all our facilities without the proper supervision and security, I think we're setting ourselves up, Mr. President, for a disaster to happen. And I'm not going to wait for that to happen. I thank you, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Council Mars. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I agree with the resolution. I just, number one, want to know what the amendments are again. I think you said that it'd be mandatory. You were requesting that they require mandatory school personnel be in attendance during the functions. And what was the other amendment?
[Richard Caraviello]: Mandatory personnel and supervisors be present.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, I think this is one this issue is definitely one of the probably 10 to 20 issues that need to Be discussed I think I agree with you comes much you have brought this up in the past and I remember you clearly you go and head-to-head with our superintendent about this and Um, it's something that should have already been put in place with regards to security. It's good that you got your hands on that, um, agreement and hopefully you will share that with us so that we could take a look at it. But I think you said enough when you mentioned the highlights from the agreement and the fact that no security can be, is required within that agreement. And that, that is, that is a little scary to me. Um, just a point of information.
[Michael Marks]: Councilor Marks. I just wanted to let it be known that this document is available on the school website. So it'd be like going on the City of Medford website. This is available for anyone to look at, not only this council, anyone in the community. So I just want people to know that that's out there, and it's as easy as clicking on their website to get a copy of it. Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Martins. Council Member Craig.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. And I think this is definitely something that I am in support of. And I ask that the school committee do review that policy and make the necessary changes and do what they have to do to ensure our children's safety and anybody that enters those buildings' safety on a number of levels, including this one. I just don't want to mislead the public in thinking with regards to, I think, what some of the admins want the public to believe is that a group was in this McGlynn school and left a magazine clip in one of our buildings at the McGlynn. And because that magazine clip was thrown away in the trash barrel is the reason why we really may never know where that came from. That is what I just don't, this is something that definitely needs to be looked at. So don't 10 to 20 things within the next week or two And so don't a hundred other things need to be looked at within the next couple months because we obviously need revamping in all our policies and procedures, all our contracts with, I mean, just, there are a whole host of issues that we've obviously have discovered problems with, but I don't want anybody to believe that whatever group rents that school was the reason for what was found. We don't know that. And we may never know that because it was hidden and covered up for so long. And that, to me, is the root of the entire problem for everybody that knew. And we will probably never know where that came from. So I want to make sure I made that point. At the same time, I know this needs to be reviewed. What was spoken of is a little bit disturbing. And it definitely needs to be revamped. looked into whether or not we even rent our facilities is definitely a question the school committee needs to decide. I'm sure we'll be there to help and give our opinions when the time comes during those discussions. But the concerning part to me is that because that was thrown away, we can't get fingerprints. We can't look and see if there's any serial number. We just don't have enough. And that's really the scary part.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. On the motion by Councilor Marks. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I'd like to be recorded in opposition to the resolution. The reason being last week the school committee did vote to examine their rental policies and I feel as though they should be provided the opportunity to do that. I certainly respect Councilor Marks for bringing the issue forward, and I can certainly understand why he did. However, I feel as though our school committee has been elected to perform a function, and that's to set policy in our public schools, and this is an issue of public policy. There is an ongoing investigation, as Councilor Lungo had spoke to, and I think we need to let our colleagues on the school committee do their job, Mr. President, so for that reason, it has to be recorded in opposition.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Layton. On the motion by Councilor Marks. Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, my, my resolution, uh, does not say that the city council will craft a new request form. It doesn't say it'll craft a new facilities rental agreement. It doesn't say the school committee must do this. It must do that. We're making a recommendation as elected officials. And we have every right as a concerned, not only elected official, but as a concerned parent and a resident in this community to make sure that our wishes are also carried out, Mr. President, and our concerns are carried out. So by no means is this usurping of the school committee's authority. It's great that they waited for something to happen, and now they're acting. I brought this issue up for the last four years to the superintendent, to the school committee, publicly at this meeting, and it fell on deaf ears. And now they're acting. Great for the school committee. Great for the mayor. They're acting now. I just don't believe, Mr. President, that for us, we should be able to give guidance and our input on what we believe needs to take place. And that's what I did tonight, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Mr. President, just in my reading of the resolution, be it resolved the Medford School Committee immediately review and revise the Medford Public Schools rental policy. That's already been voted on. They are going to do that, right? So we'll take that language out. Be it resolved the Medford School Committee immediately only permit school and community sponsored events. That's what it says. That's a directive more than a suggestion to me, Mr. President. With that being said, I have no problem with the gentleman bringing the matter forward. I'm in opposition to it for a theoretical reason, not for any other reason more. The school committee implements policy. The school committee makes policy. The superintendent's in charge of executing that policy, Mr. President. I think we should let the school committee have an opportunity to do their job and do what they need to do. And I rest my case at that.
[Michael Marks]: Counsel Box. Mr. President, the council's been on the council for a few years. He knows much of what we say up here are recommendations. And that's all that is. So he can go based on any wording he believes. But I could just tell you when I went head-to-head with the superintendent and voted against budgets, I wish I had that same support of some of the members of this council before anything happened, Mr. President, not after the fact. So to make a recommendation tonight to improve security in our schools is well under the purview of this council, and it's a recommendation, and that's all it is, is a recommendation, Mr. President. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Thank you. And I think it's important to point out that the resolution states that only permits school and community-sponsored events. I think the wording, until there is a complete public safety review, is important. Because, yes, whoever rented that school or rents our facilities, they are being subject to, could it have been them? You know, they are being subject to that, what unfortunately is taking place.
[Adam Knight]: What if information comes tonight? Quite frankly, it could have been anybody that has access to the school. Anybody that has a key to the school. Anybody that's an employee to the school. It could be anybody. And we don't know. And the council is absolutely correct about that. And that's why there is an investigation that's pending. And when we have the information that we need to proceed, we will. But it's not even we. It's the school committee.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And I think until we have the investigation, which I believe the chief said last Tuesday it was going to take one to two weeks, I think until then, if it's only going to be one more week, then I agree wholeheartedly with you, Councilor Marks, that nobody should be in our schools. Nobody. You know, parents were emailing and calling me today because the high school was left unlocked between 7 and 7 42, which is when I believe our Medford Police Department stationed there and were there for the day. Now, my children's school at the Roberts, they were there from when the doors opened until, I mean, I left far after school closed, and our Medford Police Department was still there. So we're getting complaints just for the school being open. So I wholeheartedly believe, and unfortunately the case is we don't know where it came from, so until, which is probably one more week, until we have the results of that investigation, nobody should be in our facilities.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you. Name and address of the record, please. Robert M. Pentez, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass., former member of this party. You know, the world is in a changing state of times right now, and I think what Councilman Marks has introduced is something that could be epidemic anywhere in this country, but it's not the first time. It's been here before. You know, you as Councilors, you have a 50 percent voice in the school department budget. And if you see something that's not taking place in their budget, for example, under school security, and here's a prime example of what school security is all about, this is the opportunity to do it. If the school committee knows that the city council is with them and trying to help them, that's a great leadership quality. And I don't think anybody in any municipal or state or federal capacity should sit back. If you've got something to say that revolves around security, Say it. That's what you're getting paid for. That's what the people expect from you. With that being said, Mr. President, not only do I think it's a good movement, I think it would be wise, as a suggestion being offered to the school committee, that they review their entire policy. And now, knowing that they're going to be having a new superintendent as of June or at the end of May or whatever it might be, if not sooner, whatever the situation might be, here's an opportunity to start to clean house on issues that are really of a concern. Maybe the gun clip said something. But the review of the policy is what it's all about. People in the building that nobody knows nothing about. And I think it's a good motion. And I would hope the council votes approval.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Good evening. Name and address of the record, please.
[Jean Nuzzo]: Hi, good evening. Gene Nuzzo, 35 Paris Street. I hope you'll give me a little leeway. I'm just catching up on the happenings and I have some thoughts. And a few of the points that I wanted to make have been brought up in this particular topic, so hopefully you'll give me just a little bit of latitude. I want to talk about leadership, because I think it's crucial in dealing with this issue. And leadership involves establishing a clear vision and sharing that vision with others so they'll follow willingly. It's providing the information, knowledge, and methods to realize the vision, and it's coordinating, balancing, conflicting interests of all the members and stakeholders. A leader steps up in times of crisis and is able to think and act in a creative way during difficult times. And transparency is also crucial in this particular instance. And transparency is a lack of hidden agendas and conditions. It's accompanied by the availability of full information required for collaboration, cooperation, and collective decision making. A minimum degree of disclosure is required when making agreements and dealings and practices for transactions to assure everything is open and available. And they are essential conditions for a free and open exchange for the rules and reasons behind measures to be sure that they're fair, clear, and concise to all participants. And they're not mutually exclusive. And I feel like the events that we have been going through in the city of Medford in these past several days and what I've seen on highlight reels.
[Richard Caraviello]: We're talking about the rental policy. I understand, but I'm tying, I'm tying into making your point of the rental.
[Jean Nuzzo]: But I think it all ties together, right? We've got a lot of people who have high emotions and everybody's cherry picking different positions and items and thoughts. And while I don't have children in the school system, I think that brings a very different perspective to what's going on, and I'm sharing that with you because I think it comes into play, because this is one component, right? I think there's a larger issue at play here, and that is that someone, regardless of who it is, and to Brianna's point, we may never know because the item has been disposed of.
[Richard Caraviello]: We're talking about the rental of the school.
[Jean Nuzzo]: I'm trying.
[Richard Caraviello]: Okay.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: When would you like her to speak? Cause if you have a speech prepared, I have a speaking point.
[Richard Caraviello]: If you could get back to the rental fee, we're not talking about what was found in school. Council marks is brought up for revising the policy of the schools.
[Jean Nuzzo]: But his point was that it was found in the school because there was a rental component.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I just like, would like to take a vote to allow her to, of reader speech, or if you want her to move till the end of the meeting, then.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Jean Nuzzo]: Do you want me to do it at the end, or can I?
[Richard Caraviello]: Continue, but again, try to get to the rest of the story.
[Jean Nuzzo]: So while I recognize the issue, my greatest concern is not in the response and how the decision was made, but that the item was able to be brought into the school. And I think a component of it is the rental. But the fact is that someone, we don't know who, brought that weapon in in the first place. And I think we're doing everything very piecemeal, and this is a small component. So I would just like to point out that it's a protocol review. It's a full-scale protocol review. You know, the reality is that the cities around the United States, not us, have been hyper-focused on this issue. They've developed committees on safety, both for schools and otherwise, to solicit community feedback and ideas to be included in the formation of their plans and crafting of their first response protocols. They work with architects and engineers and owner's reps to review and improve existing designs to harden their building shells. and come up with distractive techniques within the building in the event of a crisis. And they find the funding and they begin the implementation of those plans. We haven't done any of that. We're not even speaking about that. And that is really the crux of the problem. The crux of the matter, from a solution perspective, isn't to cherry pick each and individual piece, but it's to look at it holistically. And not only to deal with it from a logistical perspective, but to provide information to the people who are the most likely target, which is our students and our staff and our schools. We need to provide them with information on how to respond, when to respond, and practice those responses so their muscle memories kick in. And talking about rental and talking about who can use it and talking about storage and all the other pieces are just small pieces to the larger puzzle. The frightening fact is that we're not keeping up with the times. In Medford, we've fallen behind. We've spent thousands upon thousands of dollars on other projects. And we've let this crucial issue fall to the wayside. When you think about the different projects we've spent and monies to expedite some of them, some of the measures that you can do for a single school cost under $400,000. And while that seems like a large amount of money, we spent $500,000 to expedite the Riverside Plaza project. So it's all about looking at the large picture. And that's my point, and that's why I'm here. I just want to say that I believe our focus has been on the wrong place, and we as a community need to be direct. Had even some of our energy and effort been spent on concrete assessments and plans to protect our schools and our public buildings, there would have been a protocol in place. The issue wouldn't have been left to the discretion of the administrative team on staff that week because they would have known what the protocol was and they would have followed it. So absent of that protocol, They made their judgment on what to do. In hindsight, we all believe it was not the right judgment. But I don't think if you reflect as an individual, everybody would say, I absolutely would have called the police. Right? So my final point in closing is that my issue is I believe we have an issue with transparency and approachability. There were people and there are people that are resident stakeholders and subject matter experts who have raised the issue over and over. And they've been disregarded and they've been silenced because some people don't know what they don't know. And the only way you're going to get that information is if you allow people to speak. There's a dedicated focus in this city to urbanize the city of Medford. And we need to, in conjunction with that effort, if it will move forward, do what needs to be done to prepare us for what urbanization means. This event is a wake-up call to our community. This administration in this city needs to become fully transparent and participative immediately, at all levels. It should be clear to everyone at this moment, in this time, that in a disaster situation, we would and will be lacking in the essentials we need. Unless this administration's approach to planning and implementation is overhauled immediately, I urge you to become familiar with the steps and frameworks other cities and communities are taking to investigate these, not just a single, but an overarching. We need to focus on this crucial item swiftly, but with decisive, methodical, measured approach. Change is difficult. Planning is tedious, but we as a community can rise to the challenge, if not for our children, then for who? Please look at this as a holistic issue and not just cherry pick. I urge you to do that as a planner. I urge you to look at the issue in its entirety, if for no one else, for our kids, because they really need to be.
[Adam Knight]: One information, Councilor Knight. Just last week, the council did vote to request that the administration issue an RFP hire an independent security expert to perform an assessment, a safety and security assessment at all our public buildings, which includes our public schools as well. So I can't agree with you more wholeheartedly, Ms. Nuzzo, when you say about needing a holistic approach and not taking a piecemeal approach to it. Thank you very much.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Jean Nuzzo]: So I would just ask, I don't know if there's a motion that you can make to begin that process more quickly. I know a security RFP will take time and security will only look at one component. If I would make you any recommendation, it would be that you need someone to kind of be the point of the spear on this, because there will be, if you look at other communities, a security component is only one side. You've got the building structure, you've got the building technologies, you've got the manpower, transparency and position, landscaping, architecture, it's a very complex issue. Thank you, I appreciate your time.
[SPEAKER_09]: Excuse me, name and address of the record, please. Paul Halloween Jr. 29 row left. Question to the chair for Council Marks. When it comes to security, when it comes to the security part of your amendment, is that just so I can understand it, is that like a high security guard, someone who works in school or a police officer? Councilmarks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. It would be up to the school committee to decide what they consider security. We currently have security officers at the school department, we have police personnel in the community, so it would be under their purview to figure out who they want there as security. But having an organization or a group determine their own security and who they internally will report as security, to me is inadequate and not a prudent way of operating.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Matz. Councilor Lococo.
[Joyce Paul]: I'll yield to the speaker.
[Richard Caraviello]: Name and address for the record, please.
[Joyce Paul]: Joyce Paul, 8 Mason Street, Medford, Mass. I wanted to say I agree with Mr. Marks and Breanna Lungo-Koehn, and I want to thank both of you. I think it's very, very unfortunate. When I came to Medford, you know, I thought of this as a very different town, and it's just the way things are. But I think it's rational and reasonable and sensible, and I think something needs to be done. And I think it's unfortunate and sad, but I think it is reasonable, and I support what you have to say. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Councilor Lungo-Curran. Thank you, President Caraviello. I would just like to amend this if my councilor doesn't mind, council colleague doesn't mind, or create a B paper that a full security audit of our schools be conducted, even if we have to hire an outside consultant.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. On the B paper that a full security audit be done of the school system. Didn't we vote on that amendment last week? Yes, we did.
[SPEAKER_08]: And is the amendment in order or out of order?
[Richard Caraviello]: This is a more specific order. The motion last week was for every public building, which does encompass the schools also.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you for your ruling, Mr. President. Thank you. Move the question, Mr. President.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Marks, as amended by Councilor... Roll call vote, Mr. President. As amended by Councilor Marks and as amended by Councilor McLaren. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Clerk]: Vice President Dello Russo?
[Richard Caraviello]: No.
[Clerk]: Councilor Falco? Yes. Councilor Knight? No. Councilor Kern? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Calvillo?
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes. Five in the affirmative, two in the negative, motion passes. 18-099, offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, whereas high levels of lead were found at Riverbend Park, and whereas the location is right next to the Andrews School in the soccer fields behind the Andrews Inn, whereas after my request, this City Council voted to do additional testing behind the Andrews, and whereas high levels of lead were found behind the Andrews at the 2.2-7 foot level, be it resolved, that the testing location be expanded, and that prior testing locations be further tested from the zero to two foot level. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. We all received a map of the testing locations, those behind Riverbend Park, and then those that the city council requested be done behind the Andrews School, along the lines of close to the soccer fields where our children play soccer on Saturday and Sunday. That was done, and I pushed and pushed for the results to be sent to us. I'm very thankful that they did the testing. There was an additional five locations that were tested after our council request, and lead was found. I did speak to Ms. Hunt about this a few weeks ago. She told me that the lead was found between two and seven feet. She knew exactly what my next question was going to be. She said, you're wondering, are we going to test between zero and two feet? And I believe her answer was she was not sure of that. But I'm publicly requesting and asking my council to support a vote with regards to testing at the, especially behind the Andrews where our children are, I think behind Riverbend, I'm not sure if it's utilized, but behind the Andrews, I'd like the testing expanded to make sure, to see what the levels of lead are on the grounds where our children are playing soccer. And also a testing of, some testing of the zero to two feet marking points. Because if we have lead from zero to two feet, that is not healthy for our children. And with there being a school right there and hundreds of kids playing soccer and after school activities, I just think it concerned me when this came forward probably, jeez, nine, 10, 11 months ago. I know that the updated testing was done in October of 2017. So this is just something that I think is necessary to move forward. I know we're going to have an expense if this needs to be cleaned up, but we need to know, knowing obviously we can, there'll be different ways that we'll be able to figure out how to work with this, but we need to make sure that where our children are playing is safe. So I would just move approval, ask for a roll call vote that we expand the testing behind the Andrews. As you probably saw when you looked, when you open your email, it's closer to the walkway where the additional testing was done. I'm just looking for some additional testing to see how far it's crept in and also just some surface level testing so that we can make sure there's not lead from the zero to two foot mark. So I would just ask for a roll call vote and my support by my colleagues.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor.
[Adam Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, I certainly have no problem supporting this paper this evening. I'd like to ask permission from the Council to add a B paper on it, just to get a report back from the administration, maybe in a committee of the whole setting, as to what impact these findings are going to have on the expansion of the Clippership Connector, Mr. President. Ultimately, I think we found out about this pollution through test borings that were done in anticipation of the extension of the Clippership Trail. And I think that that's kind of gotten us to the point where we're at today. So I'd like to have an update, Mr. President, to determine what's going on with that project as well.
[Michael Marks]: Uh, thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank council Longo current for bringing this up. Uh, this is a logical next step, especially because of the proximity to, uh, the Andrew school. And I support this tonight, Mr. President on the motion.
[John Falco]: Councilor Falco. Thank you, Mr. President. I also just want to go and recognize supporting this. I think this is a good resolution. I think this is a great next step. We need to make sure that this is safe for everyone. Like we said earlier, there are plenty of kids that use the fields on the weekends for soccer and whatnot. But you also have children that are traversing those fields on a daily basis, getting to and from school, and using those trails behind the school as well. So I move approval.
[George Scarpelli]: Councilor Scarpelli. Thank you, Mr. President. I apologize for stepping out for a second, but before I heard this writing, I wanted to just reiterate Councilor Longo-Curran's appreciation for getting this out and understanding that, you know, it's frightening to think where it is and where it could be. So, expanding it and making sure that our safety of our children, again, in another format is foremost and most important. So, thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: not to mention the newly implemented dog park. Name and address for the record, please.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Andrew Castagnetti, Cushing Street. What I'm about to say, it all ties in, so bear with me, Council President, to this Clippership Connector path and behind it, Dr. Andrews. First of all, the Douglas Andrews and the McGlynn was probably built on a dump, if I remember correctly. However, that worked out as far as testing, I don't know. I find it unfortunate, as I say in the real estate business, that there's a dirty 21E involved, meaning pollution in the earth, dirt. It's very appalling, it's more than appalling to me that this missing clipper ship connected, which is about a half a mile from behind the Salton Star building to the Dr. Andrews ray yard. It's probably a half mile, otherwise you could go from the center of Medford Square all the way past Arlington. And on the east side, you could go from the Dark of Andrews all the way and not deal with Route 16 or Route 28 and walk to the subway station. Capital idea. Unfortunately, it seems that the leadership here has not done the half mile behind you, Council President. And I find that more than appalling because As you stated, it was not an official bike path, Council President. However, one week after I threw my hat into the ring to run for city council, I was driving and riding my bicycle near the Mystic River, within five feet of the river, next to Route 93, near the Riverside Yacht Club. And my front tire went into a sinkhole, And I had a severe head injury, concussion, and broken bones. When I finally got home, my wife took me to the Lawrence Memorial Hospital, I guess it's called. And we had all kinds of repair work done. I can't understand why it's not done. And if the zero to two foot level has not been tested, If the Douglas Andrews is okay to put a piece of tar on there for their bike path, footpath, and stone dust on the Tom Lincoln side that he designed, well, if you're not gonna disturb the soil, I can't see why we're getting into this big ball of wax trouble.
[Richard Caraviello]: It goes beyond the scope of the bike path. There's playgrounds there, there's a lot more than the bike path involved there. That's the reason. We're not just talking about the bike path.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: So the schools are?
[Richard Caraviello]: The schools, there's kids that play there, there's a new park.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: They have car parks that their grandfather know?
[Richard Caraviello]: No, Councilor Lungo-Koehn is asking that those areas also be tested to see what's going on there also. So we're not just concerned with the bike path.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Okay, my second point would be, from behind the Salton Star building, where the path does not exist, towards all the way to the Doug Andrews border. That is underneath Route 93, behind 76 Ship Avenue, behind 54 to 68 Ship Avenue, behind the Riverside Yacht Club, which leases the land. They don't own it, to the best of my knowledge. And behind Shipside Green at 20 Ship Avenue. where the dirty 21E is in the back. And it's all fenced off. So I don't have egress to that area either. This bike path should be built on the people's land under riparian rights in the 1630s, Massachusetts law, that we the people have the rights within so many feet of mean high tide. If I recollect, when I was a child, high tide came up to the Karate Bridge. And low tide, that didn't smell so good, but I don't want to get out of track so people can stop laughing. I'm dead serious. In a city like this, you cannot do the half mile path out of the 10 miles? You know, what is wrong? That is the point. Thank you.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: I'm listening. And why are your children going to the schools behind there?
[Adam Knight]: And playing soccer there? That's why Councilor Langel brought the resolution forward for the test. That's her concern.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Well, it didn't get polluted after the buildings were built, my dear. Think about that.
[Richard Caraviello]: That's the Councilor's concern.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: So what was the plan under the rug and dirt back then? If it's not done, one year anniversary of my head injury, I believe I will take legal action to get the city to get this job done, the state, Middlesex County, I got them all covered.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Lungo-Koehn's motion is to test the land in several areas of that. It has nothing to do with the bike path. Bike path is a whole separate issue that's not even being addressed.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: If I remember correctly, I was the one that brought this forward, and Breonna took the motion to send it to the mayor. Thank you, and thank you for the response. I am more than appalled. I'll take care of it if I have to. Thank you for listening. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, as amended by Councilor Knight, as seconded by Councilor Dello Russo, Mr. Clerk, roll call vote has been requested.
[Clerk]: Vice President Dela Cruz, no. Affirmative. Councilor Falco. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Leocurt. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Caraviello.
[Richard Caraviello]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, none in the negative, motion passes. We have a few moments of silence here, so if I could read them all at once and we could have one moment of silence. A couple of them are, I'm sorry I left over from last week, but due to the length of the meeting, we held them over this week. So, start off with the first one. Offered by President Caraviello, be it resolved that the Medford City Council expresses sincere condolences to the family of Sina Cutler. Thank you, President. Cutler family is a long family history in this community, and their mother just passed away last week, and I want to send my condolences to them. 18, 281, offered by President Caraviello, Vice President Dello Russo, Councilor Knight, be it resolved that the Medford City Council's President sends their condolences to the family of Mildred Mimi Ionesa. Move approval by Councilor De La Rosa and offered by Councilor Knight and President Caraviello, be it resolved that the Medford City Council send its deepest and say condolences to the family of Joe Small on his recent passing. If we could please rise for a moment of silence, please.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you. Mr. President, just if I could, Councilor Knox. Just if I could, on Mildred Ionesa, I just wanted to say a few words. I've known Mildred for a number of years. And she's always had a smile on her face, a good word to say about people, and a true family person that family always came first. And she will be sorely missed, Mr. President.
[Adam Knight]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Mr. President, just a brief bit on Joe Small. Mr. Small was a lifelong Medford resident, longtime firefighter, very involved in the professional firefighters of Massachusetts, one of the founding members to help bring workplace safety and occupational health initiatives forward as an organization through organized labor. Mr. President, he's going to be sadly missed. He was a good man, a good citizen in the city of Medford, a great grandfather, and someone that put himself before others to ensure their safety in the workplace. So he will be sadly missed, and I offer my condolences. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: And one last one here. Offered by Councilor Scarpelli, be it resolved that the DPW, Director, investigate this colored water in the Lawrence Estate neighborhood. Councilor Scarpelli.
[George Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Again, I just had a few phone calls in the last couple days, one before I left, that if we can just have the director of DPW, maybe some from the Water Department, do some testing. They've had some issues with discolored, rusty water in that area periodically. So if we can see, or if they can update any work that's being done so we can update our residents, it would be greatly appreciated. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Scarpelli, Councilor Dello Russo.
[Fred Dello Russo]: And in the matter of public safety, if they could test the water to make sure there's not any cross-contamination there. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: On the motion by Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by Councilor Dello Russo, seconded by Councilor Falco. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Petitions, presentations, and similar matters. 18282 petition by Robert M. Penta, 0 Summit Road, Bedford, Mass., to address the council regarding the Bedford Police Department's in the ammunition gun clip found at the McGlynn Middle School. Councilor Penta, I'm going to, before we get started, this is an ongoing police matter. So I would hope that- I understand that. That you respect that and please Take the proper precautions. I'll give you the leeway that you need, but please understand, we don't want to have to stop in the middle of this. Thank you. Next special director, please.
[Robert Penta]: My name is Robert Pentez, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass. The stress and anxiety of Clipgate, that's what I call it, Clipgate, has needlessly caused our city an embarrassed showing for collective management when they thought nobody was looking. Dating back to December 28th, when the ammo clip was first found, A cast of characters have become principal components to the investigation, starting with the cleaning company personnel who first found the clip. We have further parties of interest in the school custodian, Mr. Edwards, the principal at the McGlynn School, Mr. Belson, the school superintendent, the resource officer, Medford police officer, Riccati, Mr. McLaughlin, director of building and grounds, Mayor Burke, and school employees who brought this to the attention of Councilor Lungo-Koehn. When Councilor Lungo-Koehn notified the police on Thursday, December 15th, of this concern brought to her attention by school employees, the school building was swept on Tuesday, February 20th, according to news reports. Thankfully, Breanna Lungo-Koehn and Councilor Marks addressed this matter at their next council meeting with many concerned parents in attendance. This past Thursday, February 22nd, at the Karen Little Theater at Medford High School. Seven days after Breonna Lungelkorn notified police, the mayor called for a school committee meeting wherein hundreds of Medford citizens, teachers, and administrators attended to discuss the matter. When Mayor Burke, as chairperson of the school committee, first found out about this matter, and from whom and what did she do, she has yet to disclose that matter. While the February 22nd meeting revealed a lot of anger and displeasure as to what the Clipgate incident has caused, it also revealed shortcomings to questions asked. One glaring question, and yet to be answered, was, who was the we that decided not to share the info at the outset? The Medford Police, under the direction of Chief Sacco, is leading the in-house investigation regarding this incident, as he should. If the Medford police are good enough to investigate a murder, stolen property, drug dealing, and other crimes within their daily jobs, they now don't need to be upstaged by the mayor and her hiring of her close, personal, and financially rewarding political friend, Martha Coakley. Mayor Burke, on her own, without any discussion, approval, or vote of record from the school committee, has hired her close personal friend, former Attorney General Martha Coakley, who has contributed $1,000 to Mayor Burke's campaign to do this independent personnel investigation because of this matter as it's reported in the news reports. This independent personnel investigation should have no ties nor relationships to any politicians in our cities. I ask, where is the transparency to this matter? Independent means just what it says. Free and devoid from any influence, guidance, or counsel of another or others, nor affiliated with or loyal to no one political party, organization, or voter. Both Mrs. Burke and Mrs. Coakley are both Democrats. This hiring of Martha Coakley by Mayor Burke is a sole source contract, a contract awarded without competitive bidding. It directs itself to cronyism, particularly in awarding jobs to friends or trusted colleagues in politics between politicians. This hiring also prevents presents, excuse me, a serious question as to whether Mayor Burke has violated the state ethics law on the chapter 62. Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 268A, wherein the law states if a conflict is apparent, or the appearance is a telling sign, then a violation of the law is readily at hand. A public employee may not act in a manner that would cause a reasonable person to think that she would show favor toward someone or that she can be improperly influenced. I stand here not to question the ability or the capability of Martha Coakley, but rather the concern of a state ethics conflict of interest, as well as to her individual unspecified cost from her very expensive downtown Boston law firm of Foley and Hogue. Mayor Burke's relationship with Martha Coakley has been long and financially rewarding. I find it interesting that Mayor Burke is now concerned with having an independent personnel investigation, but where is her outside independent audit of the school department if she is so concerned about righting the ship? I do not believe we need a very expensive, close, personal, and political friend of the mayor to address Medford's employee personnel policies. Medford is a good city with tons of good people in it. Let this incident be the thoughtful reminder that when the law is not followed and protocols are not in place, and when city leaders take it upon themselves to make decisions that fly in the face of potential safety and what the law says, then all involved, no matter who, as this case has demonstrated, shall be held accountable. For the truth only has one consequence. Let no cover-up be worse than the crime itself. I would like to conclude by making a correction to a statement I made last Thursday at the school committee meeting. At the conclusion of my commentary and in my haste, I misread what I meant to say, and it was as follows, what I meant to say. What happened in Florida was horrific, and hopefully we all have learned something here tonight. The people of Medford want action, and as city officials, you owe it to them. Now, with that being said, Mr. President, again, You folks have been through the whole issue of conflict of interest, whether it be your pay raises or jobs. This is a very serious matter. This hiring of Mrs. Coakley out of the Clear Blue Sky, while this incident is going on, I believe does not speak well for the police investigation. I don't think it speaks well for the Medford Police Department. They can handle their own investigation, and if it turns out to be something on one of their own, they will resolve it. If it's something that's resolved here in the building, an employee, it will be resolved internally. And if the need is to have an updated personnel policy that hasn't taken place since this mayor has come into being, well then so be it. But to hire someone who paid you, strike that, who gave you $1,000 in political contributions, smacks with the theory that this is directly a conflict of interest. And this is a sole source contract. There was no need for this. There was no need to go out with no competition, no bidding on this. This wasn't a serious emergency that needed to be done and nobody could be contacted. So I really think it needs to be reviewed. And I think the city solicitor needs to review it with you council. I would hope someone on the council would ask that question. Why did the mayor go ahead and do it? The mayor hasn't even notified you fellas and you yet that she's hired Mrs. Coakley for this particular purpose. to do this investigation. I don't know how much she charges. People say she charges $500 an hour. Well, how many hours is she going to go for and how long is this going to go on for? The taxpayers of this community need to know that. And this issue of her being hired should not be disguised because of this ammo gate that's going on here in the city of Medford. They are two separate issues. And the mayor needs to respond and answer that question. Was she part of the we that made the decision not to disclose the information, dating back as early as December 28th and bringing it up to February 15th when Councilor Longo-Curran brought this to everybody's attention because of people bringing it to her attention. You know, if you remember closely what the Chief said when the question was asked of him about the picture with the clip with the gun, because I was the one that asked him, where did you get that picture, Chief? And he says he got it. from the Director of Buildings and Grounds, Mr. McLaughlin. So I gave you seven people in the beginning that start this whole thing going that have to be interviewed. Possibly every single elected official probably should be interviewed and asked a question, because maybe some of you know. Maybe some of you have been told something. I don't know. But you know something? It's a very serious incident. Last Thursday night, up at that high school, there were so many people that were so impassioned as to what they were saying that sometimes it just looked like it might have or it could have gotten out of hand. But logic and common sense and calmness has to take place. We all know now that there is an issue out there. We all know that allegedly it was thrown away. We don't know if it was thrown away, if it was misplaced, somebody took it, somebody got rid of it, I don't know. The police report, the police investigation will prove that. But while all that's going on, to hire another paid outside consultant, because that person is a political personal friend of the mayor, My God, come on, folks. I mean, there's got to be some checks and balances here. It can't. If it looks like a duck and walks like a duck and smells like a duck, it probably is. Chapter 268A, that's what it says. You can't give the appearance. And this definitely not only gives the You've got the $1,000. You've got the contributions. And she's not only contributed to this mayor, she's contributed to other mayors and other people in this city. You can't do that. That's not being independent. That's saying pay to play. And if that's what's going to go on here, then shame on this city and shame on elected officials for allowing this to happen. And I would hope Mrs. Coakley would give a second thought about this and say, well, while it was nice to be asked, I think it would be better for the city of Medford to find someone who has absolutely no connections if they really want to do an independent policy. You folks are all part of the Mass. Municipal Association. They have a huge department in there to review personnel purposes. You pay. You're a paying member on an annual basis. You should have gone to them first. But to turn around in this situation and disguise it because of what happened with the ammo clip and go out there and hire a Methodist lawyer from one of the most expensive law firms in Boston, and you don't even know what it's going to cost you, it makes no sense at all. I would hope one of you somewhere along here puts a request in to have a report as to how and why she was hired, how much is she getting, and if, in fact, this is a conflict of interest.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Robert Penta]: You're welcome.
[Fred Dello Russo]: Councilor Dela Russa. I find that the marks of disparagement in Indy Wendo regarding the relationship between the two individuals that were focused upon tonight to be unsavory and predictable. Thank you. Good evening. Name and address of the record, please.
[Joyce Paul]: Joyce Paul, 8 Mason Street, Manford, Mass. I was a warranted contracting officer for the federal government for many years. And I most definitely understand what Mr. Penta has said. And he is correct. There are laws, there are rules. There is a long, long process for people to get contracts and to get positions. And certainly for something this important, I consider important for the city and for our children. I definitely think that this is not appropriate and not saying anything against Miss Coakley. But there is a process and there should be a process. And the reason is to have things done not only above board, but so that there is no question that there was anything hidden or anything untoward. It really, in many ways, protects, in this case, Miss Coakley, as much as it protects anybody else. But it is, it's federal, it's state, it's local, and it is the way it is. And it should not have been done the way it was. That is not legal, that is not okay. And I definitely support what Mr. Penta has said. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Name and address of the record, please.
[Andrew Castagnetti]: Castagnetti, Cushman Street. It's, in order to have, what's the word? no appearance of collusion. It makes sense to have an independent outsider from far, far away. If you're going to spend the money, especially, and we had a saying back even prior to the sixties, if you're not part of the solution, maybe it's all part of something else. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: Good evening. Name and address to the record, please.
[Jean Nuzzo]: Jean Nuzzo, 35 Paris Street, Medford. I just want to take a moment to reiterate and suggest, if we're going to step outside the bounds of standard procedure and expend money, it's more crucial, in my opinion, I would put forth, to look forward towards solutions to keep the issue from happening again than to spend that money to look back and try to figure out what happened. That would be my suggestion as a resident, as a taxpayer, as a concerned citizen. It happened. We don't know that we'll ever definitively know, but we do know we're not secure and we're not safe. And that money would be better spent figuring out how to make our children and our staff in the school safe. Thank you.
[Richard Caraviello]: I don't know if anybody behind this rail knows if any money has been expended or if there is any charge, so.
[Jean Nuzzo]: I understand, but it sounds like that's gonna happen. Again, that's it. And it sounds like it was done outside the purview of.
[Richard Caraviello]: Again, we don't know.
[Jean Nuzzo]: Of a procurement process.
[Richard Caraviello]: I don't think anyone behind this rail has been apprised that.
[Jean Nuzzo]: It was on the news, they were talking about it.
[Richard Caraviello]: Said that she's been hired, but I don't know, there's been no figure mentioned. It's under the school department purview, anyways. Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Jean Nuzzo]: don't you approve the school, don't you approve their budget? Oh, so once a year.
[Richard Caraviello]: Okay. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I just want to thank the speaker. I too have nothing against Martha Coakley, but when it was announced that somebody close to the mayor was going to be doing this investigation, it did I was a little upset with that, and I felt like it was a slap in the face to everybody that lives in this community. We're smarter than that. The people are smarter than that. We know the mayor wants to come out in a good light after all this, but hiring a consultant that is donated to your campaign and who lives in the city and who endorsed your campaign, I just don't think that's right. If we wanted to have an outside consultant investigate this, whether or not we want to have that, I think it's something that needs to be discussed live with the entire school committee. I would love for the council to be present as well, because we will be the ones eventually approving the budget or improving any additional funding that's needed, whether that be in the school department or the city budget. But I'd like to know, I thought this was supposed to start yesterday, from what it said on the news. But I just would like to know how this was decided. I'd like to put a resolution in to see if any money has been expended to date. to start this investigation, and how long it's going to take, who is consulted, was there a public vote? There was definitely not a school committee meeting before the Wednesday press conference. So there are a whole host of issues that I personally have. So I'd like to ask that question, how much has been expended? I will have a hard time voting for any budget if we're hiring a consultant where there's an appearance of a conflict of interest. I'd also like to ask our city solicitor with regards to how do we find out if this is a conflict of interest? Do we need to call state ethics or do, or I'm putting a resolution forward that we, that the city council be updated on how much has been expended or will be expended to hire this consultant.
[Clerk]: Okay.
[Richard Caraviello]: Motion to take, uh, Mr. Penton's paper, uh, receive it in place on file. Councilor Marks. Let's finish up this paper and then Councilor Wong-O'Karn can make her resolution. Councilor Dela Rousseff. Councilor Marks, excuse me.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank the gentleman and the young lady for speaking. They brought up some very valid points. I too have the same concerns as my council colleague has mentioned. And it was just recently, Mr. President, that this council took some a pretty big action to go against a potential development on Locust Street and to help alleviate some concerns that Director Butters had as well as neighbors in an area. And we went as far as to ask for outside legal counsel to help us with an issue. And we got to a point right now that the mayor just sent out a correspondent saying she no longer is going to fund that outside counsel. And here we have the mayor going off on her own Because as far as I know, the school committee met in the committee of the whole or whatever you want to call it. They can't take formal votes there. It's like us in the committee of the whole. We could take a vote in the committee of the whole. It has to come out on the floor for a formal vote. As far as I know, that never took place with the school committee. I don't think they're following their own procedures and protocol. And I don't know how the mayor can unilaterally make a decision to hire someone without going through the proper procurement laws and so forth that are requirements.
[Richard Caraviello]: We don't know if anyone has been hired, officially. It's all hearsay.
[Michael Marks]: No, I saw it on the news on several stations.
[Richard Caraviello]: I haven't seen anything that officially says that there's been a hire, so again... It would be nice, Mr. President,
[Michael Marks]: Well, I think the mayor may have stated it as it was just mentioned, but it would be nice, what's going on in this community, to get some type of correspondence. Wouldn't that be nice for the mayor to reach out to the council and say, hey, this is what we're doing. This is what's happening in the community. This is what we're doing. We just had a sweep. We're doing X, Y, and Z. Not one correspondence in the last 12 days from this mayor to this elected body. Maybe someone else received it, and if they did, they could step forward. Not one correspondence, Mr. President. But then again, we hear leadership that works. We hear this and that coming from the administration. And this administration does not correspond with us, Mr. President. And that's a telltale sign of a government that's going in the wrong direction, let me tell you. So... Point of information, Councilor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, President Caraviello. I think on top of that, not only has she not reached out to the entire council, the administration, I personally was the one told by multiple people what happened on Thursday the 15th. I reported it to the police, Councilor Pinter, on the 16th at 9 a.m. But I sent the school committee an email, the school committee and the mayor, an email at 6 a.m. last Tuesday. Every school committee member has reached out to me, whether that just be a one-liner or a phone call, except Mayor Burke. She's not even called me to ask what happened, what's going on, what can we do to fix this? I've yet to even receive a one line email saying thank you for the update.
[Richard Caraviello]: Councilor Marks.
[Michael Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I stated what I had to state, Mr. President. Um, I'd like to see to the answers, uh, that, uh, former Councilor Penter and Councilor Longo asked for, so I would ask that be in the form of a motion, Mr. President, that we send that to the city administration.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Motion to take papers under suspension. On the motion by Councilor DelaRosa to receive and place on file, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Motion passes. Motion to take papers under suspension. Thank you. Offered by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Let's get, let's finish this up, we have a paper here. Offered by Councilman Kern, be it resolved that the Medford City Council be updated with regard to how much has been, how much has been or will be expended for an outside investigation. Be it further resolved that we get an opinion as to whether the consultant, as to whether the consultant is legal? Is ethical. Council Member O'Kane.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, that we get an opinion either from state ethics or from our city solicitor.
[Richard Caraviello]: An ethical opinion.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: An ethical opinion, whether or not this is ethical. I'd go one step further, I don't know if I'll have the votes tonight, to say we hire somebody independent. Again, nothing wrong with Martha Coakley, it's just such an appearance of a conflict of interest that I don't feel comfortable, nor do the many people that have emailed or called me about this one issue alone. So I would take that one step further and say that if we're going to do an investigation and the school committee wants to vote on that, that we either go out to bid or we use a consultant or attorney that has no connections to the city of Medford, just like we did for when we hired an attorney for the Locust Street development. None of us knew of him whatsoever. And we did it with transparency. And that's the way this needs to be done.
[Richard Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Knight. Motion to refer to the school committee, Mr. President. On the motion by Councilor Knight to refer this paper to the school committee.
[Adam Knight]: Can you just have the clerk read it one more time, please?
[Richard Caraviello]: I don't know if we have the authority. This is a school committee matter. I mean, I agree with Councilor Longo's motion here, but it is a school committee matter. Again, be it resolved. The Medford City Council will be updated with regard to how much has been or will be expended for an outside investigation. Be it further resolved that we get an ethical opinion on the consultants. Councilman.
[Michael Marks]: If the school committee never formally voted on it, how is it a school committee matter?
[Richard Caraviello]: Again, this is all, again, I don't have any paper saying that anyone has been hired.
[Michael Marks]: Right, because the mayor hasn't communicated with us, that's why we're trying to get answers.
[Richard Caraviello]: Again, I don't know if anyone was hired, so.
[Michael Marks]: Right, so I would recommend that this, or make a motion to be sent to the city administration, as well as the school committee.
[Robert Penta]: Mr. President. Let me address the record, please. Zero Summit Road, Barpenta. Number one, As outlined in the local press and in the Boston news media, she was hired, Martha Coakley was hired by the mayor. This vote never took place, it was never presented before the school committee.
[Richard Caraviello]: Well, again, that's, again.
[Robert Penta]: Well, wait a minute, I'm just telling you, if you can check it out, it was never presented before the, it was never presented.
[Richard Caraviello]: We don't have any paperwork to say that.
[Robert Penta]: It was never presented, Rick, before the school committee. There's no official vote.
[Richard Caraviello]: Again, so we don't know if anyone's ever been hired. So again, that's all hearsay.
[Robert Penta]: If it's hearsay, never mind. Can I ask you to amend the resolution that reads, well, maybe you don't like it. You can leave if you're bored. Maybe you can ask the question that You're concerned about the ethics of it because of the fact of the financial contributions she has made to the mayor, and that in and of itself presents a conflict of interest. The appearance of a conflict of interest, that's what 268A says. That's what we're asking for.
[Richard Caraviello]: But I think you sometimes have to be definitive. So we're asking for an opinion that said, counsel?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: No, I think that's, definitely needs to be stated. I think our city solicitor needs to review this, figure out if he can give us an opinion with regards to the financial contribution and the endorsement of the campaign. And if he can't, then state ethics needs to give the school committee in the city of Medford the decision. I think that should be public knowledge.
[Richard Caraviello]: Again, this board has not been notified of anyone being hired, so we don't know.
[Michael Marks]: But I was at, through the chair. Mr. President, please, Mr. President. With all due respect, with all due respect about notification, we weren't even notified that there was a magazine found in the school. So you're saying that's not true? I mean, you know, the notification thing is out the window. You know, we haven't been notified from day one on anything. And I have to believe when I hear the mayor say she hired Martha Coakley, when I read in the paper, when I see it on the local news. We don't know of any cost or anything. I have to, you're right, we don't know that. That's why we're asking the question. But I have to believe there's some truth to it when I see it in all these, different media venues. I have to believe this. I'm true to it.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: And through the chair, I was at the press conference and it wasn't, it wasn't a secret. The mayor said, I've hired Martha Coakley to do an independent investigation beginning immediately. I think the words were, so we know that either whether the check has been written and the process has started, it would lead one to believe that it was said Wednesday and immediately would be Thursday, Friday, Monday, Tuesday. So we, we are under the impression, the city is under the impression that this investigation probably has started and I would like to know how much has been expended and to halt that so we can go out to bid and do it the right way by an independent party that has no dealings with the city of Medford.
[Robert Penta]: Thank you. Mr. President, just as a point of reference, on February 23rd it was written in the Boston Herald and where the mayor is quoted as saying that Martha Coakley is now an employee being hired.
[Richard Caraviello]: Great. We have a motion on the floor by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. On the motion by Councilor Lungo-Koehn, seconded by Councilor Marks. All those in favor? The chair seems to be in doubt. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. We are sending a resolution by Councilor Lungo-Koehn. Okay, we're not talking about okay, mr. Clark, please call the roll Yes Five in the affirmative, two in the negative. Motion passes. Records. Tabled records of the meeting of February 6th will pass to Councilor Marks. Councilor Marks. Excuse me.
[Clerk]: Councilor Falco.
[John Falco]: Thank you, Mr. President. I just wanted to make a quick announcement. Tomorrow night, the ad hoc subcommittee to the Malden Hospital site development will be meeting at St. Francis Parish Center. It's 6 p.m., and we will be meeting also with the Maldon Hospital ad hoc committee from the Maldon City Council. And what is that meeting again? St. Francis Parish Center.
[Richard Caraviello]: St. Francis School, 7 o'clock. St. Francis Parish Center. St. Francis Parish Center. 6 o'clock. 6 o'clock. Yes. Ad hoc meeting for the Maldon Hospital project. Yes. Thank you, Councilor Falco. Thank you. We'll pass the table of records, we'll pass to Councilor Marks. Councilor Marks, how did you find those records of February 6th? Okay, on the motion by Councilor Marksley, the February 6th minutes be accepted. Seconded by Councilor Dello Russo. All in favor? Motion passes. The records are meeting February 20th. We'll pass to Vice President Dello Russo. Mr. Vice President, how did you find your records? Motion by Councilor Dello Russo that the minutes be passed. Seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Motion by Councilor Scarpelli to adjourn. Seconded by Councilor Falco. All those in favor? Aye. Motion passes. Meeting adjourned.
|
total time: 11.71 minutes total words: 1713  |
total time: 33.38 minutes total words: 5213  |
total time: 14.48 minutes total words: 2652  |
total time: 3.89 minutes total words: 850  |
|
total time: 1.91 minutes total words: 339  |
total time: 13.61 minutes total words: 2345  |
total time: 0.94 minutes total words: 153  |
total time: 0.43 minutes total words: 64  |