[SPEAKER_08]: Welcome everyone to our November meeting. I want to just get started right away because we have a big agenda. The first order of business is to accept the minutes from the October meeting. Is there any?
[Moreshi]: John? Sorry. I don't have them in front of me, but when I looked at them earlier, I don't think it lists me as attending.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Thank you for noticing that.
[Moreshi]: I usually don't catch the attendance.
[SPEAKER_08]: Um, okay. I can, I can fix that. So, um, with that amendment. Oh, Ron. I don't know why you can't unmute Ron because you're a co-host. I am. I'm sorry, guys. We're just doing a little zoom business. Oh yeah, there you go, you're good now.
[Eunice Browne]: I just heard from Phyllis too, and she said she was joining us, so. Okay. Popping on in a minute.
[SPEAKER_08]: Good, okay. So I will amend those, I will amend that. Are there any other issues with the minutes? Move approval. Second.
[Moreshi]: Second.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great, all in favor? Okay, great. All right, so next is the City Council continuing of the City Council composition discussion and a provisional vote after our discussion. So we talked a lot at the last meeting and there were some questions, a lot of thoughts. Does anybody want to start? Does anybody want to start? or do people feel ready to vote already?
[Eunice Browne]: I'll just say, before I would vote, I would really like to have seen the interview with Patricia Brady-Doherty because I know she had some opposing thoughts. Having been a local politician before, I would be very interested to Here, she seems to go against the grain here and I would really like to. You know, hear what she has to say as somebody who's, you know. Directly been in the position where all of this would affect them.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, do you want to address that?
[David Zabner]: Yeah, so I finally uploaded some notes from that meeting earlier today, so you can take a look. If you have questions about more of what she said, I recorded the interview. I promised her I would delete it and not share it with anybody, but I'm happy to go back and take another look at it before I delete it. And I also have handwritten notes from the meeting. In short, her feeling on council composition was that she's against word representation because she is particularly worried about word bosses was the phrase that she used and she felt that word representation made it likely that particular city councilors would be less interested in representing the whole city and more focused on on just the word that they were elected to represent Um, she also made a few mentions of the idea that, um, you know, uh, she was nervous about having to pay more city Councilors. Um, right. She felt that, um, enough money was already spent on city Councilors. Uh, and I think she also mentioned a few places that the problem of possibly like expanding the literal number of chairs for city councilors in the city council chambers. So that was her other objection. Yeah. That's what I have in my note.
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah. Did she define what a ward boss is?
[David Zabner]: I think we chatted about it. I would have to go back to be sure. But in short, I think I've read about ward bosses. It's the idea of somebody using the fact that they represent and possibly have veto power over what occurs in a city ward to cement control of that ward in a way that a lot of people feel is inappropriate.
[SPEAKER_08]: OK, thank you for that summary, David. And these actually were questions that the Collins Center was going to help us with. So Anthony,
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yeah, so I actually did this question came up about award bosses and what it means came up at the last meeting. And so I did do a search a lot of research for this. The reason I didn't put together a paper for the, for the committee is actually for this reason. So, there is a lot of research from historical perspective looking at word bosses in Boston. and other communities around the United States, and particularly a lot on Chicago. However, all the research that I found focused on ward bosses in the aldermanic system, even in Boston, and that's a system in which it's very different from a city council, even a ward city council system. The aldermen have more, I would say, sort of executive type authority, the authority to grant sort of permits and control that process in their particular district than would a, even a ward city councilor would. Whereas in a city council system, or at least the ones that we have here in Massachusetts in the modern day, the council can only act as a body, whereas under the aldermanic system, there are some things that ward Councilor, ward, I'm sorry, aldermen have a little bit of individual authority over. At least that's what I saw in the literature. So I didn't put together a particular one, because it's not, in the modern times, it's not really focused. It didn't really look at how the, whether ward bosses develop under a district council, ward council system.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you. Does anybody have any other thoughts or questions about that? Paula?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Oh, I don't have nothing regarding the board bosses, but just the topic in general. Okay. So the stark reality is I've never been really convinced about this ward representation, though I know many people are interested in it, especially some of the people on this committee. And I want to be swayed. The number one argument for me is, does it increase representation of In some way or another, does it truly reach people who we aren't reaching now? And I'm just not sure. I think the, you know, having been elected as on a citywide basis, I come so deeply ingrained that my responsibility was to every citizen and certainly particularly every student in our community. And it really went beyond student because it wasn't just often, we didn't have blinders on. There were always things that where we, also thought about kids who were, say, in parochial schools or whatever. There is some interlap. For me, that is so deeply ingrained, the thought of trying to step into, okay, now I'm going to be, and I know we're talking about city council, but I'm going to represent my ward first and then the city. It's really hard for me to get around. Again, if I had such a convincing argument that we are missing a segment of our population. I mean, I think in many ways the segment of our population that we've been missing is we haven't had much representation now from our Black community. We Finally, Justin comes from an Asian background, but we've not had a Latino on our city council. That's the representation that I would be wanting to try and increase, not necessarily the geographic representation. So I'm being real honest and letting you know, I'm struggling, because I do know that there's a lot of people who think this is the answer. Another piece of this for me is that we also have a question about balance of power. Our current city councilors, and not only our current ones, but ones that have gone on for some time, are frustrated in their roles because of the lack of power that they have, influence that they have on key issues or whatever. And so I'm thinking, okay, now we're going to have more city councilors. And, you know, when you're up there on the podium, everybody wants to get a chance to speak because it's really important to get air time, so that your constituents know that you're doing your job. And now we're going to have more people needing to speak. And part of me sort of says, how effective does that become. Is the question more how we deviate power? Is it the number of people? Are we going to solve a problem by creating a ward representation? And I'm thinking ward and some at large. Or are we going to, in fact, make it even more challenging us to operate? So those are all my dilemmas.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you, Paula. Yeah, go ahead.
[Jean Zotter]: I will just responding to your concern Paulette around would would ward help create racial ethnic diversity in city council. We know we have at least one war that is majority-minority, so less non-whites or more non-whites than whites. Then the article that Milva sent out on diversity in city council, through ward representation seem to me when I read it suggests that if you have certain some words that are majority minority then it's likely that you will increase the diversity of your city council if your city has say 30%. quote minority. in each board, then ward representation won't help with that. So what we have is one ward and other wards that are getting close to being more diverse and less white. So that's one reason I feel like I'm leaning towards board representation is I do think it would help increase the diversity of our city council based on the article that maybe the Collins Center sent to Milva and the data that we saw. But as far as like, do you represent your ward versus do you represent this whole city? I don't know and I don't know if the Collins Center has any ways to make it clear in the charter that the the ward representatives still have the onus of representing the needs of the city, not just their particular ward, whether that be in a preamble or something like that.
[SPEAKER_08]: Anthony or Frank or Marilyn, do you want to answer that question?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I'll let Marilyn or Frank chime in here. I think we can craft some language. The one thing is that regardless of whether you're elected from a ward or from at large, you're making decisions for the city in its entirety. When I was advising council's lawyer, that was one of the things that we always told people, but I'll let Frank or Marilyn chime in.
[Contreas]: Thank you, Martha. I agree with that.
[Wright]: Yeah, I do as well. And I just from personal experience, having been a ward city councilor, I would say initially that my recollection of being sworn in is that we are sworn in to uphold the U.S. state constitutions as well as the city charter and ordinances. We don't get sworn in to represent any type of ward that's distinct from the other wards. And I suspect that what you'll find is that individual ward Councilors will be different. But my experience is that most people acted in the best interest of the city while focusing on what the needs of their particular ward may be because they are more familiar, they live in it. They become the contact person for the people who live in their neighborhood and they represent. I think there will be some uniqueness to each individual ward. Councilor, should you go that route? But the role is to serve the city. And the goal, as I see it, is to make sure that each segment of the city, geographically, and the residents therein, have representation on the City Council.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you. Okay, David, I believe you were next.
[David Zabner]: Yeah, so Paulette, I think, brought up kind of two separate points. The first one, which was the issue of word representation, I think is one that's been pretty well chatted about. And last week, the thing that really struck me with that was that it seems to me that the decision of word representation is as much as anything else about how easy we want it to be to get elected, right? It seemed to me like one of the big advantages or disadvantages, kind of, I think, depending on your point of view, is that to be elected in a word, you need a much smaller number of votes, you need to knock on a much smaller number of doors, you need to gain the trust of a much smaller group of people. And I think uh, there it's, it's possible that the, that leads, in fact, I think it's likely that that leads to more diversity of a variety of different kinds on the, um, on the city council, whether that's diversity of opinion. And we end up with people who have kind of farther right or farther left or farther in other directions, opinions or, um, more gender or, or, uh, racial diversity. Uh, I think only time will tell, um, I certainly imagine it will lead to more diversity of socioeconomic status. It's a lot cheaper to run for office in a ward system. The other one is the issue of the number of city councilors, which was one that during the interview I did struck me as odd. Having talked to some current city councilors about the number of people on the city council, I got the feeling that they actually felt that there were not enough city Councilors and that they viewed a large part of their job as doing the kinds of things we do when we're not in these meetings, right? Looking up reports, doing research, trying to figure out how to make the city a better place. And I got the sense that they wished they had more people to put on more committees to think about more problems at the same time. And I get the sense from talking to city councilors that like those city council meetings are not when they feel they're doing their job. They feel that they're doing their job in those subcommittee meetings and when they're talking to businesses about how the rules should be changed and when they're going line by line over zoning ordinances. And those kinds of things don't happen in the big meetings where everybody needs to get their turn to talk. They happen You know, at different times, so I think. I think I, I would be in favor of expanding the city council, kind of, regardless of whether or not we choose word representation. I don't have a strong feeling on word representation, but I think it would be a big decision 1 way or the other.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you. All right, Daniel.
[SPEAKER_05]: So I very similar things to say I think that yeah, yeah. Is anybody else having trouble hearing? Yeah.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, so I'm going to mute and see if that's any better.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Better?
[SPEAKER_05]: So I was just gonna say a very similar thing. I think that... Wait, Danielle, I'm sorry. There's still an echo, so... Maybe you just keep muting, it's okay. Can everybody who's not speaking mute, and then we can see if that helps? Better?
[SPEAKER_07]: Okay, everybody okay?
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, I'm sorry.
[SPEAKER_08]: Phyllis, I think you were next.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Well, I think John might have been, but that's OK. And you people may have already talked about that. I'm sorry I had to miss the last couple of meetings, but I had things I had to do at school. Is there any, and maybe this is for people at the Collins Center, Do we have any data or any information on how people feel in different cities or towns who have individual ward Councilors or just citywide Councilors? Do they feel any more represented if they have a ward Councilor as opposed to at large Councilors?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I'd have to look into that. I don't have any data on that at hand. Marilyn or Frank, do you have any thoughts?
[Contreas]: I've never seen anything that would address that exact question.
[Wright]: Go ahead, Frank, sorry. I'm not aware of any statistics. The only thing I comment on is that my experience is that having a ward Councilor gives you a point person, one individual who you feel is the person you can go to because they represent your ward, your neighborhood. but I don't have any statistics to back that up.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Yeah, I guess because a concern of mine is, or something I think about is, I'm not even really sure that a lot of the residents are even aware of or know that they have a ward councillor or a large councillor. I'm not sure they're even in tune with what the represents representation status is of the city, you know? So, and I don't know how they find out that information, but okay, thank you. Thank you, Phyllis.
[Moreshi]: Sorry, I just had a few quick points I wanted to touch on. I'm really in favor of ward representation, so I'm just gonna hit these quick. I hope I don't take too much time. I think a big one, and I think it's an important one we talked about a little bit, is doing what's best for the city. And I want to sort of flip that a little bit. It's not just that people would be doing what's best for their ward as a potential concern. Let's look at it now. As we saw last meeting, we have a disproportionate representation. More parts of our community are sending people to the at-large council, right? And I think unintentionally for most people, and fairly, I'm not assigning a value judgment, people bring their perspectives. And I think it's possible that a lot of people will view what's best for the city through the lens of their experience, which will come from those particular parts of the city. So I think worrying about ward representation, creating favoritism is a valid concern. I also think there may be favoritism in the system we have now, because the practical reality is we're disproportionately represented by people from certain parts of the city. So I think ward representation may be an antidote. I'm sorry, I'm losing my voice a little bit.
[SPEAKER_07]: That's okay.
[Moreshi]: I think the second thing I'd want to flag, and I'm from Malden where we have ward representation. When I first moved to Medford, I was having trouble getting my trash picked up for some reason, my yard waste, excuse me. And I didn't know who to call because we didn't have ward Councilors and that's who I would call in Malden. And so it's not just about the big votes that we think about, the budget, or the big policy things. We're also talking about making sure city services work for people. Constituent services are an important part of a Councilor's job. And if we have more representation, you know who to call. And I think that dovetails with the third part, which sort of ties into what Ms. Morrison had said. Ms. Morrison was my religion teacher in high school, so that's how we're approaching it. A lot of people don't know who their elected representatives are. The United States elects way more people than most democracies. And I think there is value, maybe a small one, but a real one, of giving people fewer people to vote for. A ward councillor and three councillors at large is easier to have real substantive engagement and opinions about than seven councillors, 14 candidates. So I think in that small way, it's better for democracy. And I had a fourth point, if you'll bear with me for one second. Oh, actually two. Award representation seems to be fairly common across the Commonwealth in cities. We're the outlier here. And I think it's important to think about that. Why is this so popular? And dovetailing with that, the experience with Lowell a few years ago, where they had to enter into a consent decree with the federal government because they were disenfranchising people on, it might've been linguistic grounds, I think it was racial. as someone mentioned earlier, we have one majority minority ward. So I don't know what the likelihood of a lawsuit is. I don't know how likelihood it is to materialize soon, but I think it's something to be mindful of that geographic distinctions are going to probably be interrelated with racial linguistic makeup. And as a matter of representation, as a good thing, but also in being mindful of Lowell's experience, potential federal lawsuit, I think we should account for that and make sure people are represented. So that is all I have. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you, John. I'm going to go to Anthony. But first, I just want to make sure that we all see Danielle's thoughts since the Zoom sound wasn't working for her. And what she wanted to say is in the chat that Medford has not been a city that attracts a diverse group of candidates for city council. So we should do whatever we can from the charter's perspective to change this and ward versus designation is a way to do this. I just wanted to make sure that was heard. Okay, Anthony. Anthony, are you able to, can you unmute? There you are. Okay. No, Anthony, Andrea cola. In trouble on muting.
[SPEAKER_07]: Uh, I know. There we go. Can you hear me now? Yes.
[Andreottola]: Okay. Sorry about that. And if time somebody mutes from that, and I can't seem to unmute on this side, but anyway, um, It was good hearing everyone's perspective. And I just have a question. I tend to favor what representation. Like Pauletta, I'm not convinced yet because there are other options that we have not really kind of explored. And one of them was what David said about expanding just the numbers of the city councilors. Would that in any way kind of help with with being more inviting to people from different kind of backgrounds for the city council. I don't know that, you know, would nine city councilors also get the desired effect that we want? Like, we really haven't kind of taken the time to look at other options. And is it necessary for us to vote now? We still have a, you know, survey going for another another month. If we kind of make that decision now. What does it say to the people who are you know, participating in that survey, you know, can we table this until at least the surveys closed? So we can kind of bring in, you know, the, you know, the community, the community opinion along with ours, because like, I'm not totally sold. I'm in favor of what representation, but I want to know, especially when we have to present to the city council, the reasons why we took this path, you know, that we have, you know, some solid evidence to back it up, or if not, they're just going to dismiss our findings. So that's really all I wanted to add.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thanks. Thank you. You know, as we've done with other things, the vote is intended to be provisional, so it can be reversed if compelling information comes forth. Right now, I mean, I sent everybody what our public feedback has been so far on word representation, so you should all have a good sense of what the public comment has been on it thus far, and I believe it's, pretty overwhelmingly in favor of word representation, of hybrid word representation. So, and if you, since we have it on the agenda that we're taking a provisional vote, I would like to go ahead with it unless you would like to make a motion to table it. So, if you want, you can think about that while everybody else makes their comments and if you want to do that, okay?
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great. Okay, Eunice.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay, thanks a lot of interesting points here that I'm hearing and, you know, like the others, I'm not sold on this yet at all. Leaning against it at the moment, but listening closely few things that, you know, I'd like to consider the expanding of the. City council, I think would be a good discussion to have. I think in reading through some of the responses that we got from some of our current electeds, Nicole Morell brought that up, that she thinks the current council is too small. And I think it was David that mentioned it earlier in his conversations with some of the electeds as well, that they wish they had more people for more committees and things. I think Zach had some ideas about what authority or something like that. Be interesting to see what that's all about. Then in regards to how we're currently represented, I think Phyllis brought up the point that a lot of people don't understand how we are represented now. And I've seen that in a lot of Facebook posts, Reddit posts, and so forth. People coming fairly new to the city have no idea. Like John said, I went to call my ward Councilor because my trash didn't get picked up. Well, we don't have that. I think the biggest advantage I see toward representation is that you're focusing on a smaller footprint, and what that seems to do is reduce the costs. It seems like, and I think it's being put forth there by some of the candidates, that you need a minimum of $20,000 to run for office. That's an absurd amount of money. Without going to word representation, is there a way to make that not be so. I mean, I guess, you know, maybe some of the others can address this a bit better. My understanding is that it's at least 10,000 or so to do a mailer, just, you know, off the top, you know, and then you've got your POM cards that, you know, get dropped off at homes or at your events. You've got your signage and so forth and whatever other, you know, things go with running. What I would rather see is keeping the at-large system that we have now, increasing the size of our council by making us nine or 11 maybe, and finding a way To reduce the actual cost of running. Maybe there are more innovative ways of campaigning out there. I looked at, I went to city hall the other day and they're not up on the city website yet, but there will be soon. And took a look at the campaign finance reports that the. Candidates have to submit prior to the election, and then they submit another one in January. And a lot of the candidates, if they get to 10,000, That's a lot. In the past, and I've looked at this in other years as well, some candidates don't raise any more than $4,000 or $5,000. And then you have other candidates that seem to band together, and they're raising the heaps of money, and they're at a distinct advantage because they can do all these big glossy mailers. I would rather see a way of keeping what we have and finding more innovative ways for campaigning, because I think that the argument towards ward representation is that it's easier for people to campaign and cost less money, and that's where I would like to see things change. you know, or the alternative to that would be keeping ward representation or instituting ward representation, but adding five more Councilors to make us 13. So that would be almost giving us the same amount of at-large Councilors. We'd have eight, nine, 10, 11, 12. We'd have five instead of the seven at-large, so a little closer. So that's my two cents.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you, Eunice. Maury. Can you unmute? Let me see.
[Maury Carroll]: Yep, I'm unmuted. Hi, everyone. As everyone knows my position, I'm a proponent for the Alderman, the Ward Alderman type government has changed. I feel as though all the years that we have done the councilors at large for city government, I think it's failed us. And it's failed us royally when you look around the condition of the city, our type of government, Right now, we are now chasing virtually every city and town around us. When you should go back 25, 30 years ago, we were sitting at the top of the heap, whether it be business-wise, educationally-wise. City council has nothing to do with schools. To me, I think school committees should stay at large. I, you know, it's a whole different type of government between school and city council. But I hear the statement saying that it's going to create more diversity. There's no guarantee who's going to run for many ward. What I think it's going to do is attract people that are enthusiastic about getting involved in city government. to show them that they may have more of an opportunity to get elected because they're just dealing with their area or their ward, whatever you want to call it, and go out and work that way. I agree with what Eunice is saying, you know, to get elected here in the city, it's outrageous. Paula, I can tell you, she's running citywide for years. Look at this mayoral race this year. They're around $80,000 each. And, you know, to get elected mayor in the city. But to me, I think it's time for a change. And I'm all in favor of voting tonight or whatever you guys want to do. But my position still is, Ward Alderman, it's time to give it a shot. I think this government has let us down. Thanks.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thanks, Maury. Okay, I'm going to spend maybe 10 to 15 more minutes of discussion. And I want to give Ron a chance to speak.
[Ron Giovino]: Can you hear me now?
[SPEAKER_08]: Yep.
[Ron Giovino]: So first, as the unofficial chairperson of this subcommittee, I just want to thank all the people that were on the subcommittee did their real due diligence and really delve into the issue. I want to talk a little bit about some of the things that were mentioned here. You know, everybody had great points. To Paulette's point about wards being, you know, favoritism, you know, I think the favoritism exists in an at-large system that we see now anyways, because there are, you know, you have your reps that you know will listen to you because you have relationships with them. There are organizations in the city who have banded together that they have their strong relationships, and you have represented, you have some. politicians who do their own thing no matter what the people say. So I don't know if that changes with ward representation. As far as the money goes, campaign money, wishful thinking, I just don't think we have the power or any method of controlling how much money you can spend. I think if somebody can spend 20,000 and you can only afford 3,000, then you're at a disadvantage, there's no question. I think ward representation, The cost, just by definition, would go down because you need you know one eighth of the flyers you need one eighth of the, you know, this and that. So, I think that's the only way we have to do that. And, and I also hear, you know, the, the adding reps just as reps. I don't know what research and discussion helps other than we just know that what we have would expand and we'd have more of them. There's the pluses and minuses. I don't think the subcommittee ignored it. I think we just moved on because there's really not a measuring stick that says if we have seven now, we'll be better at 11. So it's certainly an option, but I don't know if it's that kind of quantum change that we wanna make. Finally, I'll say that I just think that we've done our due diligence, and my concern in the committee as a whole is that we have a lot of work to do. And the decisions that we're going to make, if we make an opinion tonight, it's only an opinion. It's just our vote. It's going to the voters have plenty of, they've had plenty of time to comment on this. They will have more time to comment on. The city council will have time. The mayor will have her opinion. This is a living document that this is not nothing final. I think we all have to, you know, pick it and vote on it tonight. And we have to move on. I think what the subcommittee proved on an aside is that subcommittees work. And I'd like to see more subcommittees happening because you need more balls in the air to make this all work. I mean, we can't just sit here for six months and decide on ward representation and not be talking about budget and finance. And we're starting with the school committee subcommittee that has four or five members, and there's 11, 12 members in this group. So there's no reason why we can't have four subcommittees going at the same time to report back and have these discussions. I think we're missing an opportunity in the subcommittee strategy to not get more done. And I think as I look at it, You know, I just think the timeline just keeps going and going. We have hardworking people who are putting in the hours, but we just haven't given them the ability to, you know, set that up. So, and believe me, Milva has done an admirable, incredible job of organizing this group. It's just not easy. I know just trying to plan a meeting is not easy. But I think we have to really take a moment to say, hey, you know, we've done our due diligence on this, we have to move the question, and we have to get the set the school committee subcommittee is going to be an enormous project. haven't talked about budgets. There's so many other things that have to happen. So I'd like to really step a foot heavier on the metal on the pedal and start really moving towards having this kind of discussion times five or six so that we're talking about different things and generating more. The conversation has been generated to wait for the survey to happen. I don't know if that changes the 11, 12 members of this committee in terms of where we should head. We don't have the power to say this is the way it's going to be. We just have a process that moves it forward. I happen to support ward representation for one simple reason. When you hear that as a ward in the city who has no representation over many years, that concerns me. I think that Ward representation will bring everybody into the process and also create new opportunities for new people who think about it but don't want to pay $20,000 to get in. So I'll be quiet, and I'd like to listen to everybody else, then move for the vote. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you, Rahm. All right, Paulette? Wait a minute, you're muted.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Okay. I just want to say I really appreciate this discussion and all the points that were made. I think that it's kind of coalesced a lot of our things that were sort of like floating around more precisely for me. I do think that probably the strongest, I mean, without a doubt, the question is, does it get representation for the where the wards were historically have not been represented. And I think the other part of the discussion, which certainly is valuable for me, is the it allows more people to attempt to run because the financial burden isn't so high. And I think those are very important and strong points. I did want to ask what and I think Frank said he had served Um, what happens when, uh, someone from a ward, there's, there's no candidate? Does that happen? And, and what happens then? I'm just curious if anybody can address that.
[Wright]: Uh, I, if, if I may, it sounded like my name came up there. So, um, I'm unaware of it happening. I know, um, There have been situations where there may be an announced intention not to run again. It might take a while, depending on how long you have to pull nomination papers for somebody to pull papers. But I'm unaware of any situation. And I grew up in Malden. My cousin was a city council for 24 years. I worked 23 years in Somerville. Been in Melrose for 30 years. And I'm generally aware of what goes on in the Commonwealth. and I'm unaware of a situation where nobody pulled papers for a ward or enough for at large.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Was there any requirement of living in the particular ward for how long or like what prevents someone to just move into the ward just because there's an empty seat so they're going to run for it?
[Wright]: I would say that would be addressed in your charter.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So that would be something we'd spell out.
[Wright]: Yeah, I don't know if Marilyn has a comment on that, but my recollection is there may have been something to that effect in Somerville. I'm unaware of it in Melrose, but and I don't know about any other community.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Okay, thanks. So part of it is us putting in or defining, perhaps saying, if there's no candidate that runs from a particular ward, what happens?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Just to add on to Frank's point, I'm also unaware of, in a city of a similar size to Medford, there being no one pulling papers. But one of the things you will be putting in the charter that the document that you're working on our vacancy provisions. So should a seat become vacant. What happens, there's a number of approaches. I'm one of the ones that I've seen. sort of when there are no candidates, is you might go to the next highest vote getter of the last election, or the body will vote to install someone for the remainder of the term. There are a number of approaches. All I'm saying is there's a number of approaches to deal with the vacancy, and that's one of the things this body will be looking at as it puts together a charter.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Thanks very much.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great, thank you. Okay, last comment. Phyllis, and then we'll go to public comment.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Paulette actually asked the same question that I wanted to ask, and I think that's pretty important. But I do want to know that I feel really specific about this point, that if someone is going to represent the ward, I believe they should have to live in the ward. I don't know about how long all that or anything, but I think that's pretty important. But as I just said, I think I would really prefer the ward representation because I think the person or the elected person could make themselves known better to the people of the ward. It's a smaller area. But my concern was, what if someone doesn't run? What if someone doesn't pull papers? And I think that's something that may happen. People may not have heard of it, but I find people becoming more and more disenchanted with politics and how things run. They just, they're not that interested in it. That's my understanding. And I'm on a lot of committees and there's not a lot of interest in city politics or city government. So that would be something that would be very concerning to me. So, and the living in the ward would be critically important for me too.
[SPEAKER_08]: So, but thanks for the time. Thank you. Ron had an answer to that question, so do you want to throw that in?
[Ron Giovino]: Just quickly, the subcommittee did look at that option. There are several procedures that the Collins Center has given us, even to the fact that if nobody is on the ballot, the ballot has an open slot and people can write in. There's no option to not have a Wood candidate. So the candidates, and that's why it doesn't really happen because you don't somebody if you find out the awards empty somebody steps up usually, but there is an option to leave an open ballot item for that ward and you would write in the vote. Secondly, the ward representative we set the terms of whether that when the person lives there. When a person moves out of the award there is also a procedure to replace that person. The whole purpose of ward representation is that you live there and I would tend to doubt that someone would buy a house in Medford just to win a ward seat but There are all kinds of rules. We looked at it as a subcommittee. It's detailed. And as we didn't address it here in the presentation, only because the next process for us, once we agree which way we're going, is to work with the Collins Center to write up this article. And that would include all those things as well.
[Phyllis Morrison]: So Rob, just as an FYI, it'd be pretty expensive seat if they wanted to buy a house in Medford.
[Ron Giovino]: Yeah, I don't think it's happening.
[Andreottola]: Thank you. But it's technically only using someone's address. It happens all the time. It's happening in Boston right now. People can just use someone's address that lives in that ward. So it is something that we should spell out in detail. And when we do get to that point in the charter.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, thank you. I want to open it up to public comment. But first, I just wanted to see if the call in center had any thoughts about a question that has come up on the committee. And it's also come up from some members of the public, which is the issue of the increase in cost for more for adding elected represent elected officials. Have any other committees addressed that? Is that, you know, is that something that, because we've been asked more than once.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I guess the only thing that I can say to it tonight is that I forget, honestly, what the salaries are for the Councilor position, but I mean, just sort of nuts and bolts, you'd be adding those salaries. You don't necessarily, I think, have to increase the staff if you don't, and that's more of an administrative decision, but you could, in theory, increase staff for Councilors. To me, it's more of a weighing of the representational benefits that this body and the municipality as a whole finds important versus the addition of these salary costs. I don't know if anyone else up from, my team wants to speak on it.
[Wright]: I would agree with Anthony.
[Contreas]: I think one, oh, go ahead, Frank.
[Wright]: No, I was gonna say I agree with Anthony. I think it's a, you know, It's a decision that you have to make for recommendation purposes and the City Council and the Mayor will have to make as to, you know, it's an investment in your city and how valuable an investment do you see it to switch to a larger City Council. Thank you.
[Contreas]: One of the issues that came up in several other communities was the cost of benefits, because some Councilors were eligible for benefits. And one response was to eliminate benefits if you were elected after the charter was adopted. You wouldn't be eligible for the benefits that but the other Councilors were grandfathers. But that's an issue that affects cost more than salary.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you. Do you have one more quick comment, Eunice, before I go to public?
[Eunice Browne]: Um, yeah, I actually have the salaries, um, that I got from, uh, city clerk heard of these couple of months ago. Um, the mayor makes, um, pardon me while I look at my other screen here. The mayor makes one 35, nine 30, and this is all annually. Um, the city councilors make 29,360. The city council president makes 32, five 50. and the city council vice president makes 30,640. My understanding is that we are one of the highest paid city council groups in the state of Massachusetts, maybe behind Boston and somewhere else. I would wonder if we are basically revamping how our government operates is could we reduce the salaries so that they are more in line with other communities who, in some other communities, they're more along the lines of, you know, maybe 15 to 20,000. And, you know, anybody who is elected from that, from X point forward, that's what they make.
[SPEAKER_08]: I'm not sure that's in the purview of the charter, and we can look at that, but I wanted to stay on topic right now, but we can investigate whether that's something that is in the purview of the charter. I'm not sure about that. The call-in center probably not. But right now, I want to move on, and we do have someone from the public who'd like to speak. Bill. I think I've made it so you can, there we go.
[Bill Giglio]: Yeah. Has anyone looked into like any cities that do do ward representation? Does it actually bring out more voters? But I would almost think it does. And I would almost think that's a good thing where our voter turnout is very low, but maybe ward representation might bring out voters, you know, even though they're just voting for someone in their ward, but then now they can also vote for, you know, for school committees and mayors and stuff, which might actually up up the tally of who actually comes, actually who is, you know, cause as we know, we're very low percentage in voting, but it may actually bring out voters. I don't know what Malden's percentages on voting is compared to ours. And to Eunice's point, I think she makes a great point. Like, and I know, like you just said, it's off topic, but just to throw my two cents in, Malden with their ward representation, they make 18,000 each. So I would love to see it go a little lower, but again, I don't know who's, who makes that decision or who doesn't, but that would be my recommendation as well. So thank you.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great, thank you. Anthony or Frank or Marilyn, do we know anything about voter turnout and voter representation?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Not aware of any studies that specifically studied the different structures around voter representation, its impact on voter turnout. Anecdotally, I've been in two communities, one with Ward, one without, and the voter turnout seemed to be about the same, under 20%. So I don't know, Marilyn or Frank?
[Wright]: I don't have any information or data to support one way or the other. I'm inclined to think along the same lines as you, Anthony. I'm not sure. We have ward representation in Melrose, and I think it's been generally below 20%. A lot of it, I think, relates to whether or not you have a contested mayor's race, and that obviously is unrelated to the composition of your city charter. There may be situations where you have a particular head-to-head ward Councilor race that might bring out a larger turnout for that particular award. Um, I can think of a few examples, but that's obviously not citywide.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, thank you. Mori, do you have a final comment?
[Maury Carroll]: Yeah, I'd just like to move the vote right now at this point. We've gone over this for how long now and. just make a stand one way or the other. So I'm going to make a motion to that we move forward as a body looking at that we support Ward Alderman within the city.
[SPEAKER_08]: Do we have a second on the motion to vote on whether to provisionally make a decision that we want ward representation, hybrid ward representation. Okay. Okay. So do you want to just, uh, uh, Maury, do you want us, I don't want to, um, say, put words in your mouth for the motion. Okay.
[Maury Carroll]: So, um, the motion is okay. A roll call vote on,
[SPEAKER_08]: Yes or no on hybrid word representation for the City Council. Maury.
[Maury Carroll]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Eunice. No. John.
[Moreshi]: Yes.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Paulette.
[SPEAKER_08]: Paulette, you're muted. Okay.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great. Anthony, Andrea Tola.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I abstain.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: Jean.
[Jean Zotter]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Danielle.
[Jean Zotter]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: That was a yes, Danielle. Okay. Phyllis.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Ron. Yes. And I vote yes. I don't think I missed anybody, did I? David?
[David Zabner]: I vote yes as well, to whatever degree it matters.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. So we have nine committee members yes, one committee member no, and one abstain. So congrats, we've just decided provisionally to move to hybrid board representation for city council. There will be other things that we have to decide, like exactly how many and other issues, but that's a big step, so great. Okay, so now the next item on the agenda, which we've been putting off, is just the question of whether we want a preamble in our charter. I sent around this handout so that you've all sort of seen the arguments for it, and the Collins Center's actually, if we decide to go ahead, the Collins Center will help us with the drafting, but there were a few example preambles in that. And now, so I'm just going to open the floor and see what people's thoughts are. We're on.
[Ron Giovino]: I think this is a perfect example of something that should be set to a subcommittee to research and present. I don't think anybody, I mean, your choices would be, do you like the preamble or you don't want to preamble once that's done? I think there's a lot of research that has to go into it. We have a ton of examples from the Collins Center, but this to me is a classic example of what should go into a subcommittee and come out for the Committee of the Whole to review.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, David, you had a comment?
[David Zabner]: Yeah. So in my view, the preamble falls into one of two categories. It's either going to be, uh, a waste of time because we're arguing about something that doesn't have kind of legal significance or it could save us a lot of time by kind of, uh, being explicit about what our values are as a group and what we're trying to encode in the thing. Um, I don't know if that helps anybody else make decisions, but my guess is that the preamble is more likely to be a poor use of our time as a group, and we'll spend a lot of time arguing about words and commas. But I could also see it being really, really useful if it's kind of a true statement of values that then drives how the rest of the charter is written.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. And Daniel had a comment. Can we vote if we want a preamble or not, and then create a subcommittee based on that vote? So I'm unclear whether you're actually making a motion there, Daniel, or just that's just a comment.
[SPEAKER_05]: Yeah, sorry. Could be a motion.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Do you want to make, are you making a motion right now that we should vote on whether we want to preamble?
[Andreottola]: I second it.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Is there any discussion on the motion?
[Ron Giovino]: Can we just have the other folks who had their hands raised?
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, some people have their hands raised, so we'll call this discussion on the motion. Jean?
[Jean Zotter]: I would like to see a preamble. I think that it doesn't have to be long, but it sort of states what our values were when we were creating the charter. And I do think it is, I know it's not binding, but it is helpful in interpreting charter. I am a lawyer, but sometimes people look at those things just to understand what the committee was trying to do when they weren't list there at the meetings or I was wondering if you could get some of those values from our listening session and really take those from what we hear from the community. And I wrote in a preamble question into the listening session just to say, what are the values you wanna see in your charter? So I agree with David, I don't think we should spend a lot of time on it and I definitely don't think we should wordsmith it. And I don't know if it's worth the committee's time, but I do find these things helpful in interpreting, just providing context.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great, thank you.
[Unidentified]: I don't know, we'll get out of here.
[Maury Carroll]: You know, I'd like to see a committee with a timeline on it, say, okay, then put four people together of our body, and you have two meetings to come back with all this stuff, so it doesn't get tossed around for two or three months. But just to get, just like, A couple of people involved in this committee concentrate on that And then come back to us and say this is what we're thinking instead of all of us just tossing it back and forth Okay Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: So now I just want to return to the motion which is um Do we want a preamble? Um in our draft charter, is that is that what you is that your motion? Yes.
[Ron Giovino]: Okay Can we just amend that emotion just to say yes The motion should be to create a preamble subcommittee. Um, well, both options.
[SPEAKER_08]: I want, can, can we just do the motion first and then go to the process discussion? Okay. So the first question is on the table is, do we want a preamble in the charter? Um, do we want to roll call vote? Did you want to roll call vote, Daniel? Should we do that? Yeah. Okay. All right. Eunice.
[Eunice Browne]: Where'd she go? Yeah, no, I'm here.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Come on, Jonas, let's go.
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah, sure.
[Adam Hurtubise]: OK, John.
[Moreshi]: No.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Paula. Yes. Jean.
[SPEAKER_07]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Danielle. Yes. Phyllis. Yes. Maury. Yes. Ron.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: I will vote yes, and Javid, do you want to throw in your two cents? I'll vote no. And Anthony, did I get Anthony in?
[Andreottola]: I'm here, yes, please.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. So, as far as committee members, I think we had 10 yes and one no, I believe. So the vote is to have a preamble. And before we move ahead with forming a subcommittee, I just wanted to see if the Collins Center could maybe talk a little bit about what is the process for other committees in creating preambles.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Actually, we'd be curious if Marilyn would like to chime in here.
[Contreas]: Well, I've, I've seen it done through the subcommittee route. I've seen the committee as a whole take up the question. Some communities just put this off till the end. Because it, in order to be able to sort of encapsulate their, their. their deliberations. And mostly they use other preambles as a guide. And that's how it proceeds. It's not the same everywhere, but those are the ways that I've seen.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great. Thank you. Anthony from Collins Center, did I
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: understand you correctly at the call center and how draft a preamble we can do that I mean we have like like you said earlier we have sent over several versions to the committee we can sort of create sort of merge one and then the body can the body or the subcommittee can look at that and and add sort of Medford-specific language. And then we can, you know, to the extent it needs any wordsmithing, there's a tend towards plain language really throughout the charter. So you don't use some of those, you know, more complicated legal terms so that anybody who reads it understands the document as a whole. So those are some of the things that we can look for and do some of that, you know, parsing of the words that, might be painful for the committee to do as a group to send something back for the body to review.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, Eunice, you wanted to say something?
[Eunice Browne]: Well, me?
[SPEAKER_08]: No. Oh, I thought you were... Oh, that's my... There was a hand in your square. It's my cursor. Sorry. Okay. Well, so there was a, there was a suggestion that we create a subcommittee, but now we've heard that, um, there are other options that we can do it with subcommittee. We can do it with the whole committee. We could possibly, uh, make it the last thing we do and the call center can help, uh, draft it. Um, and when, uh, to the call and center, when you help draft, is it, uh, a situation where maybe the committee sort of gives you, okay, these are the things we want the preamble to reflect. And then you sort of, use those along with your knowledge of how other preambles are written to come up with a draft?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yeah, I think that would be fine if the committee had sort of broad ideals or things they wanted to say about the community or about this, what they're hoping the charter encompasses or does to move the community forward. We can take that, those languages and form those into specific language in this portion of the text for the committee obviously to review and adopt.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Okay, so now that discussion that we've had a little bit of discussion or. Ron, you were interested in forming the subcommittee. How do you feel about. How do you feel about it at this point?
[Ron Giovino]: I, again, I think that subcommittee is the place for for this to be developed and I think you could. You know, I think we can trust people to create this. I think it's a very important piece. I think it's we're creating a historic document, it would be nice to have the framework of a preamble, but I just, you know, I think as chairperson, you can just build a subcommittee, as we've done in the past on this one.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay, Jean. My suggestion might be to wait till we get, till we have stuff drafted more and some more discussion that, because then the preamble can kind of summarize where we, so we could still do it through a committee, but maybe not, we don't need to set that up for right now. Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: So where, so we've, Frances wanted to speak. Frances.
[Frances Nwajei]: Would you please run through your vote again?
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, I'm just trying to get that while I'm trying to also Um, okay. I, we just, there's a question of whether I got everybody's vote. I have Eunice. Yes. John. No. Paulette. Yes. Gene. Yes. Danielle. Yes. Ron. Yes. Anthony. Yes. Phyllis. Yes. Maury. Yes. Uh, am I missing anyone? David? No. David. Right. Okay, so David, did you have a comment on the discussion?
[David Zabner]: Yeah, I said this earlier. I think if we're going to have a preamble, I think it should drive the way we write the rest of the charter and not the other way around. You know, I think it's certainly possible to look at a document and try and guess what our values are backwards from that. But I think we would probably be better off doing it in the other direction. So, I would support Ron's idea of forming that committee now. And maybe even trying to have the fan will be the 1st thing that gets written and voted on. And kind of becomes the 1st line in the sand that we draw.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, so we have a couple of suggestions to form a subcommittee, not an official motion yet. I guess what I would like to do before we form a subcommittee is have the task be clear. Is the subcommittee actually drafting the preamble or just creating sort of the frameworks for it, the values and the issues that we want the preamble to cover? Do we want the subcommittee to actually draft it?
[Ron Giovino]: If you ask my opinion, I think the subcommittee should produce a document for us, for the committee of the whole to approve and edit.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, so are you making a motion for that, Rome?
[Ron Giovino]: Yes, and to Jean's point too, I agree with Jean. This preamble, like everything else we do, is a changeable, editable document. So that can change, but I would just like, I'm more about the, get it, let's get it off the table working and let's move to the big pieces that we have to get. But yes, I would like to make a motion to establish a subcommittee to research and create the preamble for the Medford charter.
[Maury Carroll]: I'll second that.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Okay. So the motion is to establish a subcommittee, um, to research and draft a preamble. Uh, All in, should we do a roll call? Or, yeah, we should probably do a roll call. Eunice? Yes. John?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Paulette? You're muted, Paulette.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Gene? Yes. Danielle? Yes. Phyllis?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Ron?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: Maury?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: And I'll vote yes. And Daveed? Yes. Yeah, dear. Okay. Okay, so that's unanimous. So now, does anybody want to volunteer for this subcommittee?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Okay. I'll go on it. Okay. David, Jean, Danielle, Maury.
[SPEAKER_08]: Four is good. Does that sound good? I think that's enough. Okay. Somebody will volunteer to be the sort of organizer, organize the meetings. create agendas and things like that?
[Jean Zotter]: I don't think I can with all the listening sessions.
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, no, I understand. Okay, I'll join and I'll do that. I can do it. David, you will. Okay, so since this is an official subcommittee, the meetings and the agenda have to be posted 48 hours in advance. And if you send them to me, can take care of getting them to the appropriate people in the city, or I can tell you who to send.
[Eunice Browne]: I'm generally the one that alerts the TV station.
[Maury Carroll]: Great. Thank you. And everyone else, Eunice. Nice job.
[Eunice Browne]: I didn't post this. I got a little bit busy.
[Maury Carroll]: Shame on you.
[Eunice Browne]: All right. Great. I'm fired.
[SPEAKER_08]: So our next item is a very big item. And I was hoping we could just sort of, I mean, tonight we will just be sort of starting it. But balance of power is something that we haven't talked about yet. And it's been talked about a lot at our listening session at our, well, our events. And it's been talked about in our survey comments. So we've got a great document from the Collins Center. Have people had a chance to look at that? Yes. And I just want to sort of open the conversation about that.
[SPEAKER_07]: Anybody want to start?
[Jean Zotter]: Thoughts? Oh, Gene. I think some of the balance of power wasn't addressed by the memo from the Collins Center, which was around the budget, or at least I think that the fiscal balance of power is what has come up quite a bit. And I didn't know if the Collins Center knew of any.
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, it was addressed in there. They mentioned that they didn't specifically cover it because it's covered by state law. Is that correct?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yeah, I would just add the caveat that one of the reasons that it's not specifically delved into is there isn't much variation. There's Boston, which recently has this authority. And then there is every other community in Massachusetts, which if they're a city with an elected mayor, all follow the statutory process.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay, and the statutory process is the mayor establishes the budget, city council can either approve or decrease line items, but cannot increase or move money around. Is that like the- Correct, correct.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: And then there's a timeline that there's a clock that starts running on when the mayor submits it to when the council approves it or rejects it. That's all covered by the statute.
[Jean Zotter]: And some of the. Can I ask a question about that, Ken?
[Andreottola]: I know that dates and times of, of submissions has been an issue in Medford in the past. Is there a way that we could kind of change those requirements? Just say like the mayor needs to present the budget in March rather than I think sometimes you'll get presented in June and the city council would, you know, you know, take a conniption. You know is that something that we can address in the charter putting specifying at least dates if we can't change the actual you know the power. Can we change the process.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I'm not, I have to pull up the statute. I don't have it in front of me right now, but I can look at it while we talk. But my understanding is no, what the state statute says, and Frank or Marilyn, please interrupt me if I'm misstating it, but when I say there's a timeline, there's a point in which if the mayor doesn't submit the budget at a certain point in time in the year, then he basically, or he or she, excuse me, basically gives it up and the council can sort of draft their own budget. However, if the council, if the mayor submits it at a certain time, at the appropriate time or before that deadline, then the council has a certain period to approve or decrease the budget or do those negotiations before it has to be adopted.
[Andreottola]: I understand that, but is it, you know, I believe it's sometime in June and often, you know, what's happened in Medford is the council has wanted to be more involved in the process earlier so they could kind of have, uh, you know, the information they need to, you know, make changes and decisions. Is there a way that we could kind of in our, in the charter kind of establish, you know, different, dates like the mayor needs to submit it earlier or involve the council more without actually changing, you know, that, you know, interfering with that state statute.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Well, I guess my understanding and Frank, I see Frank, you can jump in after this is that, um, no, the short answer is no. The mayor has until the time provided by the statute to submit the budget.
[Wright]: Okay. What I have seen in cities is either by ordinance or by agreement, the mayor agrees or the mayor shall present to the city council at some point, whether it's mid-year, after the first of the year or in March, a snapshot of where the budget is at that point. Because in effect, a budget is always just a snapshot. you hit day two of the new budget, things are going to change. I mean, there's unpredictability, there's weather, there's, you know, building issues, there's whatever. But so, uh, I, I don't know what the date is, but I know in Somerville, they, uh, they look to the mayor to come to them. I believe it's in March and, um, not only report on the status of the current year, but where the mayor foresees, not a commitment per se, as I recall, but foresees the next budget headed. But that's not by charter. That's, again, the whole issue of the potential conflict with state statute, but I believe that's by ordinance.
[SPEAKER_08]: Thank you. Jean, did you get all your questions in?
[Jean Zotter]: Well, I'm looking at the model charter. It looks like you can sort of set up meetings, fiscal meetings, or it looks like there was a submission, like we could discuss when the operating budget has to be submitted, or is it Can you modify the state law or is that what we have to work with, I guess?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Sorry, I was just reading through the state statute. My understanding is that you can put, as the mayor has, is the mayor has the state statute. Basically, you can't overwrite the state statute.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay. Is that something you could share with us so we know what the timeline is in that? That would be helpful.
[Contreas]: I'd like to follow up to your other point about the meeting cell because we have written charters and it appears in in several city charters that the mayor presents some picture of the city's revenue forecast fairly early in the year, like March or April, so that people know what your revenues are expected to be and what some of your fixed costs are, and that provides some foundation for the budget deliberations going forward. We've also had communities that have put financial forecasts in their charter, requiring that a financial forecast be provided of three to five years. So the communities will, once again, have an idea of what their picture looks like going forward.
[Jean Zotter]: I think things like that would be helpful. It seems like that is some of the concerns that come up with city council, and also just as a community member, knowing where things are would be helpful. Yeah. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great. Okay, so it makes sense that we're talking about the budget because that has been an issue here in Medford, but there's also other balance of power issues that were addressed in the handout that we're going to have to talk about. So, I mean, I believe the committees and commissions was in there and the veto power. And removing public officials as well. And we have a link to the state statute, which I can also provide for everyone after the meeting as well. Any other sort of thoughts, questions, discussion about how we want to move forward with this very big topic?
[Andreottola]: I think we should break it down into sections, the budget being one, the balance of power regarding which commissions or committees might require a vote of the city council, things like that. But there's a lot to this topic that I think it's more, it would serve us well to kind of take it in pieces rather than to kind of try to discuss it all at once.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, John?
[Moreshi]: Yeah, I would just echo what Anthony said. I think the devil's in the details. You know, how do we feel about a veto is something I feel like we could get into and think through. You know, the broad choice, I think. Is maybe a helpful framework, but ultimately, I think people are going to have different opinions on this specific.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay, any other I mean, we can break that down. We can. Uh, Eunice or before I speak for the heater is singing in the background.
[Eunice Browne]: It's getting a little cold in here. Um, don't we have a whole section coming down the pike at some point about budget. Where, you know, some of this perhaps belongs. And then the issues about vetoes and public officials, you know, appointing and removing. I think those are separate entities, so, um, you know, I'll agree with, um. John and Anthony, my colleagues, that, you know, it, this encompasses a whole bunch of different subtopics. And I think that those, if I recall the sort of different sections of things, some of these belong in other sections of the charter that, you know, we've got coming down the pike. I think those may be the places where some of these discussions belong.
[Ron Giovino]: Okay, Ron. Thanks. I think some of the challenges are that although it would be nice to split the issue, I think there's a lot of overlapping that goes on in this discussion over balance of power. Secondly, I think that the city council has already done a lot of this legwork and part of the research should be going back to see where that came from, their amendments that they have, their charter amendment process involved a lot of details about who controls the budget and timeline. So that's got to be part of the discussion, but this is kind of like a huge, huge issue. And we really have to come up with a really strong plan of attack on this one. And call-in center is going to play a key role in guiding us as to what can and cannot be changed.
[SPEAKER_08]: Are you talking about the budget specifically or the whole question?
[Ron Giovino]: Yeah, I'm talking about the, you know, the budget is just the beginning of some of the communications powers and processes that go between school committee, city council, and the mayor's office. And remember, our proposal is going through the city council and the mayor's office, so It would be nice if we could have an open discussion detailed with them, but they've certainly looked at it. I'm sure we know every year the budget is a supreme frustration, but it's a big negotiation because everybody above us has a power to say, no, this isn't the way it's going to be. I think we really have to dig deep and come up with our research and the ultimate person to decide are the people with their vote, not the current people in their seats. I guess it's a major, you know, I don't have a real plan for how to do it, but we just have to be careful of what we can control and what we can't control. And, you know, I don't want to see one group looking at one way and setting a precedent that the other group would have to stop. So it really has to be a unified effort. Good luck. Good luck, Mila.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Any other thoughts? I mean,
[Jean Zotter]: Any other thoughts? Well, it just sounds like Ron suggesting a subcommittee.
[Ron Giovino]: Yeah. You know, the money I made on the subcommittee, I am a subcommittee fan, yes.
[SPEAKER_08]: I mean, we do have a lot of things to talk about and a lot of decisions to make, but the budget has been a big issue in general in Medford and the budget procedures. So that might be, I guess, Ron, if you are proposing a subcommittee, are you proposing a subcommittee on balance of power in general or breaking down the pieces?
[Ron Giovino]: All I'm saying is that a discussion on balance of power and budget will consume this entire committee's time for a good portion of time. And I think it would consume it with some of the items that can be offline researched and brought to the table. That's why I like the subcommittee ideas because it can be broken up and it can be, you know, this time here, this two hours are almost over. And we just, you know, this one is to me is, you know, huge. So if we had responsibilities split up that you come back to a subcommittee meeting and work on the presence, similar to what we did with the ward representation, but on a higher scale. Yes, I'm suggesting we do a subcommittee.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. John, you wanted to speak?
[Moreshi]: Yeah, well, I love the subcommittee idea. And just thinking about what that would be, I'm trying to remember our plan of work from a few months ago. Yeah. The way I think about this, we're talking about veto power, we're talking about appointment power, those to me seem like executive powers. So do we want, you know, an executive power section looking at all the issues that are in the standard executive power section of the charters we've reviewed? You know, so there's an executive power subcommittee. I seem to remember the conversation about the work plan, and I could be misremembering, thought that a combination executive and legislative power subcommittee was the preferred?
[Phyllis Morrison]: Yes, that is correct.
[Moreshi]: That seems kind of big to me, but I think that makes sense as well. But I think following the standard Article 1, Article 2, Article 3 structure for subcommittees, perhaps cutting budget out given its heightened consideration in our current political circumstance may make sense. I do think, I don't think we need a veto subcommittee. I think an executive power subcommittee or an executive legislative subcommittee is the way to go to just bang out these small issues and we can have a really healthy discussion based on, you know, sort of a model that the subcommittee comes up with. As a subcommittee recommendation is not set in stone at all, but I do think having a solid framework for people to bounce ideas off of and edit is much more productive, particularly if it's informed by subcommittee work. then sort of an abstract discussion. And I struggle with abstract stuff, so that just might be my bias, but.
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah. So it was when we did talk about, we looked at the work plan, we did talk about articles two and three, subcommittee to address articles two and three, which is legislative grants and executive grants. That could be what you're proposing. Eunice.
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah, we may have this in the work plan, as you said. So, maybe I'm speaking out of turn here, but and I don't know if we can do this, but I would really like to see. A list of possible subcommittees. You know, there are 11 or 12 of us and, um. You know, I'm sure that we all have sort of our own areas that we have a particular interest in, you know, maybe some people are interested in x and y doesn't really matter quite so much to them. You know, and I think we all have to be careful about over extending ourselves to we all have, you know, other lives. What I would like to see is a list of possible subcommittees. I'm on the school committee subcommittee, I was on the city council one, speaking only for myself. I would hate to sign up for something now and realize next month that I wanted to sign up for something that interests me even more, but now I'm already overextended. And I think other people might feel the same way, too. You know, we're doing a gargantuan task here. If we can, you know, have a list of possible subcommittees, you can kind of begin picking and choosing what you might want to serve on, you know, in accordance with your interests and maybe other things that are going on in your life, too.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. So when we talk about the work plan and the subcommittees, I mean, the word representation one was sort of separate because it was such a big issue. But we talked about breaking them down by articles. So that would be where you can find the subcommittee topic.
[David Zabner]: Yeah, I just wanted to agree with john. I think it's a really good idea to split out the budget committee from the other one. But I want to disagree with him on the idea that we should have one for the executive and one for the city council, just because I think their powers are going to be excluded. Right. Right. Whatever power we give to the mayor is power that the city council doesn't get and vice versa. So I think it makes a lot of sense to combine those two under one roof.
[SPEAKER_08]: OK. OK, does anybody else have any comments or do we? I mean, we did and we didn't make. We did talk about the work plan in the past and we talked about the Article 2 and Article 3 subcommittee. So does anyone want to? Do we wanna move forward and form that subcommittee?
[Moreshi]: I'll move to do so.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Anybody second that?
[Andreottola]: I will.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. All in favor?
[Andreottola]: Aye.
[SPEAKER_08]: Aye. Anybody against? Okay, so in article two and three subcommittee, does anybody wanna volunteer to be on it?
[Moreshi]: I will.
[SPEAKER_08]: John, I will be on this one as well. Anybody else?
[Andreottola]: And what is this one? I wanna be involved with the budget, but this isn't the budget.
[SPEAKER_08]: This is not specifically the budget, the budget is later. Anybody else? Articles two and three, executive branch and legislative branch. What's the timeline? Yeah, I didn't, well, we know the timeline for the preamble is sort of extended, but for this one, we didn't put it into the motion, but I would say it would be nice to have a report back to the whole committee by January or February at the latest.
[Maury Carroll]: I'll jump on, Noah.
[SPEAKER_08]: Great. Thank you. Okay, I will contact you guys and set that up. I also just want to thank the Collins Center for that memo. And it was really instructive for me to look at it and just to be able to see sort of how the mayoral power in Menford compares with other communities. And And it's pretty comparable. So thank you for that. Does anybody, is there any member of the public that wants to speak on this topic? Okay. Okay, so now we just have sort of business things. Jean, do you wanna give us an update on the listening sessions?
[Jean Zotter]: Sure. I was gonna share my screen.
[SPEAKER_08]: I'm going to give you.
[Jean Zotter]: Is that all right?
[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, let me just. I think I can. Oh, you can because you're a co-host, right? Yeah.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay, so I made a calendar for our listening sessions. It's in the listening session folder in our shared drive. So we have five scheduled so far. We have one at the library, one at the Willis Family Development, one at Tempone, one at the Firefighters Association, one at the Senior Center, and then, sorry, we have six. And then we have one with the Medford Chamber of Commerce that Maury is pulling together. Then we have a virtual listening session scheduled for December 9th, which will be accessible if people need ASL. And then I have dates where the community health workers from the Board of Health are willing to attend a listening session and provide interpretation and translation. So I have some requests. The first is I need some volunteers to do some listening sessions. So I need one volunteer to do the Medford Senior Center, which is on the 14th at 2.30 p.m. Ron's doing that one, and I don't have a second person to do it with.
[Ron Giovino]: Gene, did Aubrey respond that she can't do that one?
[Jean Zotter]: No, I haven't heard from her either way.
[Ron Giovino]: Should I reach out to her and see if- Well, only because she's there for the other two.
[Jean Zotter]: I'll see if she wants to do that. So then we need one person to do the Medford Chamber of Commerce, which is 9 a.m., coffee. And Maury, you're doing that. You'll be facilitating that or do you want to be a participant?
[Maury Carroll]: No, I'll help facilitate it. It's going to be one of two venues. It's either at Tufts University, because last night at our meeting, I asked them to get as many people involved in it, so they're going to open it up to Zoom. So Tufts has the the capability of doing that are in Haines Square. I think it's called the vent temps that they're new down there and they want to get involved with the chamber and in the city and these kind of events. So it's gonna be one of those two venues that just I should know by the end of the day tomorrow.
[Andreottola]: So is there any... I'd be willing to do it with you, but I'm not a very good note taker.
[Maury Carroll]: So if there's... That's not my strength, Anthony, I'm with you.
[Jean Zotter]: Anyone want a note take for that one? Come on, Jean, you can go. I had to check my calendar if I'm free. I'd love to do... Who's that? Paulette. Paulette? Okay.
[SPEAKER_07]: Great.
[Jean Zotter]: That's great. All right. Paulette, nice.
[SPEAKER_07]: Thank you.
[Maury Carroll]: and Anthony. Yeah, beautiful.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay. So then for our virtual listening session, we'll have ASL interpretation. We need two. We need a facilitator and a note taker for that one. It'll be on a Saturday. Francis, we don't have a time yet, right? I don't know if she's still here.
[Frances Nwajei]: Frances is here. I could not find the unmute button.
[SPEAKER_07]: Oh, OK.
[Frances Nwajei]: I could hold down my space bar. We don't have the time yet. It will probably be in the afternoon. And because we will have ASL interpretation, I would suggest that we give at least two hours. Because remember, the information has to flow back and forth times two. OK. So I'm thinking, um, maybe like a one to three.
[Andreottola]: All right. I volunteered to do that one already.
[Frances Nwajei]: So yeah, I'm open to, um, I'm open to what would, what would work best for people. Um, I just ask that we remember that ASL interpretation is very different. So. We would have to like watch our cadence to give the interpreters time, and I would have two Zoom rooms going on two different computers.
[Jean Zotter]: So, is there anyone else that would like to either facilitate or note take for that one? Anthony, you would?
[Andreottola]: Yeah, I was planning on facilitating that.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: December 9th. December 9th. I can be the note taker.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: I mean, I don't like calendar, but I'm pretty sure I'm pretty.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay. All right. So then I... I'm sorry.
[Frances Nwajei]: Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry, Jean. What time would work best for you, Anthony and Milva? Do you prefer a one to three or do you prefer a three to five?
[Andreottola]: Whatever works best for most for me. Same.
[Frances Nwajei]: Okay, so I'll work around interpreter schedules then. Great. Thank you.
[Jean Zotter]: So I've reached out to the Interfaith Clergy Association and working on that. So we may take some of these times where we'll have translation interpretation. And then Paulette, I know you're reaching out to the West Medford Community Center.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So let me give you an update on that. I have had a number of conversations. I started out talking to Terry about trying to piggyback on one of their senior events. And then I spoke to Lisa, the head of the center, and she really didn't want us to do it directed at seniors specifically. I had just thought about the senior events because I knew, know that they were, that they happen. She suggests, so then I went back and today had a conversation again with Terry a second time, and he, I told them what time there was an interpreter, and I just want to clarify, that's a sign language interpreter we're talking about.
[Jean Zotter]: No, these are, the times I gave you, Paulette, are Spanish, Haitian Creole, and Brazilian Portuguese speakers. Okay. That's your interpretation for- Okay.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So the concerns that Terry brought to mind was that they have kids in the building till six o'clock. And so he suggested he much preferred a six to seven time. as opposed to a five to six. And I didn't know, I didn't know whether we specifically wanted to have interpreters. He, you know, both of us worried a little bit about what our turnout would be when it isn't piggybacked to another event, which would automatically bring people in. You know, I had suggested we could do it as a wine and cheese, but we can't do wine. I will tell you that Terry did mention that usually they rent out for $100 an hour and that rentals are part of their lifeline as opposed to a fire station or something like that. I said to him, I would check into it, but I didn't believe we had funds available. So I just want to raise that because it is a different area. But of course, they certainly understand the fact that this is a community event. Frances, I can't see what you just wrote.
[Frances Nwajei]: I said you'd get you would be able to capture seniors from the senior center because they're going to help push it for us, which is why it's at 230. So, we would definitely get a big input of seniors.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Francis what's at 230.
[Frances Nwajei]: The senior center listening session, the one that's scheduled for the 14th. Oh, okay. Yeah, so if you were concerned about, you know, not reaching that demographic, you would get that demographic.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I was particularly looking at that for the seniors in the West Medford Community Center. But, you know, I think that since they raised it as a concern, I think it certainly makes sense to do a six to seven. event if people can do it. We looked at December 6th as the most likely date. Terry wrote that into his calendar. But I just didn't know about the interpreters and what we could do.
[Jean Zotter]: I'll see if maybe they could work a little later, if they have that flexibility, I'm not sure. Or they said till 6.30 that day, so.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Right, I noticed that, so that's why I wondered if maybe they could.
[Jean Zotter]: Okay. And I don't know about money, like, Milva, do we have money?
[SPEAKER_08]: You know, I mean, we do have a small budget.
[Frances Nwajei]: You know, we can. I just want to clarify, the budget is for the work of the call center, and the budget is for translation.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Okay.
[Frances Nwajei]: So if we need, if we need a hundred dollars, then I have to see like where that money can get pulled out of. Um, my office has a very minimal budget, but if there's a line that that a hundred dollars can get pulled out of, um, then so be it, but it's not something that I can say that can be done. I don't know how we can try. It's not easy to transfer funding that has already been allocated. So like the funding for the call incentive bill, you can't take the money out of that.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So I think the thing to do is I'll go back to Terry and it just so happens I need to renew my membership. So maybe that will offset some of the cost, whatever. And let's see if we can make this one work. if the interpreters are available. Can we hold it without interpreters just?
[Jean Zotter]: Yeah, I was just, yeah, so you could do a different time without interpreters.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, I think the time was, that was a day, like Terry told me that he was not, he was not there on Monday. So the Mondays were not good. For me, it's one of the few dates in December that I might actually be available. So, so let's let's put it on tentatively and I'll go back and gene I will confirm with you after I talk to Terry again okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: Okay. Um, we only have five minutes left so and we really need to end on time so. Thank you for doing all that, and you guys will continue to plan. Maury, did you have a thought that you wanted to throw in?
[Maury Carroll]: Yeah. The only thing when it comes to paying a venue right now for the work we're trying to do to bring every section of the city into having a voice here, I'd be totally against that. Okay.
[SPEAKER_08]: Eunice?
[Eunice Browne]: How are we promoting these? Popping it on the city calendar? isn't the most ideal way. I think we need to take for this, and I was going to say the same thing for the surveys, which is coming up in a moment or two. We need to take much, much, much, much more proactive ways to be getting the word out about anything that we're doing.
[SPEAKER_08]: If you want to work on that, that's awesome. I'm posting them. I'm notifying the city of all of them. I'm posting them on social media. As you know, we don't have a newspaper. But any other help or suggestions on that?
[Jean Zotter]: I've created flyers for each one, Eunice.
[Eunice Browne]: This is something that I did with the surveys a few weeks back. I guess on our Google spreadsheet in the survey section of our site that we're able to now see how many surveys have come in. I did this with the surveys and noticed a bit of an uptick, but I put it on Facebook, the surveys on my personal page. I made it public and I tagged everybody that I knew. I said, I'd really appreciate it. This is really important, explained it and sent the link. I'm wondering if doing that with the listening sessions might work as well. PMing all of your friends, you know, with the listening session or the survey, you know, and saying, you know, please come out and attend one of these listening sessions. Please fill out the survey. You know, that's, I think, something that each one of us can do and, you know, hopefully see an uptick in things. Okay, great. Thanks, people. Those were great ideas.
[SPEAKER_08]: And I'm not, I just, we really only have two minutes left. So I think we made some good progress on that discussion. As far as the interviews, I just want to remind anybody who's done an interview and hasn't submitted a report, please do that. There may be some new elected officials that we're going to want to interview in the next month. Just throwing that out there. We had a public information session on October 19th. Our turnout in the hall was not very good, but we did have a good number on Zoom, and we had a good discussion. So thanks to everybody who participated and worked on that. We had discussed survey outreach on election day, and I guess that's sort of along with what Eunice was talking about, just outreach in general. We do have one more month for the survey. So whatever people can do would be great. Our next meeting is on December 7th, as usual. And people who volunteered for subcommittees will be hearing about that. Does any member from the public have any comment at this point? Okay, so I think we're gonna wrap up. I'll make a motion to adjourn. Thank you, Maury. Second.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Second.
[SPEAKER_08]: All in favor?
[Adam Hurtubise]: Thanks, everybody.
[SPEAKER_08]: Wait a minute.
[Adam Hurtubise]: Happy Thanksgiving everyone. Happy Thanksgiving.
[Unidentified]: Happy Thanksgiving to all.
|
total time: 8.81 minutes total words: 536 |
total time: 1.03 minutes total words: 122 |
||