[Laurel Siegel]: Right. Good evening, everybody. Um, so, uh, we, uh, we'll go ahead and get started and just talk about the minutes from our April meeting. Um, did anybody have any comments or question or discussion on those minutes? And otherwise, do we have a motion to approve?
[Unidentified]: Motion to approve. Thank you. Thank you. All in favor.
[Laurel Siegel]: Hi. Hi. All right, wonderful. So this evening, we're gonna be talking a lot about the city council. You saw that we had shared out a table that Anthony from the Collins Center had put together for us comparing some of the other charters that we've been looking at as to what kinds of provisions and how they differ. Anthony, I don't know if you wanna share a screen on that or if you want me to share a screen.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I'll share my screen. So I'm just going to quickly go through this. Let me just talk about two quick things before I do that. The first thing that you'll notice is that there's not a column for Medford. And the reason for that is we've all seen the charter a lot in these past couple months. And really the Medford charter just has one section addressing the city council. Again, as we've discussed before, there may be other pieces that are in other statutes or in other special acts, but the Medford charter, the one that's on the website, is in many ways silent on some of these provisions. And then the other thing is, as I talk through the sections of this table, I'll just sort of touch on some of the pieces that have to do with, or how they differ from Medford, and my colleague Marilyn can chime in. So first, and then the other piece, just for the body to know, the focus was on really the authority of the city council as a, as an element of the city government, and how that authority is rooted in the charter. So some city councils have other authority, you know, things that have been drafted by ordinance and things like that. Those aren't really addressed in this particular chart. So with that out of the way, so Medford, you have a seven-member city council, all of them are at large, the comparison cities, They're all at 11 with varying numbers of at-large members. The remainder of the members are at districts or wards, depending on how they're referenced in the charter. Terms are two years, same thing as Medford. I think this prohibition section, which is specifically articulating each of these charters is kind of interesting. They're all pretty much the same prohibition against holding up their office in the city, as well as ordering or giving direction to the appointees or employees of the mayor. Those are actually things that are sort of rooted in established law already. Under the ethics law, a city Councilor can't hold office in the city that they are a member that they are on the council and in plan a cities. It's pretty well established that there's a separation between the two bodies of government. But these charters specifically delineated what these prohibitions are in a section called prohibitions. And I believe that that section is also in the sample charter that we sent to you, to the body, a couple of months ago. Marilyn, is there anything you want to say on this particular piece?
[Contreas]: No, no, keep going. So great.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: And then the next part that we talked about or that's in the, these charters is compensation. All of these cities communities, set the compensation of the city council by ordinance. And. Pittsfield, interestingly, requires a two-thirds supermajority for any change in the compensation of the city council. Medford does not have this section in their charter, talking about how you set the compensation. However, I've noticed by going through some of the legislative history of Medford, that you tend to set the compensation of your elected officials by a special act, sending up to the state house. which is one way to do it, but often has more steps than may be necessary. So most, or at least not most of the places, but at least the places that we're comparing Medford to, they set council and mayoral salaries by ordinance. Another interesting feature of some of these other communities is that their charters require the attendance of the mayor at the city council meetings if requested. So the city council may require the mayor or his staff to attend city council meetings to answer questions. Pittsville does not, but Melrose and Weymouth do. Another point that is uh, technically kind of silent in Medford is are the appointments that the city council itself can make. Um, in these three other communities, um, the city council can, um, appoint the city clerk or, uh, clerk of committees, uh, town auditor, town clerk, clerk of committees and Pittsfield. I wrote vague. That's kind of my own impression. Their provision just says that, the council can appoint or hire any staff that it deems necessary for its function. There's no sort of limit on how many or what their functions really can be. So that's sort of my own little editorial there. Again, under states, under your, Medford is under the plan A charter. So they would appoint their city clerk unless there was some other special act or something to the contrary. These communities specifically set that out in their charter. Another one that is interesting and different from plan A charters in other places, all of these communities, the city council has the ability to approve or reject department head appointments and appointments to multi-member boards. That is different from other plan A charters for those, that's kind of unique to these particular communities. And then there's the mayoral veto. The mayor can veto any order, ordinance or anything else coming out of the city council, but the city council has the ability to override. The city council does not have the ability to increase budget items. It can decrease, but it cannot increase budget items. And then third, which is, I find often silent in charters, but these communities which have more modern charters have explicitly spelled this out, which is how does the community sort of eliminate or add or modify agencies or departments within the organization. For example, the law department, the police department, the finance department. In all of these communities, the charter states that it has to be a council order, but it has to originate or come from the mayor. So the city council cannot on its own engage in a reorganization of the, of a city department, but it can at the behest of a mayor. And those are sort of these are all more modern charters. And these are all these are all sort of spelled out in their charter. And it's what sort of makes them unique and interesting and things that this body may want to consider or think about as it's looking at the balance of power. Maryland, is there anything you want to touch on before I turn it back over to the committee?
[Contreas]: uh... i i just uh... today's fun fact is that the reason the pitfield city council did not appoint the the cleric is that the city clerk remains an elected office in the city of pittsfield it's it seems to be a popular uh... approach in western math which you don't find much uh... on on the side of uh... the more eastern side uh... On the administrative organization provision where the mayor has to present a plan, and then the council can approve it, is very much a feature that began to gain much more prominence after Proposition 2.5. Almost all charters have something similar.
[SPEAKER_13]: Could you repeat that, please?
[Contreas]: Sure. In prior to proposition two and a half, a lot of charters provided that the council could do reorganization after two and a half, it definitely moved almost totally to the mayor.
[SPEAKER_13]: Thank you.
[Laurel Siegel]: So, and why, why would that be? Is it just because the limitations on the funding that They wanted the mayor to have more control over that or why did prop two and a half cause that change?
[Contreas]: Well, I think that it was very much a matter of putting the mayor in the executive role and not splitting executive duties between the mayor and the council.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: from personal experience in Springfield where they don't have that provision, there can be some tension around who can, who has the authority to reorganize the city, because the mayor is appointing department heads, but then the city council, they have their authority under the budget to cut an entire budget item for a department in theory, but then also maybe eliminating, and that has caused some legal issues.
[Matt Leming]: Go ahead, Matt. Just a general question. Why the focus on, and sorry if it's obvious, but why the focus on these three municipalities in particular? So is it just because they're the most similar to Medford or were just kind of three random examples? I was just wondering about that.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: So in the, I forget which one, but in the first, maybe first or second memo that we shared with the committee, we'd identified these communities as being similar to Medford. And so this is following on that thread of thought.
[Laurel Siegel]: Jean, you wanna go ahead?
[Jean Zotter]: Sure. Hello, everybody. I have a cold, so I apologize if I'm coughing a lot. For the override of the mayor veto, is that all supermajority for the three? Medford I think it's five you need five out of the seven to override a mayor be mayor veto for all of these communities it's two thirds.
[Eunice Browne]: What is the difference between a city clerk, and a clerk of committees.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: So the city clerk is in charge of the city clerk's office. They're in charge of birth certificates, death certificates. They don't necessarily have to attend city council meetings and sort of act as the parliamentarian. Oftentimes that's sort of another duty that's oftentimes spelled out in either their charter or the position of city clerk. Then they're the record keeper of the city. The clerk of committees is, I'm trying to think about how best to describe it, it's, it's, it's a job more associated it's often housed in the city clerk's office, but it's a department that's exclusively for the city council in the setting up their committee meetings, as well as oftentimes taking minutes and other administrative tasks related to city council work specifically.
[Unidentified]: Any other questions on Anthony's presentation?
[Jean Zotter]: Oh, go ahead, Jean. Sorry, I have one more. Legal counsel for city council, has that already been, I missed the last meeting, but that's an issue in Medford is having city solicitor or having their own legal counsel. Is that delineated in the other cities or?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: So it's not in any of the other city charters. I say it's not, I mean, council for the city council specifically is not delineated in any other city charters. I can't remember, I didn't look at this specifically, but to the extent that city solicitors- No, there aren't any. Yeah, they're the city, they're the attorney for the entire city. So they're the lawyer for the mayor, the city council, so on and so forth.
[Contreas]: They're the attorneys for the municipal corporation, which includes both the council and the mayor.
[Eunice Browne]: Eunice? Thanks. I have two questions. The first one being, is the trend in most communities that have a city council for the terms to be two-year terms and to go along with that? Then I have another question on a different area. are the communities that have a mayor, I note that I think in Melrose, their mayor has a four year term. And I think their Councilors have two year terms. Is that a seeming trend? And then my second question is, is it Typical or the trend that Councilors can reject appointments to boards, like such as what we're doing. So the different boards and commissions.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: So, Marilyn, I'll turn it over to you on the trend piece. I'm not aware of any. I personally not aware of any communities where the city council has more than their term is longer than two years.
[Contreas]: Um, Winthrop, Winthrop has Councilors serve for four year terms. Um, and. A half of the half of the council is elected at each municipal election. As I recall in Framingham, uh, the ward Councilors are elected or district Councilors are elected for two years terms, but the two at large Councilors are elected to four year terms. Those are the four-year terms that I'm most familiar with.
[Ron Giovino]: Would you say it's a trend?
[Contreas]: The trend in terms of mayors having four-year terms, it's not overwhelming, but it's a pretty steady trend. You're seeing more communities move toward a four-year term. You're probably up to close to half of them by now that have four-year terms.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I'm sorry, Eunice, but there was a second part to your question, too.
[Eunice Browne]: I just there was a second question on a different area. The mayoral, the councilors may reject recording stopped. The recording stopped.
[Unidentified]: Recording in progress.
[Eunice Browne]: Oh, okay. I'm not sure what happened. May reject department heads or appointments to multi-member boards. Is this typical that Councilors? Yes. Okay, it is. Interesting.
[Contreas]: Yes, the confirmation authority of the council, the authority to confirm the mayor's appointments is in most charters.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay, so that would be, all these sort of ad hoc boards and, uh, you know, well, there are exceptions.
[Contreas]: If you have like, uh, if, if it's a statutory board, if the board created by ordinance, those are the, those are the appointments that would come to the council. Okay. The mayor always has the right to form an advisory committee, um, that wouldn't need, that wouldn't need, um, wouldn't need confirmation because they're not in a decision-making role.
[Eunice Browne]: I'm just thinking because we have, if I can just get to our website quick, but we seem to have a couple of dozen various boards and commissions. Everything from zoning and community development, bicycle advisory and human rights and parks and, you know, so on and so forth. So would the council be rejecting, could they reject any member of any one of those boards?
[Contreas]: Probably not the ones that have advisory in their title, but the others they could. Okay, thanks.
[Matt Leming]: I know for the Community Preservation Committee here, I had to go to a council appointment. They confirmed me.
[Ron Giovino]: Ron, go ahead. I don't think our city council approves department heads, I'm pretty sure about that. But my question is, Anthony, you'd mentioned Under 1 of these forms that the city council has the ability to. Acquire resources as they seem fit is that I misunderstand that.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Acquire resources, um.
[Ron Giovino]: You know, like, if they needed, I don't know, whatever support they need to do their jobs.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Oh, so under appointment authority. Yeah. Hits field. They have language, and I don't have the specific language up in front of I can pull it up in one moment, but it just said that they can they can. appoint a staff, you know, the appropriate staff for them to do their function I, I sort of editorialize it it was vague and that the, the, the charter doesn't put a limit on the number of staff that they could appoint or. sort of what jobs they can or can't do. Now that's going to bump up against the budgeting authority of the mayor, potentially. But yeah, in Pittsfield, they have basically very broad language on the staffing of the council and their ability to make that appointment. Marilyn, do you have any more background on that?
[Contreas]: A little bit. There are communities that have created positions that aren't the clerk of commissions that aren't the clerk of committees for the council. For example, a couple of communities have a position called budget and management analyst who helps them work through the budget and some of the issues that arise with ordinances. And that is in one community that I remember, they actually tie that individual's salary to the finance director's salary. And there's another community that has a very similar position. And you're seeing, I'm not seeing a huge trend in that area, but more people are looking at it.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: And Ron, if you'll indulge me, I can share the specific language from their website. Can everybody see that? So we're looking at section 2-8 appointments of the city council. Subject to appropriation, the city council may employ staff as it deems necessary. So they're not saying much, but they do have the authority.
[Ron Giovino]: So even the bigger question is Marilyn has, describe the city solicitors role in the entire city. You know, there is there is scuttlebutt going through that city council would like to have their own, you know, legal advisor working for them. And is that something, Marilyn or Anthony, that can be overridden by something that we write here? Or is it something that we're talking mass state, mass general laws, in terms of the entity of each town, city being a corporation?
[Contreas]: It does rely on that status of the municipality as a corporation. The legislature is not going to accept dueling lawyers.
[Ron Giovino]: Got it. And final question is, as we're talking about this, and I know we're really early in the game still, when we look at this massive document that we all have of all the four communities, the ability to mix and match things that we want, things that we don't want, is that impacted by the fact that we have defined a government role in terms of plan A or whatever, or is mixing and matching something that can be done?
[Contreas]: Mixing and matching can be done to the extent that the document is what is referred to as internally consistent. Meaning that it's- We have to use the same words in the same way.
[Ron Giovino]: Right. But if we have a plan A government, is there a, does that limit us from developing something from the other plans of government?
[Contreas]: Absolutely not.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[Eunice Browne]: Go ahead, Eunice. Sorry to monopolize here. I've been following I guess Plymouth is doing what we're doing right now with their charter and I guess they're a community that's similar in size to us, but I think they've had a town meeting representation and they're Uh, you know, looking at alternatives and one of the things that seems to have come up in some of their, some of the Facebook posts that I see is, um, and whether true or not, I don't know. There's always three sides to a story. Um, but one of the concerns seems to be that changes to their charter will cost the community money. So. If the city council is looking for their own legal representation. If we're going to hire. We have a city clerk already. If they want a clerk of committees, and whatever else, you know, can ends up being incorporated into our final project, then you know, there may be concerned that some of these changes are going to cost money to the taxpayers. Is that a reasonable conclusion to draw? And a reasonable concern to have?
[Contreas]: I know a little bit of the Plymouth story, but much of that depends on what you do and what the charter provides. I don't, we can't point to any particular town where costs go up as a result as a direct result of charter adoption. Okay, if you, if you, if you create a position, for example, if you take take women, women had a town manager and a representative town meeting. Now, they have a mayor and a council, the town manager. had a salary, the mayor has a salary, the town meeting didn't have a salary, the council does. So there was some cost there. But as far as sort of really causing the set the budget to substantially change in the city that did not happen. Okay, thanks.
[Milva McDonald]: I have a question. When you outlined the budget in these three communities, you said the council could decrease the budget. What about- State law provides. What about amending the budget? Amend by decreasing or eliminating- Or changing items, moving them around, moving money around.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: The councils can eliminate a line item, for lack of a better term, to get sort of a... Or decrease it. Or decrease. They can't add, in other words, if, so let's say you have two departments, you know, Department A and Department B. They can't move Department A's money to Department B, but they could zero out the Department A's budget.
[Milva McDonald]: So is, are there any, is that a standard practice in any communities, or are these three pretty much the norm?
[Contreas]: That's state law. They're following state law. That's what state law now allows.
[Unidentified]: That's what's currently in place in Medford, correct? Mm-hmm. Okay. Any other questions on the presentation? All right.
[Laurel Siegel]: Then, you know, following along this is, as everybody knows, our city council has proposed certain amendments to the charter that they're currently in the process of, you know, conducting meetings and public hearings about specifically three changes, one to expand their rights with respect to the budget. I believe to allow them to add items to the budget, if I'm not mistaken. Um, and, um, really to hire their own, uh, consultants such as attorneys, um, and also adding approval over members of boards and commissions. Um, so, um, you know, we have been asked as a body to weigh in on this, um, Uh, Milva and I shared with all of you a proposed statement that she and I drafted, which if you'd like, I'm happy to share screen on here. Um, one second. Um, essentially reiterating our viewpoint, um, without going to the substance of these specific changes that Our charge is really to investigate and research the charter and gather public input from the Medford community. And then based on that to draft appropriate new charter language. And so from our perspective, Milva and my perspective at least is that it would be premature for us to weigh in on these specific changes because we have not yet done the process of gathering public input. I think any of these potentially could be matters that we would consider, um, as we go through this process. Um, but, um, that in this moment, we just don't have the capacity to render an opinion one way or another without having any public input, um, on these items. Um, so, you know, obviously we wanted to open it up to the group and get thoughts and input on making this statement to the city council.
[Andreottola]: I have a question, just in something that was said during the city council meeting regarding that the amendments that they proposed would be binding and would actually go into effect before this body could do this work. So I'm interested in understanding how they can, these amendments can be adopted before, you know, this process takes place and why other amendments that were mentioned like changing the term of a mayor or different types of things could not be, would not be binding. Does anyone have any information on what was said about that? I think these would go on the ballot, if I'm not mistaken.
[Laurel Siegel]: So part of it, and Anthony, feel free to help out here, is there are certain types of changes that can be made through this process that they're utilizing and certain types of changes that cannot be made based on state statute. And through this process, they would need the consent of the mayor these particular amendments that they're proposing and then it would be go go before the voters, and because they're accelerating this process they, you know, it could get on the ballot, certainly much more quickly than we would have the opportunity to complete our review and put out a proposal that would be reviewed by the city council and the mayor. So Anthony, you have anything to supplement that?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yeah, just just to add on to that. So and I think we covered this early on, but, you know, anything that this body proposes would ultimately have to go to the city council to then go on to the legislature to then be, you know, potentially put on the ballot. So. Technically, nothing's preventing the city council, you know, if the mayor does not, you know, veto the action to send you know, for like in terms of unvetted by this committee items onto this to the to the to the state house. So they they're they're basically starting further down the river. A procedure.
[Andreottola]: At this point, it would still need to. They wouldn't be binding unless they were approved by the legislature, is that correct?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yes, depending on the changes, based on what I believe I heard, it sounds like those would have to go to the voters. I don't know if Marilyn wants to chime in there on that.
[Contreas]: Well, there are two ways to amend the charter. And if they're using chapter 43 B section 10, that's a local process with the exception that the amendments have to be reviewed by the attorney general to determine that they're consistent with state law.
[Andreottola]: So just say. without getting into their business, just their request to have legal counsel, which we earlier, someone mentioned that was not part of, didn't jive with state law. So if they put, if that went on the ballot, that would kind of be blocked at the attorney general's level.
[Contreas]: The Attorney General reviews the question before it goes on the ballot.
[Andreottola]: Right, but how do we know that it passes?
[Contreas]: No, no, no, you can't put it, if the Attorney General says it can't go on the ballot, it can't go on.
[Andreottola]: Right, but just using the legal, the lawyer as an example.
[Contreas]: Right, if the Attorney General says this is not, this does not conform with state law, then the question can't appear on the ballot.
[Unidentified]: Now I understand, thank you. Ron, go ahead. I don't know, is that me? I didn't hear.
[Ron Giovino]: Yeah, Ron, go ahead. Just to add, this process the city council is entering in is the same process that you could form, Anthony, with a group of people to get this done. Everybody has the same process. Same process we'll walk through, they'll walk through, is my understanding. But I wanted to mention, I thought the response was excellent. I thought it was reiterating our mission here. And my question is, first, how did they ask for our opinion? Did they do something at city council meeting to request it, or did they just ask for an opinion?
[Laurel Siegel]: Uh, they, they had included myself and Milva on a message prior to the city council meeting where they discussed this, where, you know, um, saying that it would be on the agenda and that they would welcome our input.
[Ron Giovino]: Yeah, so I think the response is great. The only thing I would add is that we get that response on the record somehow, either by delivering it to the city clerk or having somebody read it at the meeting. Because to me, this process, I don't want people to walk away saying, geez, well, what does the Charter Study Committee say? This is what we say. We're not involved in this piece. And I think it should be on the city council record as they talk about it. So that would be my only comment. Thanks.
[Laurel Siegel]: Thank you. Go ahead, Maury.
[Unidentified]: You're on mute, Maury.
[Maury Carroll]: Sorry about that. So I attended the meeting the other night. And what I got out of it was basically that the projected amendments that they're trying to make are within the privy of city council. And they're trying to stay within the realm of what they can do legally. And then they gave us kind of backhanded compliments of what we're doing, so forth. You know, when I hear what they're trying to do and what they're trying to say, it's very similar to what you were showing us that other cities and towns are trying to do. But what I heard basically is no matter what, if the amendments get adopted by them, we have a right to review those and make our recommendations, whether they just came on board or not.
[Laurel Siegel]: Absolutely. Anything that, if what we propose ultimately gets voted on by both bodies and then voted on by the voters, it could potentially supersede any of the amendments that the city council is putting in place. Danielle, go ahead.
[Danielle Balocca]: Yeah, I guess this is, I just have a question about what they were proposing in terms of the legal representation piece. I think I was maybe confusing it or combining it with the piece about being able to assign department heads. That was part of it too, right? So this is, I guess I was understanding it as they wanna have a say in who's hired as a city solicitor versus having a distinct legal representation, but maybe I'm wrong. Okay. It's not that.
[Laurel Siegel]: Sorry to interrupt. I believe it explicitly excludes the appointment of department heads, what they've proposed.
[Danielle Balocca]: Okay. And then what, sorry to ask this question, but what is the difference between the function of KP law and a city solicitor?
[Laurel Siegel]: KP law is essentially, as my understanding of it, is functioning as our city solicitor because we currently do not have a city solicitor on staff. So we have hired out as outside counsel to serve in that capacity to advise the city. Um, okay. Well, we have no closer of our own. Okay. Thank you. That's my understanding of that anyway. So, um, not, not representing the city here. Uh, Eunice, you want to go ahead?
[Eunice Browne]: Um, yeah. Uh, just to kind of clarify for people, I'm looking at, um, the, uh, presentation that Councilor Bears had put together and just says how, ways to amend the city charter under mass law. And so what they're doing is exactly what Marilyn just said, Mass General Law 43B, section 10, which allows them to amend specific portions of the charter, but not changes to like terms or ward representation or at large or anything like that. So what they're trying to do with their amendments requires a two-thirds vote of the city council, which from watching the meetings is pretty plain to see that they have that and then some. A public hearing within three months, and I believe they've already scheduled that for later in May. The May schedule for meetings, the tentative schedule came out the other day. Then it requires the approval of the mayor, And then if the mayor approves, then it goes to the attorney general, and then it would go on the ballot in November. And I believe when they tried to do an override question last year, it probably has to go to the attorney general by early August. to be able to get on the ballot for November, for the state to have time to produce the ballot. And then the voters approve or reject. And if approved, the amendments then will go into effect. My question, however, is it requires approval of the mayor. Do we have any indication as to where the mayor stands on all of this. Will she bless it to go to the Attorney General. Do we know that.
[Unidentified]: Not at this point now.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay.
[Maury Carroll]: My understanding as it is right now that even as KPR is on as an advisory, legally under the charter, the only one that can really act on behalf of the city is an actual city solicitor. Now, I may be wrong, but this is what I'm hearing throughout people that have been former Councilors and in government over the last 30 or 40 years that, The only one that really can do it is an actual city solicitor on behalf of the city.
[Laurel Siegel]: Anthony or Marilyn, would you have any input on that?
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: I'm sorry, we have to repeat the question a little bit. If you could just restate that last piece of it, make sure I understand.
[Maury Carroll]: It's to my understanding that the only one that can really legally represent the city on issues are work on behalf of the city is an actual city solicitor when it comes to proposals and adoptions by the city council and so forth. That's what I've been told. Not so sure if it's true, but these are people that have been in politics for the last 30 years on mayoral and city councils and so forth. So they're saying even the fact that KPR is on, legally they can't act on behalf of the city.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Yeah, I can't give any sort of specific legal advice, but the city is a municipal corporation. And like any corporation, it can hire a lawyer to act on its behalf. So you could have a, but a term like an in-house counsel, someone who you hire, who you pay, who works inside your organization, or you can hire a law firm to be your representative. But there are a number of towns that have a lawyer who's not necessarily a city, not necessarily a city.
[Contreas]: It doesn't work for the city. I mean, in terms of it is employed by the city directly and has an office in the city and such, yeah.
[Unidentified]: Mike, you have your hand raised.
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Yeah, I just think on the on the topic on the question that you asked. I think the response is is totally reasonable and measured and I you know I support it. I think I would honestly probably go a step further. It's like we we have. I got a personal level like we have a mandate to do our job and I and I and I worry that you know they're trying to sort of. Short circuit not short circuit at. I'm trying to be respectful, right? Like, like, I just think like, we want to put together our process and we want to make recommendations. And I think like, that's one second. That's, that's the way we should go. I don't think I don't think at this point, we should we should engage with the proposals on the merits, whether they are whether reasonable or not, like, I think what you said in the memo is that we are going to do our process that we have planned to process to to get community engagement and to put together something comprehensive. And I think that we should maintain that. And long story short, I support the letter that you wrote. And I think, yeah, what Ron said about getting it into the record, I also think is important as well.
[Unidentified]: Absolutely, thank you. Ron, you have your hand.
[Ron Giovino]: Yeah, I'd like to make a motion that we adopt this response and also forward it to the city clerk's office to make part of the city council record.
[Laurel Siegel]: Do we have a second on the motion?
[Ron Giovino]: I'll second that.
[Laurel Siegel]: Great. Go ahead.
[Andreottola]: I would also like the group to consider adding something to the letter regarding, you know, members of this committee as individuals, you know, the memos and emails that come out, you know, from us saying, you know, that we have no opinion and we shouldn't speak on the topic. I agree with it, but I'd also like something, you know, about, you know, us being able to, you know, talk about this as private citizens as well. You know, I kind of feel muzzled, you know, and I don't know if there's any way of that latter, including something that would free people from the committee to speak as individuals.
[Laurel Siegel]: I can defer possibly to our friends from the Collins Center here, but you have your own individual legal rights to weigh in on matters, notwithstanding the fact that you're a part of this committee. With respect to this letter, the letter would be coming from us as a committee, not from us as individuals, and so I'm not I'm not sure of the appropriateness of including that there, but, um, you know, Anthony, if you have any thoughts on just, you know, reassuring the other Anthony as to his ability to still, you know, uh, weigh in as a, as an individual resident.
[Anthony Ivan Wilson]: Uh, no, I think you covered it pretty well.
[Laurel Siegel]: Okay. Um, Mike, do you still have your hand raised or, or raised again, or is it just still up from before? It looks like it's still up from before. Okay, so we had a motion and a second. Do we have any further discussion on the motion to approve the statement and have it put on the city record? Okay, then all in favor of doing so?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Laurel Siegel]: Anybody opposed? All right, thank you, everybody. I'm gonna turn this now over to Milbaugh for the next section.
[Milva McDonald]: Great. Okay. We have a public information session coming up on June 8th. Oh, wait, before we get into that, we wanted to mention that we are gonna try to set up meetings with city officials in the coming weeks. We're in the process of creating materials, just guidance, questions, things like that. Other than elected officials, if anybody has any thoughts on city officials that might be important for us to talk with, we'd love to hear ideas on that. If anybody has thoughts, can think about it. Or if you have any ideas now, that would be great. Ron?
[Ron Giovino]: But could you just explain what you see the processes is it like the city council be in a room with us or the school committee will be in a room with us or the one thing I'm, I'm thinking about is number one, those meetings will need to be public I assume. And number two is, are we going to have them all in the same room or. How do you envision, and the other person I would add to that list of department heads, they may have a process that they need to have changed, so there may be value in having department heads do it as well.
[Milva McDonald]: No, we're talking about meeting just a couple, two or three committee members with individual city officials to get their, mostly to listen and ask questions and listen to what their thoughts are. have to, we would not make it with the whole council. Matt?
[Matt Leming]: Yeah, I just wanted to know if this would include, if this could potentially include like former city officials, like people who might've been around for a long time, but don't currently work for the city, but still have a lot of experience in the matter.
[Milva McDonald]: Possibly, if you have thoughts of anybody in particular, let us know. We'll start compiling a list. Gene?
[Jean Zotter]: If you're taking a list of people we should reach out to, I think we should. I don't know if it's the budget person CFO, I don't know if they're called CFO. There's a whole budget section. And also the city clerk. So those are a couple people we, I think we should include.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay, great. Eunice? Superintendent and any, you know, finance people. I don't think that they have a finance person on staff right now. We left a while ago, but maybe whoever's in the acting capacity. And then maybe just to get a little bit more sense of history, some former elected officials that, you know, to, you know, go along with, you know, I think what Matt said, you know, some, you know, long tenured former elected officials to get a history, especially some of those who went through the charter change the last time as well. Some pitfalls and things like that, maybe they can help us, you know, get through it a little bit more smoothly.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, great. In terms of conducting these interviews, We'll be sort of trying to gauge interest on the part of the committee members. We'll probably create some sort of sheets for that, but just throwing it out. Is there interest on the part of committee members to conduct the interviews? How many do we have that are interested in that? Great, okay. So we'll be putting that together very soon. You'll be hearing more about that.
[Unidentified]: Any other thoughts on that before we move on?
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. June 8th, our first public information session. We have a subcommittee that's planning and we're meeting on Monday. And if anybody else wants to jump in on that, you're welcome. I guess we have a draft slide presentation we're preparing. First, I'd like to just ask how many committee members are planning to be there on June 8th? Okay, great. Does anybody have interest in participating in the presentation? We're gonna sort of take turns presenting some of the slides and the material. Okay, um, we will we might need volunteers to run tech we're still looking into how that's going to work because we need to run zoom and hopefully we're going to also be on metric community media. We want to create some interactive materials that people can sort of engage with. So if anybody has ideas on that or is willing to volunteer to help with that, anybody available?
[Danielle Balocca]: Can you say what time the planning meeting is?
[Milva McDonald]: It's at 2 in the afternoon, but it could be changed if you wanted to come and we could wiggle that time. Thank you. Okay. Okay, so I guess after we have the planning meeting on Monday, we may be coming up with a more specific list of tasks and we can put it out and see if anybody is available for those. We also are going to maybe need some help with publicity because we want to get as big of a turnout as we can. Something else to think about. We have newsletter blurbs written and We have the flyers as well.
[Ron Giovino]: Ron, I just want to say that these planning meetings have been one of the most fun meetings I've ever attended in the city so everybody should really want to come.
[Milva McDonald]: Great. Okay, so we also have other community events that we are trying to participate in. present at the farmers market, other city events. And has anybody taken a look at the Google signup sheets for those?
[Jean Zotter]: I signed up, I think, for something.
[Milva McDonald]: Great. It would be great if more people could look at that. And we may also be planning other events. For instance, we want to do an ice cream social, just very informal, maybe in July, we'll see. maybe in Medford Square in a park and just invite people to come and eat ice cream and we'll have materials and things like that. And we'll also be getting a survey up and running soon too, so. We also have the flyers and we have some, we have about 200 copies now, Laurel, is that right?
[Laurel Siegel]: Yeah, I had 200 copies printed today so that we could have an initial batch. I know that Frances is working on getting more copies printed as well as working on getting the translated versions for us. But just so we'd have some immediately, I went ahead and printed a couple of hundred copies. And we had circulated that distribution list and we really need folks to sign on. to helping us get these out. One of the things that I added today is actually as flyering the businesses in the different business districts. And I'm personally planning on going to Medford Square and just going around to all the businesses there to get it in the windows of the businesses. But it's really critically important that we get everybody's participation to take these flyers to different sections of the city and different types of facilities around the city.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, so if any people that can help with that, that would be awesome. Jean?
[Jean Zotter]: I signed up, but will you send out logistics, like how we get it?
[Milva McDonald]: Yes, I'll contact you about getting some flyers to you. Thank you. We also have a digital flyer too, so we can share things that way. But we want to get the paper flyers out to as many locations as we can. as well.
[Andreottola]: I'm concerned that there may be, our publicity may kind of get, there might be some confusion with the city council in their amendments and their public meetings and discussions. And I know the community is going to be confused and they're going to be getting different information from different people on two different processes and how do we communicate the difference?
[Milva McDonald]: Well, I mean, the statement was hopefully gonna play a role in that, but we're just putting out our materials and having our event and it doesn't have anything to do with what the city council is doing. And we just have to reiterate that. If anybody asks, say we're separate. We're a separate process. But I agree with you that there could be some confusion, and we'll just have to weather it, I think. Jean?
[Jean Zotter]: Does it make sense to put our statement on our website? Yes. Okay.
[Laurel Siegel]: Thank you for, uh, we, we were planning on doing that. We failed to mention that, but we're planning on, on having it added to our webpage as well.
[Andreottola]: Would it make sense to do some type of press release, even if just on social media or just somewhere where people can, you know, get an understanding that there are two separate processes going on because If the city council is just complimenting us at the meeting, say, yeah, they're doing great work and they go along with what they're doing. I would assume people think that it's all one process, especially people who just hear the word charter study and how will they know that they're two different animals? I think it's going to be important for people to understand that we're not involved in the ballot questions.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, we're definitely going to have to try to draw that line as clearly as possible. Danielle?
[Danielle Balocca]: I was wondering about putting the flyer on the public media channel, where you know how they run in between segments, just announcements, if it's something that could be up there.
[Milva McDonald]: Um, that's good idea.
[Danielle Balocca]: I have a contact there if you want me to reach out to them too.
[Milva McDonald]: That would be great. Thank you.
[Eunice Browne]: Uh, Eunice. Um, kind of along with, uh, Danielle's idea, I wonder if it would be possible for, um, you know, I know that in addition to, you know, taping all these meetings that the folks over there do, but I think that they do some other programming as well. Maybe to sit down with and do a Q&A with, I think Kevin is his station manager's name or somebody else that would be willing to volunteer to be a host of a program and have somebody, one of us come in and you know, have them question and, you know, one of us respond, and then have that, you know, broadcast, you know, both up on their website and then, you know, in their rotation of programs as well. You know, who we are and what we're doing.
[Milva McDonald]: Sure. That's also a good idea. Thank you. Maury?
[Maury Carroll]: I would suggest strongly the robocalls, of getting the word out of when the meetings are and what we're doing. That hits every house in the city just about. It's direct, it's right in there, right to their ear or right to their groin scale or anything. So to me, I find that to be very effective in things that we've asked the city to do. Different events we do in the chamber and to have robocalls. That's a good way of going.
[Laurel Siegel]: The city has said they will help us get the word out through all of their different mechanisms, the robocalls and the emails and the newsletters and the Facebook posts, everything that they do. So once we've got final details that we can provide, they have said that they'll help us promote it.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, thank you. Okay, any other thoughts or questions, Jean?
[Jean Zotter]: You might've covered this. I missed the last meeting. Are we, we talked about meeting twice a month. Is that, and I know we filled out a form.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, we tried, but it seems it was very difficult to get a date that everyone could do. And people seemed reluctant or ambivalent about meeting twice a month. So we're gonna keep meeting once a month, but we will be, It will be subcommittees that might meet more often than that. And we may go that route.
[Eunice Browne]: Once we have this forum in June, then I will assume that either, well, I guess, assuming that we're going to meet in July and August, but our next meeting after the June meeting, we'll be doing a postmortem of that meeting and figuring out where we are and what we need to do next. Should we be, then considering a replication of this meeting, the June meeting in September to capture, you know, once people kind of get back in the groove of things.
[Milva McDonald]: You mean another public information session?
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah. Yeah. Perhaps covering the same topics or maybe you know, now that we've gone through, you know, the forms of government in detail amongst ourselves, we did city council tonight, will we be doing forums in the future on sort of subsets of the entire charter? So a night, you know, regarding city council, a night regarding, you know, budget, the budget part of the charter, things like that.
[Milva McDonald]: I don't know, that would probably be a lot of, that would be a lot of events, but maybe, or, you know, we will definitely have more public information sessions, and I think one in the fall is probably a good idea, and maybe after the June session, and after our summer meetings, and by that time, we'll certainly have some survey information, and we can sort of assess what the best way to go about that is at that time.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. So, uh, public participation, um, Nova prior to that.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Laurel Siegel]: Um, so, um, I have accepted a position working for the city of Medford. Um, and while that position is not relevant specifically to the matter of the charter. Um, for the sake of the integrity of the work of this group, um, and not having any appearance of conflict, um, I have made the decision to step down from this group. Um, you know, I, many of, you know, I've been working on charter change for a long time prior to the inception of this committee. Um, so I will still be involved. I will, you know, attend the meetings as a, uh, as a lay public person. Um, I'm happy to volunteer as you need volunteers. I'm still happy to flyer Medford square. Um, but after a lot of consideration, I just felt it was particularly, um, continuing to be a co-chair of this group while being employed by the city. Um, I wasn't feeling that that was an appropriate place to be. So, um, but I'm excited for the work that this group is ultimately going to do. I think it can make a big impact on our city. So thank you everybody.
[Milva McDonald]: Thank you, Laurel. Congratulations on the job and we'll definitely miss your presence here, but.
[Maury Carroll]: Thank you. Nice job as always. Thank you.
[Eunice Browne]: Lots to this group, Laurel.
[Maury Carroll]: Thank you. Thank you.
[Eunice Browne]: What are you going to be doing?
[Laurel Siegel]: I'm going to be managing the community development block grant funds for the city.
[Andreottola]: Oh, wow. Congratulations.
[Laurel Siegel]: Thank you. Thank you.
[Andreottola]: That's a good one. Good job.
[Laurel Siegel]: Thank you.
[Eunice Browne]: So will, uh, will the mayor be replacing you with somebody else from the pool of candidates?
[Laurel Siegel]: There is discussion of that, but we don't yet know. Um, so. Um, you know, certainly she's aware of my decision, so, um, I know it's being considered.
[Unidentified]: Okay.
[Milva McDonald]: Um, we can open it up to public participation now. Is there anyone from the public who would like to speak or ask a question, make a comment?
[Unidentified]: I don't think I see any hands. Okay.
[Milva McDonald]: I guess we can, does anybody want to make a motion to adjourn?
[SPEAKER_13]: Make a motion to adjourn. Second.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. All in favor. Recording stopped. All right. Thank you, everyone.
[Unidentified]: Good night. Good night, everyone.
[Jean Zotter]: Bye.
|
total time: 0.72 minutes total words: 67 |
total time: 8.47 minutes total words: 686 |
||