[Milva McDonald]: All right. Welcome, everyone, to the May 2nd, 2024 meeting of the Medford Charter Study Committee. Our first order of business is to review and accept the minutes from April 18th. Did everyone have a chance to see them?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: They looked good. Motion to accept. Second.
[Milva McDonald]: All in favor? Aye. Okay. Great. All right, then we can dive right in. Oh, OK, public participation. So Ron was unable to come, but I don't know if you all had a chance to look at. He was revising his proposal. And rather than proposing a committee to research the topic of including public participation, He is suggesting an addition to the preamble and you have a chance to look at it. I did. Okay, so we can open discussion on that.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I think as a statement of intent, it's fine. I'm not sure that right now, either the school committee or the city council would say, well, we do that anyway. But it certainly puts forth a statement saying it's of concern to us.
[Unidentified]: Go ahead.
[David Zabner]: I think in a preamble that is in general, very broad and a statement, I think of generic values. I think it sticks out pretty weird, just like the writer brain. And so I'm not really sure that this is where it goes. And I also, as I understand it, there are. very much on purpose, particular meetings, which can be private. Uh, you know, I don't understand open meeting.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, executive session and things like that.
[David Zabner]: And this seems like it pretty immediately creates some tension with that kind of thing. Um,
[Milva McDonald]: It does, I think that it does say public city meetings. So I, cause I thought of that as well. And it does say public city meetings. And I think by definition, those kinds of meetings are not public. So I think, but.
[David Zabner]: I guess in the end, what I'll just say is that I I'm personally against the inclusion of that. It doesn't strike me as necessary or appropriate at the very least in this section, possibly in general.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Okay. So someplace else where we could put it.
[David Zabner]: I mean, I think if it's, if what we're talking about here is city meetings about like, I think you could certainly stick it in a two, three or eight. Um, or the charter, the school committee section or the city council section two or an eight and just kind of eight, I think is the public.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, we're going to be looking at, hopefully we're going to be looking at article eight tonight, but we'll say, um, so just sort of a statement of intent in article eight, uh, possibly. Okay. Gene.
[Jean Zotter]: Excuse me. I was the one that suggested Ron consider this instead of. Creating rules around the meetings. You know, like how many minutes people have to speak and stuff for the Charter. So. I, I, I think it, I think it to me it fits here. I I had a concern about strongly. Because we don't strongly believe other, I don't know, the lawyer in me was like, sometimes when you put modifiers like strongly on something, then people think that's more important than other things. So I was a little concerned that strongly believe, when we don't strongly believe in equity, inclusivity, or civic engagement, that piece stuck out to me is sort of highlighting one piece of the preamble, not the other pieces. But overall, I'm okay with the statement.
[Milva McDonald]: I actually had it on my, that was one of my proposals was to delete strongly. So I hear you.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Melva, can you put it up as we're talking? I read it earlier, but I didn't print it.
[Milva McDonald]: Arne, I got everything ready to put up, and I think I didn't get that. But let me see. I should be able to. While I'm fetching it, Eunice, I think you had your hand up.
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah. Just put it up. Oh, thank you. Yeah. I think that anything that is some sort of value statement or a suggestion like this, I think really is pretty watered down. You know, I, I don't think that. I think all this stuff in the preamble is certainly nice to have. I don't think anybody is going to give it a whole lot of consideration. Quite frankly, I think if. Unless we are legislating something within the charter, like we are legislating mostly everything else, like, you know, we have, you know, Councilors and school committee members will have, you know, two-year terms. The mayor has a four-year term, term limits. You know, unless we're putting something in, that is a specific requirement that this is how our city government works. I really think it means nothing. I think if you were to put this, if this charter with this statement or a similar statement in it, whether it be in the preamble or any other place within, as Daveed might suggest, where we strongly believe that public participation matters basically, Is what it's saying without specific. Requirements for it if this if this charter were to pass tomorrow and go into law next week. With that in it, does anybody really think that the public engagement situation in Medford would change in any meaningful way? I don't. I think that unless we put in specifics of how our elected officials are to behave and adhere to, then anything like this means absolutely nothing. So.
[Milva McDonald]: Can I say something? Anthony, is that you?
[Andreottola]: Yes, it's me.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, Anthony, and then Phyllis.
[Andreottola]: I kind of agree with Eunice in the sense that, you know, to kind of put this language in without having the ability to kind of have any real teeth is really unnecessary. I think we've already finalized the preamble and to add this language just to kind of make a statement to the city council is, is unnecessary. I mean, uh, city council makes the rules. Uh, school committee makes the rules, how they operate and how they conduct themselves. It doesn't need to be in the charter. Uh, you know, should we expect the city council and the school committee to, you know, allow for public participation? Uh, yeah. And, and they have, and they, are and they have rules and they'll modify them. The next city council might change it back to five minutes or 10 minutes or maybe change it to one minute. That's really up to them. I don't think it belongs in the charter. The charter is the kind of, you know, the framework. But they're the elected officials. And this is, you know, the ball is in their court at that point. It's their meetings. And I don't think it needs to be in the charter. And that's just the way I feel.
[Milva McDonald]: Thank you. Phyllis. She's muted. Oh, sorry. Hang on, Phyllis. Wait a minute. You're muted. Oh, I'm sorry. I thought I had muted you. I thought I had muted you, co-host. I'm really sorry.
[Phyllis Morrison]: That's OK. But it said that I couldn't unmute myself. You had to do it. You should be fine. I don't think the statement belongs in there at all. I see no reason for it. I think the statement before it is just perfect. I agree. Let them run their own meetings. Let them do that the way they do. We are not supposed to be micromanaging anybody. Before that sentence that you read, just I saw highlighted, I think we just leave it there. I really don't agree that that should be included.
[Milva McDonald]: OK, Aubrey.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I think I'm aligned with most of you with not including this, but I do see places where we have values that are more broad that might include this. So I feel like even without this red sentence that is like wishing to participate fully in a government that's responsive and serves residents needs might cover the red sentence.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah. So, I'm sorry, I just want to make sure I understand what you're saying. You're saying you think that it already includes this, we include this in the preamble already with the language that's there. Okay. Daveed?
[David Zabner]: I'd like to make a motion to reject this edit.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, so we're going to, okay, that's, and Anthony Seconds?
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. So a yes vote means that we do not want to include this in the preamble. And a no vote means that we may want to include it as is or edited. Okay.
[Eunice Browne]: Eunice. Just to reiterate and to make myself perfectly clear, I will vote to include it because it's better than nothing, which seems to be the alternative and seems to be the wish here. But I'll be clear that I think that whatever should be in the charter has to be far more specific and has to legislate, and yes, micromanage. I'll say it, micromanage how public participation is Handled by our elected bodies because I don't think it's being handled properly. Uh, just this week, the community was silenced once again at a meeting. So. I will vote to include it because basically it's. Better than nothing, but. In my view that. Just like all of the other stuff that we have put in the charter that are basically requirements for how. government is handled, that something more should be in here to legislate how they work with public participation. So, that's my view.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, thank you. So, that is a no vote in the way this motion is configured. Paula?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I'm going to vote yes, not to include it, but I am open to trying to figure out where else to include something. I don't think it belongs here, but I think it belongs.
[Jean Zotter]: Yes. Jean? I'm going to vote no, because I recommended Ron do this, and he did it, and I'm going to stick with him. Phyllis? Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Daveed?
[Andreottola]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Anthony.
[Andreottola]: Just to clarify, yes means not to include it, is that correct?
[Milva McDonald]: Yes, that is correct. Yes. Okay, so that's a yes. I will also vote no. So this motion carries. So we voted not to include this in the preamble. There was talk of potentially including it somewhere else. If anybody wants to follow up on that and make a proposal at the next meeting, feel free. But right now, we're going to move on to our next agenda item, which is school committee. Article four. So because there's so much material in here, I thought it would be, you know, if we broke it up, it would make it a little easier. So I thought we could start by with the basic composition. Let me put it up on the screen. And have you all reviewed the document?
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: And also, we had some notes on it from the call-in center as well. OK. So the way that we're working this is to, if people have a specific proposal that they want to make on this text, the floor is open.
[David Zabner]: So I didn't really get to do a good job reading through it before this. But my understanding was that like the one thing it seemed like everybody was in agreement on in terms of our surveys, in terms of talking to city councilors, was removing the mayor from the school committee.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, I do. I want to get to that. But I want to do composition first, because mayor's role is next. Sorry, David.
[David Zabner]: Oh, I was just looking at all of 418.
[Milva McDonald]: That's OK. That's OK. So I wanted to just see if everybody was in agreement about the composition. And then I have mayor's role, and then term of office, and then kind of the remaining text. Is that OK? Sure. OK. So composition, what's been suggested is what you see. Jean, you have a comment?
[Jean Zotter]: I think I'm fine with the combined wards, so four combined wards. And the call and center feedback is that we have to name the wards. Yes. I think we have to be careful that we don't violate voting rights law by diluting a ward that is majority minority or so that that's the only thing that I just haven't I don't know if Lowell or other cities did Lowell combine
[Milva McDonald]: The only ones I know of that have done this are Lowell and Worcester, and they did both hire consultants to divide up the wards. They were both dealing with lawsuits, so they were considering that kind of thing, the composition of the wards, in addition to just the legal questions, which we would have to consider that they have to be contiguous and they have to be roughly equal in population.
[Jean Zotter]: Sorry, go ahead. Can I continue? Yeah, go ahead. Sorry. Because we know we have one minority majority ward. And so if you combine it, it's diluting that ward. I just don't know what the impact of that would be. This is something we should consider, I guess, before we decide on that.
[Milva McDonald]: No, thank you for that point. Paulette, did you want to say something because you were part of the process?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes, so I just want to back up a little bit and explain why we got to this. Right now, everybody's at large. Lots of concern from many people at large. So if we went the other way, which of course is an option, and like the city council, do one from every ward, the concern was that there was not necessarily We didn't feel as secure that it would break out as evenly, that there would be people in every ward who was interested being in the school committee. It's a little bit more defined interest. So for that reason, and also looking at what the two cities did that were faced with the lawsuits. And once we received the information about the lawsuits, when we saw the second one with Worcester, we said, OK, we're going to have to do something different. It's only a matter of time before this would be raised in Medford. I absolutely believe it would be easier to just say, OK, one from every ward. I personally don't understand why the Collins Center said we, this committee, needs to identify it. We are suggesting that this is the ideal way to go about it. We received a—Ron wrote the elections committee. We had included that, which said, absolutely, we can do this. It certainly is not my intent, personally, that I or the subcommittee would be have the expertise to go about and define the boards. We're saying, look, we think ideally this is the way it should go. And then there are going to be people who are much more knowledgeable about this stuff than we are to make that happen. So when I saw Collin's note, I was kind of like, wait a second.
[Milva McDonald]: I think what they're saying is that what, so we're, you know, one of the decisions we made was to create a draft charter and any, if this were to be implemented, the awards would have to be defined in the charter. And since we're creating a draft charter, I think that's what they mean. It is possible that we could leave it blank and leave an addendum and say somebody else will have to figure this out, but... Well, it also might change over time. Yeah, but they have to be defined, and I think they do have to be defined in the charter.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So what if they change? What if the population changes?
[Milva McDonald]: Well, then the number of wards changed. And then that would have to change, I imagine, that section of the charter.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Right. So if it has to change, wouldn't you put a sentence in something to the effect of saying the composition of the wards would be determined by x and x seeking outside help or whatever the city council would, you know, I mean, I just can't see that we are going to have the expertise to say, I think it should be Ward 1 and Ward 5 and Ward 3 and Ward 7. I mean, that doesn't make any sense to me.
[Milva McDonald]: Well, that's why Worcester and Lowell hired consultants, I think.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: And if you're uncomfortable, I mean, if the group overall is saying, well, it might be the best way, but we're just, we're not comfortable with it. Well, that's fine. I mean, we went through a process of discussion, belabored discussion, I should say, to come up with this. It's not the easiest one. And because of that, also, it follows through in terms of, you know, if someone leaves a seat, whatever, there's more language that's more complicated. So if people want to reject it on the basis of saying, oh, it's just too complicated. But on the other hand, you charged us with trying to come up with what would be the best. for ensuring that there was a school committee that was both functional and representative.
[Milva McDonald]: Yep.
[David Zabner]: One suggestion I think that could make all of this much simpler is simply to put in a very well-defined, relatively easy, but not trivial method for changing which wards it is, right? So we say, you know, those wards may be changed by like a special act of the council or something.
[Milva McDonald]: I don't think that will align with law. I don't think it would.
[Andreottola]: I'm sorry, only be redistrict every 10 years. It's it's a very.
[David Zabner]: Well, so maybe maybe 10 years when the redistricting happens, you give the city council a choice. Either way, it seems like. there must be some way that we can choose which wards they are now and leave a straightforward, well-defined way for somebody to change those wards going forward without having to amend the Charter, is all I'm suggesting. Yeah, I wouldn't give the city council the ability to change that because it maybe the school committee maybe you know the school committee in Maybe it's like the school committee the mayor and the city council all have to agree on it.
[Milva McDonald]: I don't know i'm not sure that would fly either because um making that that would be A change the kind of change to the charter that I don't think could be done that way I think it would it would have to follow a more strict uh process um
[Andreottola]: It also would involve the state because, you know, it also involves, you know, a state reps and state senators. It's they go by the same words. So we have to it's not up to the city at all. It's really up to the state.
[David Zabner]: So I'm saying which words are combined. Seems like it should be relatively easy. But you all clearly understand the law and the multiple layers here better.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, theoretically, the wards are all about the same population. So, you know, contiguous wards makes the most sense. I still would hesitate to suggest that. I would think that if we're going to put this in, it would require an expert coming in. I mean, all we did was we found out that this was definitely in our purview to say this. But apart from that, to me, they're clearly then saying that these will be created by outside expertise. OK, Aubrey?
[Maria D'Orsi]: Can you help me understand when in the process we would have to have that final decision?
[Milva McDonald]: Well, Ideally, it would be part of the draft that we would submit if we're, you know, I mean, we could, I mean, we can talk to the call-in center about this, and we could submit it as a recommendation and then leave it in the hands of somebody else to decide, possibly, and just say this is what we recommend, but we, But we feel that it should be decided by somebody who has the knowledge. Because the other question I would like to ask the Collins Center is, we know that there are cities that have done this. We know of two. I think there might be three. But I don't know, you know, at the Statehouse how they will receive it. Like what, so I would like to find out, you know, is the Statehouse going to want to see, okay, we want to see documentation that you combine these wards in alignment with the law, for example. That's something, you know, that we would, but we can look at that down the road. Jean?
[Jean Zotter]: Well, one thing I was thinking is we have, three elementary schools. I was wondering if you put the ward maps over where they draw their students from, because that seems like that would be a place you could start. Because those are contiguous, and there's more sense of community by your elementary school, for the most part. And so you could have three combined wards to go with the elementary schools. That's just one thought I was having.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: There's four elementary schools.
[Jean Zotter]: Oh, there's four. Who am I leaving out? Brooks? Probably the McGlynn. Oh, the McGlynn, okay, so there's four.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: But they do not break evenly in any group. We started out by looking at that.
[Jean Zotter]: You did, okay. Yep. But they don't overlap with the ward maps evenly?
[Andreottola]: So if the children don't go to class and they're necessarily in the area, you know, there might be someone at the Brooks from East Medford and yeah, you know, so it.
[Jean Zotter]: I know that.
[Andreottola]: It gets real complicated.
[Jean Zotter]: But it's mostly neighborhood. I mean, I sent my son to a school that was not in the assigned school. But most of the kids in the neighborhood went to the Roberts.
[SPEAKER_02]: But who would you say who would be in it?
[Jean Zotter]: Yeah, but these aren't precise things. At my ward, the combined ward person would still be around the Roberts, even though I live here. Like I'm not looking for, but it sounds like you already looked at that, Paulette, and it didn't.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I don't think tying it to the schools really work, because if you go a little bit further, you've got the McGlynn Middle School right next to the McGlynn Elementary. So you've got that one. Those wards have two schools, while others would not have any. And I mean, the reason why I always why I argued for at large was because it meant that every school committee member was responsible for every student, no matter where they went to school. OK, now I've moved as a part of this process and said, OK, every school committee member will still represent every member of this community. I am fearful that some will think, well, this is the school in my ward, so that's, you know, I mean, that's a concern. But we're going to be magnanimous and believe that all people are doing it for all students. You know, again, the trip up for going to just ward representation was right now, for example, I think it's four or five school committee members all live in the same ward right now. And it doesn't break evenly. But it would be easier. There's no doubt about it that it would be easier. We just couldn't guarantee from our discussions or thoughts. I know in Somerville, they have ward representation, and it does work. So maybe people step up. You know, the concern usually is that people who are running for school committee have very particular interest in education. And the thing, of course, that we don't want to have happen is people running because they think, oh, boy, I can go collect that stipend.
[SPEAKER_11]: Can I ask you a question, please? Sure, go ahead.
[Andreottola]: As part of your consideration, did you ever look into having, instead of being elected to, say, a district that, say, the school committee would assign people to a school, like, you know what I mean, kind of let, you know, like, have like a process within the school committee to say, you know, you're in charge of zone A, you're B, you're C, so they would represent, you know, they would be like the go-to people for the people from that district, so. you know, kind of on something that the city council would decide rather than, you know, have it be part of the election. Because the reason I'm saying that is because I understand what you're trying to do, and I agree with it. But, you know, if you do these districts for a school committee, but we don't do them for city council, Now you're going to have ward elections and district elections. And maybe, you know, there's a preliminary election in the ward here or a district there and, you know, not elections in other areas. I think it would make it more confusing. I don't know if having like it just be assigned by the school committee. I'm the West Medford School Committee person and somebody else is the East Medford School Committee representative and have them delegate who that person is.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: The budget of the schools doesn't talk, it's for the whole school system. And the one thing that you really don't want to have on the school committee, at all potential costs, is you don't want to have people identifying with one school over another, one set of kids over the other. You want every one of your elected school committee members to care the same about the kid at the Missituk versus the kid at the McGlynn or the kid at the Brooks or the kid at the high school. And, you know, Anthony, to answer you, I can only say, gee, they managed to figure it out in Lowell and they managed to figure it out in Worcester. Yes, we might have to pay to figure it out. But if we're redoing this and you're asking us what's the ideal, this is what we think the ideal is. Really, I see the committee either saying, no, we don't wanna deal with that at all or we're just gonna go do the exact same thing that the city councilors do and we don't care what the distinction is between the two bodies.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, I wanna hear from Aubrey and then I think it might be a good time to just sort of take a vote on the committee to see where we stand on this particular configuration, this composition. Go ahead, Aubrey.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I just wanted to share a resource because I know at one point we made a map. So it was in the drive and I can... Yeah, I'll start my share.
[Milva McDonald]: Go ahead.
[Maria D'Orsi]: Can you see?
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah.
[Maria D'Orsi]: So the black dots are schools. and then the wards. It's 8-1 and 8-2, but.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah.
[Phyllis Morrison]: So there's a whole swath of the city that doesn't have a school in it.
[Maria D'Orsi]: And 2 and close. These would be the same old part.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Very close, yeah.
[Milva McDonald]: OK, so I want us to see where we're at with this. Hi, Danielle, Danielle just arrived. We're about to, I mean, first of all, let me just say, is there anybody who wants to propose an alternate composition for the school committee? David.
[David Zabner]: But only in so far as I would add a third at large candidate to replace the mayor, but we can talk about that when we move on to the mayor's bit if that makes sense.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. So, um, So since nobody has proposed an alternate composition, I think that I don't necessarily, I think we're going to end up sort of voting on the whole text. I don't think we need to actually vote because there's no changes that anybody is proposing. I think in terms of, how to write this into the charter when we do the drafting. The Collins Center can help us with that. And maybe we can talk to the Collins Center about if there are resources that can help us figure out how to combine the awards or whether it's better to leave them, sort of just leave this as a recommendation. Okay.
[Danielle Balocca]: Since everybody seems to be in agreement on that, let's move on to... Sorry, Mova. So everyone's agreeing to the combined awards idea? Yes, unless you have something to say. I did miss it, but the question, like what you already talked about, so I apologize, but last week my question was, or the thought that I had was, which is probably what you just went over, but how they would be combined and what that would mean in terms of like demographic representation, but probably what you...
[Milva McDonald]: They would have to be that the question of how they would be combined is still up there, but they would have to be contiguous and they would have to be equal, roughly equal in population. That's all we know for sure.
[Danielle Balocca]: Yeah, I guess my only concern about that would be like other demographic considerations. Yeah.
[David Zabner]: We just spent a lot of time talking about that. And the answer is, I think, by Massachusetts law, those things do have to be taken into account. It, I think, is going to remain a question mark on this going forward.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Yeah, Danielle, we talked about perhaps other people that were in better positions to make these determinations could be consulted for on that too.
[Danielle Balocca]: Yeah, thank you.
[Milva McDonald]: Yep. Okay, so the next is the mayor's role on the school committee. Does anybody have any comments about that section of the document?
[David Zabner]: Yeah, I mean, like I was saying earlier, it seems like pretty universally, according to our survey, according to the city councilors I've talked to, I think even, I don't know if I've had a chat with the mayor, but I seem to remember somebody saying the mayor doesn't really want to be on the school committee. So don't let me make things up.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[David Zabner]: To me, it seems like the mayor has enough work as the mayor. In addition, like just for me personally, I don't think the mayor should be on the school committee beyond the My understanding is there's some rule where like the mayor is in some way on all of the city's committees. I don't quite understand exactly what the legalities are of that, but I don't think the mayor should be on the school committee. I certainly don't think the mayor should be the chair of the school committee. I think the mayor has enough work as mayor, and I don't think we need to give them a second job.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, thank you, Gene.
[Jean Zotter]: We talked about this, but I still don't completely understand the reasoning behind having the mayor continue to be the chair in the proposal. I know the thought was that you want the mayor engaged in the school, which I agree, and I think the mayor should be on the school committee. I'm just not convinced the mayor needs to be the chair, and I question whether if the mayor's on the school committee, why the mayor wouldn't be engaged? Because they would have to attend the meetings. And so do we know that if the mayor's not in charge, the mayor won't be engaged? That seems like a negative assumption about the mayor's engagement in the school system. So that part I don't completely understand. I still don't completely understand why the mayor needs to be the chair and the committee's thinking that worked this out. I'd love to hear more from the committee and your thinking on that.
[Milva McDonald]: I'll let Aminous take it away.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So I think that, first of all, I'm going to do a little history lesson back to 1982, Proposition two and a half. And at that time, there was no mayor on the school committee. and there was a city manager. And for those of you who are old enough, Proposition 2.5 devastated the school systems, and Medford was hit extremely hard with a huge amount of layoffs. And part of the problem was that the manager at the time had no connection to The schools did not attend meetings, wasn't connected. You know, when you're faced with layoffs, boy, it's a lot easier to lay off people and who you don't know and who you're not in front of. And it took not years, but decades to overcome and make up for the difficulty with Proposition two and a half. So that's just a historical piece. which really underscored the reason why the mayor should be a central figure. I did interview all three mayors. And, you know, the understandably, I know all of them. And so we could do a lot of chit chat. They didn't necessarily want to be quoted word for word. All three of them said they saw it at first. Admittedly, being on the school committee, but they all three told me that it was the most important role. It was an extremely important role for them, and they were so glad that they were part of it because they really understood the issues. And remember that the school budget is the largest proportion of the city budget. And, you know, again, it's very difficult because I don't want, there's no quotes here, but you know, when you're the head of something and you're there and you're the chair of the meeting, you show up. Would it be easier, would it be easier not to show up if you weren't the head? Well, so I'll leave that to your just thinking about, but that's one of the places where we went. Now, the other piece of the discussion is some practical levels of when the mayor is, everybody thinks it's so much more work for the mayor and it is a meeting. On the other hand, as a citizen, if I want to see my mayor in public, I know that twice a month, I can go turn on the TV and watch my mayor in public. And frankly, the rest of the time, when do you see the mayor? When do you see the mayor working? So just that is an opportunity for every citizen to get to see the mayor. Who's the mayor? Oh, turn on the TV on Monday night. There's the mayor and this is how she or she or they are running the city. Just whatever. For me, the bottom line was the budgets and access. When the mayor was at the meeting and running the meeting, and again, the superintendent puts together the agenda. And so the mayor isn't doing that work. That's the work of the superintendent and the staff. Certainly, the mayor would oversee it, would take a look at it saying, hey, what's on the agenda today or tonight and what's coming up? But it's not that that adds a nuts and bolts task for the mayor. So yes, the mayor has to attend the two weekly meetings, I mean, monthly meetings. And if the mayor cannot attend, which happens sometimes, the vice chair steps into the place. None of the three mayors who I spoke to found that onerous or difficult, and they thought it gave them incredible access. As a member of the school committee, it was the opportunity for the mayor to hear with his or her ears what the issues were, and to also hear what the various different, the six other school committee members were bringing forth in our discussion. So it's incredibly valuable. And that's clearly why I feel so strongly about the mayor being in that role.
[Milva McDonald]: Thank you. Eunice.
[Eunice Browne]: Like many of you, I thought as well that the mayor should not be, at least not the chair of the school committee. And that was my stance until we heard from the three mayors, our current mayor and the past two mayors, who, as Paulette stated, she so kindly went out and spoke with at length. And each of them Pretty strongly felt that they enjoyed being on the school committee and they felt it was valuable for them and they wanted to be there and that's what. finally swayed me to the fact that it was a good idea. Um, I believe that the, um, notes, um, uh, from all of the meetings that our school committee group had, um, and I'll attribute, I think most of those to, if not all to Paulette's great work, um, are in our drive. So you can go back and see what they had to say. But that's what swayed me. But what I will ask, and it might be a running theme of mine as we run through all of these different articles, is are we responding to the community in the surveys that we received and so forth? What is it that the community wanted? And I know we've done our due diligence on every imaginable topic and every possible article, and we've all done great work. But what is it that the community wants, and are we responding to them? So that would be one question that I may bring up consistently is, are we giving the community what they want? Thank you. I definitely was, my opinion was definitely swayed.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Phyllis. I always thought that the mayor should be part of the school committee, but I had great objection to the mayor being the chair of the school committee because I didn't think that the mayor, you know, necessarily had an educational background. that would make him or her the perfect person to do this. When I found out that it was the superintendent who was setting the agenda and addressing, bring forth the needs that need to be addressed, then that made much more sense to me. And that is why, you know, I have come around to saying that, yeah, I think that the mayor probably is best suited as not only, definitely as a member, of the committee. But my strong and adamant opposition to it has been changed to I agree that the person that's mayor should be the chair of that committee based on lots of things. But for me, the most important was that the educational person was the one setting the agenda of bringing forth the agenda and bringing forth the matters that had to be attended to in the priority priority that they needed to be attended to. So
[Milva McDonald]: Thank you, Phyllis. Aubrey, did you want to share as well?
[Maria D'Orsi]: This is a small comment. I think something about being the chair, the way that the meetings work, and Paula helped me here, is that deliberations happen and the chair would go last.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes, that is, in terms of the voting, the mayor traditionally votes last. And I don't know where that comes from, but that's the way it's always been. It's alphabetical roll call.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, David, you have another comment?
[Andreottola]: I'm sorry.
[Phyllis Morrison]: I think you're muted, David. You're muted. You're muted, David.
[David Zabner]: Sorry, I just wanted to share the survey. Somebody brought up that they wanted to see the results. We got 56% of people surveyed said that they felt that the mayor should not be the chairperson of the school committee. With a further like 23% saying that they weren't sure or had no opinion. And so if we remove those people, it's like very nearly three to one against the mayor being chairperson.
[Maria D'Orsi]: You can't just remove those people. Yeah, you can't.
[David Zabner]: That's fine. Either way, I don't know that we need to go with public opinion, but public opinion is certainly clear here. Can I say something?
[Unidentified]: Go ahead.
[Andreottola]: Yeah. Sorry, I thought I might have been muted. I was kind of just testing myself. Just as far as the survey goes, we asked that specific question. If you ask different questions about the mayor and the school committee, you may have gotten different answers. I think you could also say that that could be just people who may have a general kind of maybe this is satisfaction but would want more uh a better school committee and and if you give them an option of of any change they might be for it i'm just saying it it was kind of a question that uh made it may have been better asked in a series of different questions uh than just you know uh should the mayor be on the school committee because i never really gave it a lot of thought and i i don't but uh when, sorry about that, but I just want to say that it's an opportunity for the citizens, for the people, the parents of the kids who may come and speak at a city council meeting to be in front of the mayor and to voice their concerns and have the mayor front and center. Our kids are the most important thing we have in this city and the mayor needs to be involved and should be, like, right in the middle. And when there are problems, she needs to be there and to hear them and to have to, you know, kind of be accountable to the parents and to the teachers and to everybody. I can't imagine if you're going to have the mayor, you might as well have her be the chair. If she votes last, if the majority of the school committee have a feeling one way, they're going to overrule the mayor. So I think it's fair. I don't think it's ever been, other than to hear it from a couple of, actually from one school committee member that Maury and I interviewed, and there really wasn't a clear reason why he didn't want the mayor. on the school committee as the chair. I specifically asked, and the only answer I got was, you know, it's too much power. And I don't see the mayor being a chair as really having any more power than any other school committee member when it comes to voting, so. I, um, I'd like to just make a motion that we, uh, that, uh, we, we move on and kind of keep it the way, uh, the way it is.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. So maybe what I, I, there may have been someone else who had their hand up and was it Jane? Um,
[Jean Zotter]: I can't see everybody's box. I did have my hand up. I was just wondering how this, sorry for all the questions, the school committee members, I thought they, I thought several of them were in favor of the keeping the mayor on the committee, but not as chair. I thought that those were the interviews that we had. Were there any that wanted to keep the mayor as chair? Any of the school committee that we interviewed?
[Milva McDonald]: Paulette, you did reach out to more school committee members. Was it something?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yes, it broke in different ways. There was committee members who wanted to keep the mayor on. I think almost all of the school committee members wanted the mayor on the school committee. Chair or not chair, I think that there was a division. One of the things I just want to add is I think that a whole lot of this charter review, you know, besides the city council becoming by ward is, oh, we've got to lessen the power of the mayor. And I think that because the mayor is visible at the school committee members, that it's easy for people to leap to, okay, I take the mayor off as the chair and I've lessened the power of the mayor. And I think what I've been trying to argue is the benefits from having the power, the mayor as on the school committee. And I'm just concerned that The way that it looks, because the mayor is there, makes it easy to focus on that role. And I've just been trying to argue what the benefits were. There were tremendous benefits as a member, having the mayor there.
[Milva McDonald]: OK, thank you. So Anthony made a motion. Do you want to reiterate that, Anthony? Can you restate it?
[Andreottola]: Well, I'd just like to make a motion to kind of accept what the subcommittee's findings were and to proceed with finding out about the ward and district stuff and calling the school committee, I guess calling it a day.
[Milva McDonald]: Well, okay, I mean, right now we're just on the mayor as chair questions. So unless somebody has a proposal that they want to change what's in here, then we can move on to- That's what I guess my motion is to move on. So does anybody have, does anybody, David?
[David Zabner]: I guess I'll go ahead and move to remove the mayor as chairperson and instead have the council or the board elect their own chair.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. So we're going to vote on this particular section. So the motion is to keep mayor on school committee, but not as chair. Is that correct?
[David Zabner]: Correct.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Paula. So really the question isn't, is not to have the mayor as chair.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, if you vote yes, then you are taking the mayor, making the mayor not be chair. A yes vote is- I'm gonna vote no.
[Andreottola]: I'm gonna vote no. It hasn't been seconded yet.
[Milva McDonald]: Oh, sorry. Somebody wanna second it?
[Jean Zotter]: I second.
[Milva McDonald]: Jean, okay. Paulette votes no. Aubrey? No. Jean?
[Jean Zotter]: Yes, if I could explain, I feel like the- No, you don't need to explain. Well, I would just like to- Okay. I just feel like people have asked us to have more balance of power and especially on this issue, so that's why I'm voting that way.
[Milva McDonald]: Thank you. Danielle?
[Danielle Balocca]: So vote of no.
[Milva McDonald]: No means mayor stays as chair. Yes means mayor stays on the committee, but not chair.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Wait, wait, did I do that right? No, wait a minute.
[Milva McDonald]: Yes. Paulette, you voted to keep the mayor as chair. Okay. And Danielle, you're voting to have the mayor not be chair.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: David.
[David Zabner]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Phyllis. No. Eunice. No. Anthony.
[Danielle Balocca]: No.
[Milva McDonald]: And I'm also going to vote no. So the language will stay as it is for that particular issue.
[Phyllis Morrison]: OK. Aubrey has her hand up. Oh, Aubrey.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I can probably keep up with them. What I saw in that survey is a lot of people who are unsure of how it works. And I feel like I could make an argument for this decision. Yeah. Thank you.
[Milva McDonald]: OK. So the other chunk that I wanted to pull out, because these are sort of fundamental to this article, was the term of office. Right now, the way it's written, the term is a two-year term, which is no change, basically. David?
[David Zabner]: Before we start on that, I saw, oh, I guess let's do term and then we can do 4-1-C, because I find that- Yeah, yeah, that's good.
[Milva McDonald]: So does anybody, Paula, go ahead.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yeah, so the term of office, we really wanted three years. We would love three years. Everybody we talked to said three years, the mayors, the school committee members, everybody said that would be ideal. We don't know how to do it. Four years. The problem with four years is people went, it feels a little long. There are advantages because you could stagger elections. We went through that. It would definitely have an upside, but people just just didn't feel comfortable with the four years. So we ended back with two years, which we don't think is ideal, but we think that it's practical, unfortunately. I'd actually like to submit a side paper on three years, so it's very difficult to work out.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. Does anybody have any comment on this or are there any proposals on the table to change this? particular aspect, the term of office, Aubrey.
[Maria D'Orsi]: To add to Paula, one of the things that helped me decide was hearing from people who said that a four year term might have discouraged them from running.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Yeah.
[Unidentified]: Okay, nobody.
[Andreottola]: One of the things about the three-year term, I agree that it would be ideal, but if the city council is a two-year term, we have to look at two as having, you know, consistent elections. And, you know, you can have, you know, basically be having an election every year, you know, if we didn't also do city council at three years.
[Milva McDonald]: I mean, I think we would have also considered three years for the city council if three-year elections were practical and feasible, but they're not because of the way elections are run and because under Massachusetts law, municipal elections and state and federal elections have to be on different ballots. So if they were at the same time, it would just present huge difficulties to the elections department. So I don't hear anybody looking to make, to change, to offer a proposal, so that's great. So let's move on now to the rest of the text. And I know, David, you had something you wanted to say.
[David Zabner]: Yeah, I saw that Aubrey has made some edits replacing the word voter with resident. I love it. But it does open up the eligibility of the school committee to non-citizens, as I understand it. that is what that change would do.
[Milva McDonald]: Let's see.
[David Zabner]: As I understand it. I think the reason we choose voter is that it makes it citizens over the age of 18. As far as I can tell, and I could very easily be wrong about this, lawyers correct me, residents could be a 12 year old immigrant kid. And I love that, but I don't think it's probably what you intended.
[Milva McDonald]: Paulette, did you want to speak?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: No, not on this. It's interesting.
[Milva McDonald]: So I don't know if that would interact with any existing laws about running for office, but that is interesting. In the other example charters that we looked at, did they say resident or voter? Do we remember?
[David Zabner]: And that's why we chose voter for Section 2 and 3 as well.
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah. I mean, I think that's a section that should have some consistency across all of our bodies. It's either president or it's voter. It's one or the other.
[Maria D'Orsi]: Aubrey, go ahead. I was going to propose the same thing, you know, just to have consistency. And I think that this was me taking notes at our last meeting, not me coming up with this.
[Milva McDonald]: OK. So we can change it back to voter and people are OK with that? Yes. Any other comments? Everybody looked at what the Collins Center had written.
[David Zabner]: I preferred resident, but I don't think that that's probably very a popular opinion. So I'll leave it at that.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay.
[Eunice Browne]: Melva, can you make the text bigger?
[Milva McDonald]: Yes. Thank you.
[Eunice Browne]: if we're going to follow along here.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Paula, do you have your hand raised or did you not just lower it from the last time?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: No, I just raised it. Again.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Okay.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yeah. Go ahead, Paula. So, my comment is on the Collins Center note for 1C eligibility. We had put in, have resided in one of the wards they represent, in one of the wards prior to submitting nomination papers, or it really should be at the time of submitting nomination papers. And they wrote when nomination papers are submitted can vary significantly. The thing is that if you're going to represent a ward, and there may be, again, some place where we have to make sure that this jives with what they wrote for the city council. For the city council, do they say in the works? I just don't remember.
[Milva McDonald]: I don't think we had this. David, do you remember? I don't think we had this as a condition for eligibility.
[David Zabner]: Yeah, we didn't include this time condition. And I have to say, the next thing I was going to bring up was that I think that this is not good.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So David, let me just ask you a question to explain this. If we're putting all this energy into saying we want people to be from the wards, OK, that they're ward representatives, but then you don't say any way of saying how long they live in the ward or when does that start or whatever, what's kind of the point? I mean, don't they have to, if they're going to represent the ward, shouldn't they be living in the ward and shouldn't there be some need to prove that?
[David Zabner]: No, I have no issue with having to live in the ward. The one year prior seems a little, first of all, just messy. Second of all, I think it kind of, one thing it seems to do is if you have lived in Medford from the day you were born and you decide to move to another ward, you can, maybe you've been on the school committee for 10 years and now you have to, you can't run. unless you time your move to happen at the appropriate time relative to elections.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Okay, so how do you make sure, or at what point, you say to a candidate, you're being elected by the ward, you need to live in the ward?
[David Zabner]: I think it's completely reasonable to say when you submit the nomination papers, you have to be a resident of the ward. I think that's super reasonable. I think that you're right.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So you just don't like the one year, but submitting. Yeah, I don't actually have any problem with that. I just and by the way, I think for a candidate submitting the nomination papers, I don't care if it's on a different date every every time. Right. It's a very clear. Well, the Collins Center question that. And to me, it's a very clear for a candidate who's running. It's a very clear mark. If you're certainly The nomination papers have your address on them? Yes.
[David Zabner]: And so the address should be in the place you're running. And I can't imagine why it would be anything else. So yeah, one thing I would remove is just, yeah.
[Milva McDonald]: So David, I mean, David, sorry. You're proposing that we remove for one year prior.
[David Zabner]: Correct.
[Milva McDonald]: I wish there was a...
[David Zabner]: And I guess, make it present tense, right? They shall reside in the ward they wish to represent when submitting nomination papers.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: And yeah, at the time that they submit nomination papers for that office.
[David Zabner]: I think that at the time is probably not necessary.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: OK, but the intent and the meaning is the same, so I don't really care when when they present when they you turn in your nomination papers when you when you submit. Your nomination papers. To the to the city to the city clerk is really.
[Milva McDonald]: What if we just say shall reside in the ward they wish to represent? Do we have to put the other part in?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yeah, as determined. Yeah, you have to say something.
[Andreottola]: Could we possibly put that it be their primary residence? Because just to think, if people know that there's an open ward or open district, then you can just say, well, I'll be a resident of that water district for the day I, you know, get my nomination papers in. And if that's the only requirement, they shall, I think it should say something about shall be a, hold the primary residence in the ward that they choose to run for or something to that effect.
[Milva McDonald]: I, to me, shall reside in the ward they wish to represent. That's what that says. And I think we could end it there, personally. Okay.
[Jean Zotter]: Can we just do what we did for the city council, have the same language? Have them mirror each other?
[Milva McDonald]: Yes, and we'd have to go back and check that.
[David Zabner]: Yeah, so the way we did this for the city council is we said that a ward councillor shall be a voter in the ward from which election is sought.
[Milva McDonald]: Oh, that's actually even more streamlined. Because you can't be a voter there if you don't live there, right? That's good. So Aubrey, you're still making notes. Can you just make a note to mirror city council language? And then you can fix that later.
[Andreottola]: Can I ask a silly question? Do you have to be a voter to run for office?
[David Zabner]: But that's what we just discussed. I suggested that it would be lovely to not make that a requirement for the school board, but I'm not going to really suggest that.
[Danielle Balocca]: Does voter mean like that you have to be registered to vote?
[Jean Zotter]: You have to be registered to vote. You're registered to vote doesn't mean you have a history of voting. And that's a requirement to run for office.
[Danielle Balocca]: That's interesting.
[Andreottola]: I think it is according to the general law. Is it part of the general law?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I think that's what we need to check. Because otherwise, I mean, I know a lovely, lovely person who I wish could have multiple people over the years who I would have loved to have served with on the school committee. But I think it's a requirement under, I mean, people would say to me, I'm not a citizen. So.
[Danielle Balocca]: But you can be a citizen and not a registered voter. That's right.
[David Zabner]: I think the thing the registered voter bit does is it provides a all-in-one check that you are a citizen, a resident in the right place of voting age. It's, you know, like, it's a way of offloading all of that checking that we might want to do onto a different system.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, so do we need any more discussion on this eligibility section? We've discussed having this mirror the language that's in the city council section.
[David Zabner]: I'll say that having heard Paulette say that she might be interested in opening this up to folks who are not citizens, I would love to ask the Collins Center, hey, can we have non-citizens on the school committee? And if so, I would love to revisit this and maybe open it up if that's something that enough people would vote for.
[Jean Zotter]: I would be interested in that, but it would be weird that they can be elected, but they can't vote in local elections. Yeah, that's true. I think we would need to allow them to have voting privileges in local elections, which I would be in favor of.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Can we just leave it that we'll leave it as it is right now, but we'll check it. And if it's different, if people don't need to be citizens, we'll bring it back up?
[Milva McDonald]: That sounds like a plan. OK. Okay, any other, there were a couple of other comments, I think that the Collins Center had.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So I can address, there's another one question and I'm sorry, my picture, I think it was in four two about the chair, vice chair and secretary. And the Collins Center said, it is unusual to delegate to one individual. Is this the current practice in Medford? It is the current practice in Medford. And I mean, they could opt to change it. Some school committees that I'm knowledgeable of, they have a subcommittee and the bills are brought to the subcommittee and they do it like that, but that is not the way Medford has traditionally done it. And it is by when you're elected as secretary, that is your job. And by the way, The superintendent also, the superintendent and the department head also signs off on the bills. So it's not just the school committee member. There are three sign-offs.
[Milva McDonald]: So my take on that was that maybe it doesn't need to be in the charter, because once it's in the charter, I think, Paulette, you just said, well, somebody can vote to change it, but they can't if it's in the charter. So maybe it's one of those things that doesn't need to be in the charter. It's just a way, it's one of the things that the school committee can decide when they decide their own operating rules.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, what I wrote is unless the school committee votes to form a subcommittee, especially for reviewing the bills. So I left it as an option or as a potential. I guess, you know, one of the things is that For me, if I had had a document like this and went to the city charter when I was running for school committee and saw what I was, how it worked, it would have been great. And so for me, including that detail is helpful. But, you know, I don't I'm open to the will of the.
[Milva McDonald]: Do you think that if the school committee had a document that sort of outlined their rules and how they operate, that could have been equally as helpful?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, they do now. When I ran, they didn't. They did. So they do. But again, let's say you're not knowledgeable about the city or the school committee in particular. I mean, a lot of people have no clue. what the school committee does, but yet they've been interested in this charter review and whatever. And now all of a sudden they're sort of saying, oh, I didn't know. I didn't know that the secretary had that role. You know, so for me, it's educational as well as anything else. I mean, you know, I think it's informative.
[Milva McDonald]: What do people think about this? this particular, I guess it's really just the last sentence there that's now in purple. Thank you, Aubrey.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I mean, the sentence before that says the secretary is responsible to record the votes. Yeah. Well, you know, we talk about that we're gonna have a vice chair, and we're gonna have a secretary, what the hell does the secretary do? I mean, why wouldn't you include it? Why wouldn't you include their duties?
[Milva McDonald]: Because the charter is not something that can be changed or modified, and it's the kind of situation where they might want to change or modify some of those responsibilities, I think. But I think the other thing was that the Collins Center had the question from this language maybe whether the secretary was approving the expenditure or approving that the bill be paid.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: You know, that's that's a distinction that I'm not quite sure exactly where they're cutting it. So. I would say that the bill be paid, but right. Yeah. And again, it's not solely there isn't there are other sign offs. I mean,
[Milva McDonald]: So just the fact that there's other sign-offs to me means that this can't go in like this because it implies that the secretary has that responsibility exclusively, I think, but... Okay, well, except that you could add a clause saying, along with the designated members of the school department. Right. We could.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: You know.
[Milva McDonald]: But then are we getting more complicated than we need to be in the charter? Did somebody...
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: But, but then, you know, again I'm going to sort of argue this as we go because the Collins next ones they said oh this is more specific language than we normally see. Well, okay, I read all of those other, the other ones that were submitted by other, that are in other districts, and we can copy theirs. I'm fine with copying, you know, rubber stamping theirs. Medford, it's the same as Melrose. It's the same as whatever. It's just a rubber stamp with, you know, this clause or that clause written differently. Or do we want a charter which sort of outlines, hey, this is what we're saying. This is what our government is.
[Phyllis Morrison]: Milva, I had to switch to my phone, so I can't find my reactions on here. I can't find anything on this phone. Okay. Yeah, I'd like to say my concern is what Milva just brought up though, Paulette. If it's in the charter, can it then be changed? And that is one caution for me. That's like a big yellow flag to me. That would be my concern. I think that, you know, giving people more information about things is a wonderful thing. They have a little bit of sense of how things operate. Okay. It might eliminate some questions for them too. But if it's in the charter, Does it tie the hands of the people who may think that changes would make things run more efficiently or they may have to switch to different services or different things like that? That's my concern with keeping that in there.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So I guess then the question would be, what are the provisions for changing the charter? Exactly.
[Milva McDonald]: what we're doing right now. There's other ways as well, but there's no simple way to change the charter.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Except that it's supposed to be reviewed every 10 years and it hadn't been reviewed for 50.
[Milva McDonald]: Well, when we eventually get to that section of the charter, yeah, we'll determine what period of time we want to put in, but that still leaves a long period of time. And just because it's reviewed every 10 years, that's not the same as changing it. Right.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Anyway, so we have a secretary and that the other members voted and nobody else is bothered by the fact that it doesn't say anything about the duties of the secretary.
[Phyllis Morrison]: No, I'm not bothered by that.
[David Zabner]: I'm with you. I think if somebody has no duties you might as well remove them and and then let the the board or Sorry school committee Create the role for themselves if they so desire by their own rules I have a related question Which is, so like, as it currently works, when you say that the secretary or clerk is reviewing these bills, what happens if they say no?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So if they say no, so you pull the bill, you say, I have questions about this one. Talk to people to see whether you can get the questions answered, so you feel comfortable signing it. But if you don't, then it doesn't get paid, and there's a larger discussion. Also, at the school committee meetings, when the bills and payrolls are approved, there's also an opportunity for all school committee members to ask questions about the bills. At that point, the secretary has a role where they're saying, and along with the superintendent, but the secretary, because they've reviewed them, may remember that the $700 that was spent for pizza was because it was the senior night at whatever, and that's why there's there was so much money spent on pizza or slush or shoelaces. I mean, when you're seeing the bills, you are seeing every single bill, whether it's for shoelaces or slush or textbooks or whatever. So you certainly are asked questions.
[David Zabner]: So I'll say having heard that, I think it's completely reasonable for the charter to require some member of the committee or the committee as a whole to be reviewing all of those bills. I don't find that unreasonable at all. That's my two cents.
[Milva McDonald]: OK, let's see who else has their hand up. I do. Aubrey.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I was fine with including this, but I'm also feeling fine with removing this because the secretary will still have a sentence, the responsibility to record votes, which is, I think, an important role that we want. We're saying we want somebody to be recording the votes and to have a public availability of what's happening at these meetings for recording purposes.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I have a solution. What if we say that sentence and then say, as well as other duties prescribed by the rules and regulations of the school committee or whatever? That's good.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I think that's fine. But we don't say everything the vice chair does. We don't say everything the mayor does. And I don't think we need to say everything the secretary does. Just the key piece that they do.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: OK. I could argue back, Aubrey, that the key piece is the signing of the bills.
[Maria D'Orsi]: A lot of the other people who sign it, right?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yeah, well, the superintendent does, but it's not going to get paid until the school committee member gets to do it.
[Milva McDonald]: Can I suggest that we move this responsibility from being the secretary's responsibility to being the committee's responsibility and Is that which so I think So you're to be you're suggesting changing it from the second secretary to the committee is responsible for correct.
[David Zabner]: I
[Milva McDonald]: I guess we can look at that. I'm inclined to simply remove that sentence.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I think it works easier to remove that sentence. Yeah.
[Milva McDonald]: Do we want to vote on whether we want to remove it or are we? No, just remove it.
[Andreottola]: I think we're good. If we're being consistent to, you know, if we're going to let the city council kind of make their own rules, the city school committee needs to make their own own rules as well. You know, it's just just. The charter may not change. This charter may not change. The charter may not change. It may not change for the next 30 years. The school committee has to function. We can't tie their hands by, oh, the secretary wasn't here to sign the bill, and then no slush for the kids. And by the way, I never got any slush when I was in math for public school.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, if the secretary, just Anthony, just so you know, if the secretary isn't available because they're on vacation that week, they ask someone else in the committee to do it. I mean, it's never not done.
[Andreottola]: It has to be done. So it's part of their procedures and rules and stuff. So let them figure it out.
[David Zabner]: And I don't feel strongly, but I think it should either be secretary or clerk. As it is currently written, I think it's confusing.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, just call it secretary or clerk. I think that makes sense.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I think we should stick with secretary because clerk is what's used on the city council. Yeah, you're right.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. Aubrey, do you mind making those changes as well? Okay. Any other sections of this? I mean, I think that the other, let's see. The Collins Center also sort of had some questions about the powers and duties section. No.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Right. It says that the language in this section is far more comprehensive. And I can go back again. You know, I need to, I needed some time for my brain to kind of leave what I'd written to look, try and look at it fresh and make it simpler. Um, But to see, you know, how to not be so comprehensive, I thought being comprehensive was good. Because, you know, again, even my own members on the subcommittee, I think every one of them said, I had no idea the school committee members did that. And so I was coming from it by that point of sort of saying, boy, you know, here's a chance in our charter to outline what the school committee does. You know, I understand that people see it as a much more general document. I don't really agree, but it's not the first thing that I'll disagree on. But I need some time to look at it. I didn't have a chance to simplify it. I wanted to see where the committee was going before I spent any more time on it.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, any other thoughts about that aspect of this?
[Maria D'Orsi]: I highlighted a section that I think if we, this is the one we added from the other document. If we get the purple highlights, I think if we removed that, the rest of it is pretty parallel to what I've seen in other places.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. Eunice, did you have your hand up also?
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah. If I remember correctly from one of our subcommittee meetings, Paulette, didn't you say that this is what is registered on the Medford page of the Mass Association of School Committees?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Right. Yes. But to understand that the primary, I mean, if I were to say what are the three main duties of the school committee, it's superintendent, it's to make policy, and it's to approve the budget. Those are the three main.
[Milva McDonald]: Did we just lose Paula?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: The public relations is kind of the added one. But traditionally, a former charter, it probably has those main duties. So this is just more comprehensive.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. David?
[David Zabner]: Sorry, I think I just left my hand up there. Oh, you did?
[Milva McDonald]: Okay. So, you know, I mean, going back to the ideas about sort of what should, you know, putting Anything in the charter that can be, that is policy that maybe we want to leave open the option of changing that policy or anything like that, you probably shouldn't put in the charter, right?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, okay. So with number two, appraisal, I think we can take that one out. With number one is responsible for the development of policy.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I think that's redundant with section A below that.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: With section?
[Milva McDonald]: A. Oh, here we go.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: OK. OK, so you want to take out 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5? Okay, we can take out 1, 2, 3, and 4, and 5. I just need to make sure that it says something about the budget. Oh, it does say, okay, down on C, it does. It says all that.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: All right. So you want to take out 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 and leave in ABC. By the way, on number four, it says that the school committee shall provide timely oversight and payment of bills. So it is said that that piece is actually, it's there. All right, so why don't we do that? Does that work for everybody?
[Milva McDonald]: It makes sense to me. Yeah, me too.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: We're taking out one, two, three, four, and five. We are leaving in, please, please, a voting majority of the school committee shall, I can't read my printer, yeah, shall exercise the following powers and perform the following duties, and no individual member is empowered to act unless by vote of the school committee.
[Milva McDonald]: I think that's critical. I think it's understood.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Oh, not always, Mara Milva.
[Milva McDonald]: What is the concern?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So there's boundaries, and there are times when there are members who like to work on their own and forget that they're part of the whole. And I think it's a good reminder.
[Milva McDonald]: Can you give an example? Because what can they do outside of a meeting where they're deciding on things? I'm not sure what that means.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, speak publicly as if it's a done deal, and it's not. It's their own opinion. I mean, it's fine for them to speak as their own opinion, but it's always, it's just got to be clear.
[Milva McDonald]: I don't think that the charter can police the speech of school committee members, do you?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I'm not asking for them to police the speech. I'm putting it out there that the school committee is, you have to have a majority. Just in the same way, Milved, let's do it this way. You didn't want people to do postings that might reflect on the Charter Study Committee in some way that wasn't appropriate. Remember we had that discussion at some point?
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, I think that was less of the concern. The concern is... We speak with one voice. Well, it was more about, you know, open meeting law and things like that.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Right. Well, I think that's the same. You know, I've moved an awful lot on a lot of this stuff, so.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, I understand. I guess I also feel that it's a little vague. I, you know, empowered to act. I don't know how, you know, what does that mean exactly? Does anybody else find it vague?
[Jean Zotter]: I do. I mean, it doesn't stop what you are saying, Paulette, because empowered to act implies passing those powers listed below. And because below that are A, B, and C, which is budget, making rules, and then overseeing the superintendent.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: All right, so you want to take out the clause and no individual manager is empowered to act. So we'll just say a voting majority of the school committee shall exercise the following powers and perform the following duties. It does say a voting majority, so it is redundant in that way. OK.
[Milva McDonald]: I think that's cleaner.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So just take it, if you would, Aubrey.
[Milva McDonald]: Is there anything else that people want to look at in this article? Or do we feel like we want to, we're ready to vote and say this is ready to go into our pile of approved drafts. I mean, they're all still drafts.
[Jean Zotter]: There was something about the Collins Center about the filling of vacancies. Oh, yes. Thank you for that.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Milva, that's true. I think that there's one when I was rereading it, there's a sentence that doesn't make sense. I know you want to vote on it tonight. I need to look at it with, I haven't figured out how to fix it yet.
[Milva McDonald]: Okay, so let's just look at this filling of vacancies and then if you want to clean it up based on or do the edits that we discussed, then we can vote another time. But let's look at the, so the question was in number three, which is in the event, which basically has, leaves the option for an at-large. school committee member to take the open ward seat, right? If they live in that ward.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Right. So my assumption was that most people would rather run in a ward rather than at large. But that was my assumption is that most people would rather run. But some people, there's already someone there who's been there and is very well entrenched. Now all of a sudden that person leaves and the person who's been running at large and spending all that money on an at-large campaign, if in the event that all of a sudden there was a vacancy, could that person move?
[Milva McDonald]: I think the Collins Center had brought up an issue that they said maybe because the voters are voting on an at-large, an award, so that means you would basically be saying, OK, you voted on this, but now this person is not going to do that. I guess they thought that voters might not like it.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: That's what I understood. So the question is, what happens if there are at-large candidates, you know, there's no one else in the ward who wants to run.
[Milva McDonald]: I think that is covered in subsection B. Okay. I don't know. David, did you want to say something?
[David Zabner]: Yeah, one more small issue I see with 3, which I think is solvable, is it doesn't provide a timeline for the person making a choice.
[Unidentified]: Right.
[David Zabner]: So sections one and two are pretty, or at least to me, implied to be immediate, right? Like. As soon as the vacancy is there, somebody else is now kind of immediately on the committee. And this third one, I think at a bare minimum, if we were to choose to keep it in, should say that they have. I don't know whether, like, you know, they have to decide by the next meeting. They have a week. Either way, I also just think it's complicated in a way that I don't feel is, strictly speaking, necessary.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: But if we take it out, OK, if we take three out completely and then look at subsection B, if a vacancy shall occur in the office of school committee member and there is no available candidate to build a vacancy in the manner provided, The vacancy shall be filled by majority vote. If the vacancy occurs in a designated war seat, the person selected must reside in that ward.
[Danielle Balocca]: Yeah, well, so like, what if there's a what if so it sounds like if. the at-large person isn't filling the ward vacancy that you're choosing from the next highest votes for the at-large school committee members. But what if there was a next highest vote for a ward candidate?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Well, that's already covered in one and two above it, in number. I can't. OK.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, so this is just if there is nobody who ran that's available, right? I mean, to my mind, subsection B covers it.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Okay, so take out three, and we'll say subsection B covers it, and if that should occur, they'll figure it out.
[Milva McDonald]: How do people feel about that?
[Danielle Balocca]: I remember we asked the call center about this question about like, they said it very rarely happens that there isn't someone like to fill the spot. I think that's what they said.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah. Yeah. So this would, I mean, this subsection B would maybe never happen, but it's there if it needs to happen.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: We've seen the other charters. Yeah. I mean, so I'm fine taking away three.
[Milva McDonald]: OK, awesome. So I think we made it through, and I think it's in great shape. Do you, Paulette, do you feel more comfortable if you just kind of incorporate what was discussed and then we bring it back? Well,
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: I hate to just, I mean, I think in concept we're all there. There's that piece of me that would like to read it through one more time as an entirety. Okay. But I don't want to hold things up either. I don't know. How do other people feel? Aubrey?
[Maria D'Orsi]: Are we still waiting for a decision about the very first thing we talked about tonight, the ward combining?
[Milva McDonald]: I think we decided that we were good with that. We have more questions on it that we're going to try to get answered, but people like the idea, you know, people think that that's a good way to compose the school committee.
[Maria D'Orsi]: So voting yes on this text would mean I'm voting yes to figuring out how that would work at a later date.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, I mean, basically, it means yes, we're voting this draft as an approved draft. Ultimately, the Collins Center is going to take all our drafts and look at them and they'll, you know, they'll make notes and tell us, you know, if something doesn't seem right or, you know, we suggest that you add more detail here or whatever. But so it's still in draft form, you know, so it's... Yeah, that's okay.
[Maria D'Orsi]: I'm just not sure when in the process we have to say wards one and five will be combined.
[Milva McDonald]: Yes, and that is something we need to get answered. We need to get an answer to that question for sure.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: So should we say now we'll just lay it on the table to the next meeting? Okay, no, Daveed, go ahead.
[David Zabner]: Yeah, I would personally prefer to just like, let's have a vote to accept it in principle. We can always come back and look at it again. But I think it'd be really good in terms of like making forward progress to kind of say, assuming nobody brings it back up, we're pretty happy with where this is at. And I'm sure before we submit it to wherever it's going next, we can come back and revisit it. Yeah, I I motion to, you know, except except article four as revised as revised. Sure.
[Milva McDonald]: I second it. I can second. Okay. All in favor. Do we want to roll call? I think we're unanimous. Excellent.
[Maria D'Orsi]: We're unanimous in that unanimous and thankful for the considerations given today.
[Eunice Browne]: And thank you to Paulette for all of the amazing work.
[Milva McDonald]: Thank you, Paulette. Absolutely. Thank you so much. Thank you to the committee. All right. We don't have a lot of time, but Article 7 isn't long. Did everybody look at it?
[Phyllis Morrison]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Are there any, there was one question that I tried to head off about the elections commission, and I did, it was right before the meeting, so many of you may not have had a chance to look at it. because there had been the question, should we define the Elections Commission, right?
[Unidentified]: Yeah.
[Milva McDonald]: And basically, the Collins Center said it is defined in state law, and they gave us example language from a few charters that do have sections about it, but also said that these sections essentially mirror state law. So if we did choose to add that, we would basically just be kind of adding the details of state law into the charter. I'm good.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay. I just have one question that I did add. It's a quick one. Sure. Where it says register our voters, should that be the elections office?
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, I mean, because that's how it's referred to in Medford. Is that right?
[Eunice Browne]: Yeah, it's the elections office here in Medford. I think it's in there twice.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, because that's probably language from another charter. But it would be more consistent with what we say in Medford if we change it to elections office, right? That's officially what it's called in Medford, the elections office.
[Eunice Browne]: Let me just check the city website. Hang on a sec. I mean, um, it was elections office or elections department.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah. And I also don't know if registrar of voters is kind of like an official term that, um, is how the state sees it, no matter what we call it, for instance. You know, I'm not sure about that. That's something, again, that the Collins Center would flag if we change it to elections office, and it should change back to let us know.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay, just, you know, kind of want to keep that.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah. So we want to change registrar of voters to elections office. just to be consistent with terminology, Medford's terminology. Anybody, everybody's good with that?
[SPEAKER_02]: Yep.
[Milva McDonald]: Yep. And yeah, we will have to, since we did talk about ward representation for school committee, that language will have to be altered, right? That's a simple addition, so. I'll just make a note of that. Any other?
[Eunice Browne]: Frances, you have something in the chat. Yeah, Melba, did you see the chat?
[Milva McDonald]: I'm about to look. Elections Commission. OK. All right. So we'll change that to Elections Commission, and if- Thanks, Frances. Issue that, yeah. You're welcome. And there was the question of wards, Jean.
[Jean Zotter]: Go ahead. It's more, going back to my consistency thing, which maybe the Collins Center will catch, is some places we say we might expand wards, and other places we say eight wards. And in here, we say eight wards. So it's just not always consistently presented. Yeah.
[David Zabner]: The expansion might be something that I invented in thinking through article two. I'm starting to get the feeling that it is not at least normal to kind of design your charter around the possibility of expansion.
[Milva McDonald]: Well, we did get a memo on the call-in center about wards. I'll have to dig it up and just redistribute it so we can look at it. But I do think, Jean, that if there's any weird language about wards, the Collins Center will catch it. They'll catch it. Okay, that's all. I think so. Okay. So this is a pretty straight ahead. I mean, this subcommittee, you know, this was a quickie. It's a pretty straight ahead section. I mostly approve. Okay, the only thing we did look at was number of signatures, but nobody has any issues with the number of signatures we picked.
[Andreottola]: And we also did look at, just so everybody, we did about names on the ballot. We're going to a system where the incumbents aren't always listed at the top of the ballot, which is a pretty major change. This is something that in Medford, there had been a lot of back and forth over, over decades with this particular issue. And we looked at some studies conducted by MIT, which looked at different elections, and that it was statistically significant that when people are chosen at random for the position on the ballot, they have It's fairer and that the, you know, there is a slight increase in the level of chance of someone being elected if they're chosen. The position is at random rather than at the bottom of the ballot or on the second page of a ballot.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, that's why we put that for ballot position, which would definitely be a change. It seems like a small change, but it's probably a pretty big one, actually, for elections.
[David Zabner]: I'll second the motion.
[Milva McDonald]: Great. Okay. I'll do a roll call. Paulette. Paulette, did you hear me?
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yeah, sorry.
[Milva McDonald]: Are you voting yes or no to accept Article 7, the draft? Yes. Okay. Aubrey? Yes. Jean? Yes. Danielle? Yes. David?
[Andreottola]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Eunice? Yes. Phyllis?
[Andreottola]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: Anthony?
[Andreottola]: Yes.
[Milva McDonald]: And I'm yes. Yay, another unanimous vote. Awesome. Congrats. David, did you raise your hand, sir?
[David Zabner]: I did. Yeah. So given that we only have a couple minutes left, I was wondering if I might bump something in the agenda, which is I know that we have a lot of comments left on articles two and three. And I'm wondering, I'd like to move that we have another meeting of the article two and three subcommittee and invite folks to come and give us comments and kind of revisit that.
[Milva McDonald]: Can you, what were the questions? Cause I thought we voted that through the draft.
[David Zabner]: Oh, so I was gone last month.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, no, we voted that through. OK, great.
[David Zabner]: Then we're good. It's like there's still a lot of questions left on that, but all good.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah, I can go through and resolve them all. I just have to resolve them. OK, awesome. And we only have a couple of minutes, and so we won't have really time to talk about it. But I just want to put it up on the screen and say, because next meeting, we are going to do this Article 8. We're also going to look at Article 6, which is the budget financial procedures. And then we don't have subcommittees for Articles 1, 5, 9, and 10. A lot of it is a boilerplate. But what I'd like to do is go through those articles and pick out things that I think that we need to decide on, like, for instance, regular charter review, things like that. So that's one of the things I'm going to maybe ask people to do for the next meeting is review Article 8, review Article 6, and look at those other pieces. I'll send this all to you in an email. and see if there's anything in particular that you want to raise. So those we will not draft like we've drafted the other articles, but we will do is we'll make the decisions and then the call-in center will review the drafts we've created and then they will draft those other articles for us and then we will have a draft charter. Paulette.
[Paulette Van der Kloot]: Yeah, I just, you'll send, I was looking for those other articles and I couldn't access them. Yeah, send them out to us.
[Milva McDonald]: I will send them around. Yes. Thank you. And basically, you know, hopefully some of you have taken a look at this, but when, when the subcommittee met sort of some of the main questions that we had that. We did put numbers in, but we also felt that we wanted the whole committee to look at some of these numbers as well, these timelines on the signatures and the signatures and timelines. And Eunice did this great research, and you can see it all in the margin where where she outlined sort of the differences in how communities handle these things. So basically, I think the subcommittee was in agreement that we wanted these mechanisms to be available to the public, but there's a pretty wide range in timelines and thresholds, and we wanted to give the whole committee a chance to look at that and try to make some of those decisions. So for next time, If you could carefully look at that and come up with proposals, and we'll try to get those timelines and thresholds nailed down. And then we'll have Article 8, and then we'll have the budget discussion or the financial procedures discussion. And I think in June, we're going to pretty much have a draft charter. And then we'll be looking at creating a final report and a presentation for the fall.
[Eunice Browne]: Um, Eunice, um, yeah, I just be curious and maybe it's something that we could talk about. When we meet again in 2 weeks, but now with summer coming and everybody kind of going in different directions, how much work. Is left of the committee what kinds of. Aside from our first Thursday of the month meeting, and I guess it's the second Thursday in July because of the holiday, from June through September, what kinds of time commitments are we looking at other than that one Thursday meeting? Will there be other subcommittees? Who's going to be putting together The, you know, final draft charter. I mean, what, what kind of time are we giving to this during the summer?
[Milva McDonald]: So this is what I envision is that our next meeting we're going to get. Articles 8 and 6 done over the over the next meeting in 2 weeks and the 1st meeting in June, we're going to get those 2 articles done and we're going to. lay out the decisions. We're going to have the decisions made on those other articles. Some of them, like Article 1, is just definitions. It's not really anything we need to even decide on. It's more, you know, something that we need to include in the document. So, and then there will be, we'll see how people feel, who wants to be involved in writing the final report, for instance. In June, we would, if all goes as planned, we will hand over our draft and our decisions to the Collins Center. So they'll spend whatever time they need to spend going through that. And then maybe in August, say at that meeting, we would be looking at their notes and seeing if there's any changes we need to make. But over the summer, there will be a committee or whoever wants to be involved in creating the final report. And I don't know how many people are interested in that. It will involve writing, basically.
[Jean Zotter]: Do you have samples of what?
[Milva McDonald]: Yep. I can put together some final reports and share them and see what people think. But, I mean, I'm going to be working on it, so we'll make a subcommittee. And so I guess, Eunice, the question about what the time commitment is, is it depends on whether you want to be involved in writing a final report.
[Eunice Browne]: Okay, and I guess that would be helpful.
[Andreottola]: I was just wondering, are we over between now and the fall going to update the community at all on our progress, on any of our findings, just to see if there's still anything lingering out in the community that needs to be, you know, kind of, you know, I'm just thinking that, you know, we asked the community a lot of questions, like, it's over a year ago now. You know, and like, do we, are we just at this point disengaged from the community or are we, you know, is there anything that we will be doing this summer?
[Milva McDonald]: Well, I wouldn't say we're disengaged, but if we did anything this summer in terms of a public event, it would be to sort of talk about what our work is. Because we'll have pretty much put together the draft charter by that time.
[Eunice Browne]: And summer is not the best time to be engaging the community in anything.
[Andreottola]: No, I know that, but I'm just wondering if, you know, if, if before, you know, this goes to the city council, should we allow, like have, have, you know, run it through the community first. I don't know to kind of get more kind of momentum. I'm just trying to think of how it's going to go down, down at the end.
[Milva McDonald]: Well, Anthony, if you if you have any ideas for an event like that. Um. Think, you know, and you want to present some of those ideas at our next meeting. We can do that. Okay. But it's 8.30, so we need to wrap up. But I hope that answered your question, Eunice, and I hope that other people have an idea.
[Eunice Browne]: We can see some draft reports to see how involved this is.
[Milva McDonald]: Yeah. I will be sending the material for the next meeting and the agenda soon because it's in two weeks. Really, really good work tonight. Thank you so much to everybody.
|
total time: 31.94 minutes total words: 2903 |
total time: 31.6 minutes total words: 2524 |
||