[Bears]: second regular meeting Medford City Council January 23 2024 Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callahan present Council Vice President Collins Councilors are present Councilor Leming present Councilor Councilor Scarpelli right Councilor Tseng present present bears present seven present on this meeting is called to order please rise to salute the flag.
[Bears]: Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. Records, the records of the meeting of January 9th, 2024 were passed to Councilor Tseng. Councilor Tseng, how'd you find the records? I found them in order and I moved to approve. On the motion of Councilor Tseng to approve the records, seconded by? Second. Seconded by Councilor Collins. Vice President Collins. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Reports of committees 23-467 offered by President Bears. Committee of the Whole report January 17, 2024 to follow. This is a committee of the whole we held last week on school committee compensation. There are items on the agenda tonight that were reported out of that meeting. Is there a motion to accept the report of the committee? on the motion of Councilor Tseng, seconded by Vice-President Collins. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion passes. 24-015, offered by Councilor Tseng. Resolution to discuss modernizing the City Council Communications and Outreach Strategy. Be it resolved that the Committee on Resident Services and Public Engagement me to discuss modernizing the council's communications and outreach strategy, including, but not limited to, developing guidelines and action plans for social media and press releases. Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: Thank you, President Bears. This is a resolution born out of our drive to modernize the work of our city council, which we spoke about at the last regular meeting. I told folks that there's a lot to look forward to when it comes to making sure that we are up to date. in our practices and in our communications. And as a lot of residents have pointed out in the past, it can be a little bit hard to get information. This is about really coordinating our strategy and making sure that there are one-stop shops for communications, while making sure that those strategies, social media, press releases, et cetera, truly do reach out to as wide an audience as possible, but also follow nonpartisan and neutral guidelines. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further discussion? On the motion of Councilor Tseng to refer to the Resident Services and Public Engagement Committee, seconded by Councilor Collins. All those in favour? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. 2.4-016, offered by Councilor Tseng. Be it so resolved that the Committee on Resident Services and Public Engagement meet to discuss recommendations for updating the City website. Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: Thank you. The city website is a portal to city government for a lot of people. Even though we've seen a lot of improvements on the city website, I don't think it would surprise anyone to say that we could use even more updates to the city website. And so I want to call for a meeting of the Committee on Resident Services and Public Engagement with Communications Director Steve Smerdy. to talk about recommendations for updating the city website. I know folks have sent me a bunch of ideas, and in particular, to update the city council part of the website. Thank you, Councilor Tseng.
[Bears]: Any further discussion? on the motion of Councilor Tseng to refer to the Resident Services and Public Engagement Committee, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. All those in favour? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. 24-017 offered by Councilor Scarpelli, with the goal of keeping Medford residents informed on the process, be it resolved that the Medford City Council meet with the Medford Legislative Delegation, with General Keefe of the National Guard, and with representatives from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities to discuss a temporary shelter proposed within the City of Medford. before I turn it over to Councilor Scarpelli. There was an update today from the city online from Communications Director Smriti and the mayor. The city has been informed by state officials that the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities will be opening its emergency overnight shelter in Medford in February. The state is working on a contract with the provider to assist with services on site, and at the insistence of Mayor Lungo-Koehn has signed a memorandum of understanding with the city, agreeing to several specific terms identified by the mayor. The first no more than 75 families, or roughly 250 people, will be housed at the site for short-term shelter only. Two, the duration of the stay will likely not exceed five days. Three, school-age children will not enroll in Medford public schools. At the urging of Mayor Lungo-Koehn, the state has agreed to hold a public information session prior to the opening of the shelter with the community to answer questions. and to give an overview of how the facility will operate. We put in a request for next week, but the state has not given us a date and time yet. So that is the public meeting update. I will go to Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President, and I appreciate all the hard work. I know that City Clerk has put into making sure that we have the proper people at the table to answer any questions that the community has reached out. I first want to thank Representative DiNardo for being here tonight. We realize that He really doesn't have much information either, but he's here just to really listen to people. And I really appreciate you doing that. And especially when you're talking about an issue that really concerns a lot of people and a lot of people looking for answers and really not getting many responses back from other parties. So we appreciate you being here tonight, Representative Donato. I know that both Representative Garbally and Representative Barber We're invited, but they know that it's the same message that Representative Donato would share, and as their colleagues, I think that he's representing everyone, but this really falls into his district, which is key. So I brought this forth because we did have some neighbors that had some concerns. And the concerns really, you know, it goes from one extreme to another extreme. One extreme is simple is that we understand and we want to be supportive. to the people that need this type of shelter at the time, but we want to make sure we're educated and everybody knows the process, especially the neighbors, the direct abutters, that they're informed. I've received calls from people that are in the health fields that find it a little alarming that What they're seeing in different neighborhoods in different states is the lack of vaccinations for the support that we're giving for the people that are in need. So I think that there are a lot of questions that have to be asked. There are a lot of questions that have to be answered. Unfortunately, I think the key, what we'll hear tonight is really just people sharing what the how they feel. I think that's very important. But I also understand that truly, from what we've heard, both from the communications from the mayor's office and outside is that we really need the the landlord We need someone from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, and someone from the Mayor's Office, and most importantly, someone from the Governor's Office that's going to come in and really set up a meeting that really can answer some questions. We're hearing that it's a done deal. but at the same time, we're not seeing it. We're hearing that the mayor has put out an MOU, but it hasn't been followed through yet from the state. So there's a lot of different variables that are still left wide open. And I appreciate, I think that the phone calls I got from a lot of teachers and parents from especially the McGlynn and the Roberts where they're at extended capacity right now and making sure that having to the public schools right now would be totally devastating in some of our schools. So I think that, you know, the questions we have is infrastructure, George. Do we have enough police? Do we have enough fire? Does the health department have enough support to make sure that everything is on the up and up at this facility? So there are a lot of questions. So like I said, Mr. President, this is really, I put this out for the residents that had some questions that can share it publicly so we can get it on the record and hopefully the governor's office can follow through with a meeting so people are notified properly and for one person mentioned that for her and her family, it's scary, not in a disrespectful thought process to the people that are going through this, but it's scary because of the organizational piece. I think that that's where they're not understanding and not knowing. So I know that other people want to talk, so I yield to them now. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Schapiro. I hear from Representative Donato, and then I hear from fellow councilors. Representative Donato. Press a button.
[Scarpelli]: First time here?
[Paul Donato]: This is my first time. I'm very nervous. My first time speaking in front of an audience.
[Bears]: Name and address for the record, please. It's a joke.
[Paul Donato]: So my name is Paul Donato. I'm the state representative for the 35th Middlesex District. I live at 48 Maurice Street in Medford. And let me clarify to make sure that the members of the council know that both Representative Garber and Representative Barber acquiesced to my request, along with the state senator, that it's my district and I would be more than happy to represent the delegation here before the city council. I believe that the mayor has provided a great deal of information to the members of the council as to what this situation is, and I know that there's major questions and concerns. We as a delegation, and I know that the residents in the area and the mayor herself has many questions that we want to ask. The governor has the emergency power and MOU was presented to the landlord. HomeServe is attempting to work with the governor and the migrants to find out what their needs are. My understanding is that there will be no children attending the schools, that this is a transitional system and a transitional place so that those children will be going to permanent shelters. So it would not make sense to put a child into the McGlynn or to the Andrews or to any other schools. And then all of a sudden they'd be in Chelsea, Revere, or Maynard, and we would have to pay busing to bring those children back to our schools since they started. So I think that it's important that the mayor gave you that information. And as she said, she has set the criteria. She has been in touch with me relative to the process, making sure that I was aware since it's my district, but I was aware more important to give the rest of the information to the delegation. So there are many questions and the residents have a right to ask those questions. And the mayor is on top of it with the lieutenant governor trying to get a community meeting for the residents so that they can ask the questions, the council can ask the questions, and we can get the answers from the administration as to what is the process, how long is the process, and where Where is it going to be to make sure that the community is safe, that the residents are satisfied with the process, and that the migrants themselves are safe in that particular venue? So I'm more than happy to answer any other question, but on behalf of the delegation and the mayor, I know that we've tried to keep the council abreast of what's going on.
[Bears]: Thank you, Representative Donato. Yes, and I want to acknowledge we have received several communications from the mayor, including the memorandum of understanding was emailed out to the council. Some questions have been answered. Some further questions have been generated as the process has moved along. And it does seem that, at this point, the people who have the answers to those questions are from the state government. And the mayor is working to bring them here for a community meeting. But the date is not certain. At this point, that's kind of my just quick summary. I will go to councilors. I wasn't tracking hands, but if anyone has anything they want to say or any questions they want to put on the record, then we can go to the members of the public. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Lazzaro]: I wonder, Representative Donato, if you can speak to other similar shelters in different cities that have been set up. I know this crisis has been going on for a while. Have there been other temporary shelters very short term like this that have been set up in other places?
[Paul Donato]: Um most of the yeah the legislature put a 7500 permanent shelter into the budget with the 250 million dollars that uh has been the shelters and unfortunately uh the 7500 shelters are now overcrowded uh and um We're working, well, the governor is working on finding permanent shelters for those individuals, and as those shelters open up, then the migrants who are in temporary shelters will be able to be accommodated. My understanding is there's one in Chelsea and one in Revere.
[Lazzaro]: Okay. My question is about the five-day sort of ideal limit. I think with the way that housing and bureaucracy and the way these things tend to go, my suspicion is that sometimes people will be somewhere for a little bit longer. And my concern about that isn't that the migrants will be in this shelter for longer, but that if we have presented it as such a temporary location that we're making it harder for maybe students who do need to enroll, if they end up staying for longer and they're out of school as a result for a long time, I wouldn't want to give the impression that they're blocked from attending school if they do. stay for a while, if they're there for two or three months, maybe. I don't know that that would happen. But in working with people who are trying to attain housing, often, even if you have something that's in the works, it takes a month just to roll over the next the last person to move out of somewhere, you know, like these things can kind of sometimes take time. So I'm curious about, you may not know this, but I'm curious about Medford's understanding of how we can treat the folks that are staying there as though they're residents of Medford while they're residents of Medford.
[Paul Donato]: It is my understanding from the mayor and the governor's office, the mayor has been in touch with the lieutenant governor on a daily basis relative to the concerns that the residents have and the concerns that the government has with regard to the migrants, that they have listened to the mayor's concern relative to a temporary shelter, and whether that's five days or seven days, She does not anticipate any more than that at this particular time, and that's why she's adamant that the Lieutenant Governor is assured that we are not going to be taxing the educational system.
[Lazzaro]: Okay, got it. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. Any other comments or questions from Councilors? Councilor Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you for being here, Representative Donato. Sorry to make you stand up again. Feel free to say so if this is a question, but are directed to the folks at the Office of Housing and Livable Communities. So these migrant, sorry, these temporary shelters are being set up because We're at a crisis level in terms of the lack of shelter space. You mentioned the permanent shelters that are coming online to be sort of the more long-term solution to this issue. Can you provide any sense of the status of the permanent shelters that are being set up?
[Paul Donato]: Well, the permanent shelters that are being established at this particular time have been most of the hotels and motels throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. And what they're hoping is, what the governor's, I'm assuming, what the governor's hope is, is that as we find more housing in public housing, as there are openings in the public housing, is to extract those migrants who are in the hotels and motels, which are very difficult, bring them into the permanent housing, and then bring those who are in these temporary shelters into something that's a little more accommodating.
[Collins]: Got it. Thank you so much. And the reason we're here in the first place is because even permanent, sorry, the longer term shelter beds in the hotels and motels, those are actually, we don't have as many beds as we used to.
[Paul Donato]: I think the governor's indicating that there's something like 1,000 migrants a week that are anticipated in coming into the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. So it's something that we in the legislature, the speaker and the governor and the Senate president grappling with this issue, both on the basis of the numbers of people who are coming and how to accommodate them and the potential cost in the budget.
[Collins]: Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. And I just do want to note, I think it's good to ask questions, and Rep Tornado is here, and we'll also have the record of this meeting. very likely will have to direct these questions to the state officials at their public meetings. So we're gathering some feedback here, but we don't have the answers or the folks who do have the answers or are working on creating the answers are not here.
[Paul Donato]: Well, you can be assured that the mayor is on top of this, the lieutenant governor on a daily basis to make sure that the residents are fully aware of what's going to go on, how it's going to happen and what is the final solution to the site.
[Bears]: Thank you, Representative. I'm going to go to members of the public who have questions, unless there were other councillors. I'm going to go to members of the public. We have some folks on Zoom. We have some folks here. I'll start at the podium. Please give your name and address for the record.
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: My name is Charlie Pagliarulo, 249 Gaston Street.
[Bears]: Go ahead.
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: All right. I want to start off by saying this. This was, according to State Representative Donato, it was a state of emergency from the governor back in August. Am I right? August 23rd, if I'm not mistaken? Okay, state of emergency. Now, I'll get to that in a minute, but understand something, I did my research too, and every time a law, a bylaw, a rule, a regulation is written up and okayed, it usually has these words in it. to protect the citizens of the Commonwealth. State representative, am I correct in that?
[Clerk]: Thank you. Sir, if you could direct your comments to me, thank you.
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: Well, he's the one who knows, they write up the laws of the state.
[Bears]: Pursuant to the rules of the council, comments should be directed to me, whether it's Councilors or members of the public.
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: All right, that's fine. But my little bit of homework says to me, when it comes to definitions, this is on the state of emergency, by the way, Civil Defense Act. How about that? Civil Defense Act, Acts 1950, Chapter 639. And it says in paragraph S5, power to seize or possess personal property. And I'll be quick, I won't go through the whole thing, but I'll get to the point. Because of the existing possibility of occurrence, whatever that might be, it goes on to say, to preserve the lives and property of the people of the Commonwealth. And I'll go on to another one, paragraph S5A, and I'll go on. Governor may employ every agency. as you go forward, to protect the lives and property of its citizens and to enforce the law. That's us and nobody else. And nobody else, that's us. Now, I wanna ask out loud, what is the emergency? Is it health? Do we have a COVID problem anymore? I don't think so. We're cautious, but there's no emergency. Is it civil unrest? Are there riots? Is there political upheaval? Is there military action? No. Natural disasters? Are there floods? Are there hurricanes? Are there snowstorms? I don't see any in sight. Those are definitions of an emergency act for this Commonwealth from the governor to enforce it. I don't see that. But then I hear refugees. Refugees. You know what they are? People fleeing from what I just described. Who are they? Where are they? What are they doing here? How about this one? Homelessness and shelter. for our citizens of the Commonwealth. Nobody else. So let me add to that. For a little over a decade or so, we've quote, had a housing crisis. This realtor knows a little bit about housing. We've always been in a housing crisis. There'll never be enough housing. So where's the emergency? I want to know. You know what's gonna happen when this happens? We'll be under a lot of duress. We don't have an answer as to how long it will be or how extended this will be. Think about that for a minute. Oh, by the way, these refugees, these refugees, I wanna know something. How did they get here? Were they vetted? I don't think so. Were they were they running away from something? I don't know. This is hard to understand. Why are they here for asylum? They were ready, willing and able and also paid to cross these borders. They're called illegals. That's what they're called. Call it for what it is. Damn. Now, There's a simple way to fix an emergency because if it's manmade, unnatural disaster, there's a simple way to fix this. Don't let it happen. And we won't have an emergency. Turn them around. Turn them around. Oh yeah, I hope there's no ulterior motive to this in the end, quite frankly. Now I'm gonna show you something. What am I here for? to defend my way of life and how I got here. See this picture? I'll be happy to pass it around proud as could be. This is my heritage. This is my lineage. Yeah, that's my grandfather when he's 12 years old. I get the fact that it's his passport to come here. I'll be very quick about this. But I hope you understand where I'm coming from and why. Because I have to explain this to my grandchild. This man at 12 years old came over here. But before he did, his father had to be sponsored, he had to have a skilled job, and he needed housing within two years. If he didn't have any of that in place, he's going back. He's going back. Well, he succeeded, and he didn't get any aid for it. That was my great-grandfather. I was able to speak to him when I was younger. Here's my grandfather, 12 years old. He comes over. If this bores you, let me know, because this is why I am here. He come over at 12 years old.
[Bears]: I'm not done. You have about 30 seconds left to return to the rules.
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: I have 30 seconds. Yes. My grandfather gave me a lifetime. I'll talk about my grandfather proudly. He came over here. Okay. Self-made man. He didn't get assistance. He didn't get an EBT card. He didn't get transportation or a phone. He got nothing. He wasn't even taught how to speak, he had to do it on his own. And they found a way to do it. And you know what his father not only was he a machinist, my grandfather was and he had a great way of life all on his own a self made man. And I had the honor and privilege to work with my grandfather in his business for five years, shoulder to shoulder. At the young age of 21 years old, I said to him, Papa, Why didn't you teach me Italian? You know what he said? Because I wanted to be an American. I want to see a show of hands here. If you don't mind, sir, thank you for your time.
[Clerk]: What's the matter?
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: You don't want to answer me, sir.
[Bears]: I asked you a question out loud here.
[Charlie Pagliarulo]: Who is in favor of this movement? I want to see a show of hands.
[Bears]: You've presented your topic. You've had your five minutes. I want an answer. You don't get an answer, sir. I didn't get an answer. No, sir. I know my answer. We've heard public comment from me. You may sit down. Yes, of course it is. Yes, the great treason of loving. Sir, please sit down. Sir, please sit down. The great treason of loving thy neighbor is no treason at all. We'll go to Lorna Wilkerson. Lorna, I've marked you to unmute. Name and address for the record, please. You'll have about five minutes.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: Hello, can you hear me? Can you hear me?
[Clerk]: Yes, we can hear you. Name and address for the record, please.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: My name is Lorna Wilkerson, MD, MS, member of the fellow American of College of OB-GYN. I would like to thank the person who just spoke for his absolutely excellent presentation. I would like to say that I have not only taken care of many of the illegal refugees who are coming into Boston right now as a physician, but I am the daughter of an immigrant. I am the great granddaughter of a slave. I am shocked and appalled after living in Medford for 26 years, paying my taxes, and never once coming to the city council complaining of anything. That the members of this hardworking community are treated like they are knuckleheads by this city council and by this mayor. There is no way When we are told coming to this meeting that this is already set in February 26, we will be coming with the shelter, which by the way, the address has never been given to the rest of this community without our input. I will say this. I cannot say the hospital, but currently right now as a physician, there are in a hospital in the city, two cases of tuberculosis that are the type that are resistant to medication. I would like to say that in Newton, where there is a shelter, where A colleague of mine kept a family that came in with a child that was sick. She became sick and was sick for three months with pneumonia. We are not looking as a physician, and I have presented information to the Councilor, where tuberculosis and various other diseases, not just my opinion, are coming into the city. Do you know that children cannot stay in shelters in this city, in this country, for more than three months? And we have thousands of children that are coming into the city, it's not from me, it's from the federal government, with untreated tuberculosis. Does anybody here tell me how many patients can come into the Department of Health of the City of Medford a day? I know that you're saying that there's no children coming in, but there are people coming in. Who's going to take care of the pregnant women coming in with various diseases? We have schizophrenia coming into this country. Is there anybody here who's going to take care of the many women coming here who are immigrants, illegal aliens who are being raped and abused? Do we have a domestic violence program that's going to take care of these people? I'm just saying this is a middle class town that is totally unprepared for the various issues from the aliens that I have taken care of working in a federally funded health center for the last several years. And I cannot say how disappointed and shocked I am, A, by how this council seems to be totally unprepared for what's coming to it, and B, let me just say as a Medford citizen for a quarter of a century, how the previous member who spoke of his family and how hard they worked to come here was treated. It took my mother 15 years to become a legal citizen of this country. And when she died a month ago at the age of 98, she could still speak the Constitution. How many people coming in here respect this country like she did? Thank you very much. That's my time.
[Clerk]: Thank you.
[Bears]: Any other residents like to speak? Any other comments from Councilors? Councilor Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you so much, President Bears. Representative Donato, sorry, another question for you, if you're willing to speak to it. In the couple weeks since the mayor started circulating information about this temporary shelter, I've heard from a number of residents who have asked, you know, obviously folks are coming here because they're in this crisis situation. How can we as Medford residents help these folks who might be coming temporarily into our community? And I know, again, this might be one of the many questions That can only be answered by our partners at the state level, but is there anything you can share about folks that here in Medford can have on their radar about how to help out?
[Paul Donato]: The only thing I can share is that the mayor has done everything in her power to deal with the state administration to see that the migrants are treated, they're in a safe place. But like I have indicated from the beginning, it's very difficult since the administration has not given full information to both the mayor and to the delegation. And until until they come in, have the public meeting so that the residents can understand and the members of the city government and the state government can understand what the process is, then all we can do is wait for that particular time. But I can assure you that the delegation and in particular, the mayor is on top of it.
[Collins]: Understood, Representative. Thank you. And I think it's very clear that the bottleneck here is at the state level. So thank you for the updates that you're able to provide.
[Clerk]: Thank you. Name and address for the record, please, and you have five minutes.
[Nate Merritt]: Sure. Nate Merritt, 373 Riverside Ave in Medford. I am an abutter of this place. The address is 400 Riverside Ave for the public that wants to know. And I am not satisfied with how the mayor has communicated information to the neighborhood.
[Clerk]: Mr. Merritt, if you could direct your comments to me.
[Nate Merritt]: Absolutely. Through the chair, I am not satisfied how the mayor has communicated information to the neighbors and the neighborhood and the abutters of that. If this was the Locust Street project again, right, this council hired an attorney because the Zoning Board of Appeals dropped the ball, didn't even have a public meeting, violated public meeting law, and the mayor was part of that. She understood that the residents had a right to information. But I only hear things when I come here. So I brought my wife with me tonight, who is an immigrant, and to all the Facebook keyboard warriors out there that want to say something. She's first generation American. I'm a grandchild of immigrants. I don't have a problem with immigrants. I do have a problem with the way that all the information has been communicated. This project started in October. And there's been nothing officially published until I came here and started asking questions to get them on the record. And thank you that you all as a body are willing to entertain this, but the mayor is not publishing anything except one Facebook post. And that's on set. That is not a way you communicate information and especially to gain information from your neighbors. She hasn't talked to me. She hasn't talked to my neighbors that I'm on the phone with right now. So no, I don't think she's got it. You know, she does not have a handle on this. And honestly, I don't think you do either. I care about safety of my kid. And again, for all the keyboard warriors out there that live up in the ivory tower in the hills of this community, you don't live where I do. Wegmans has a police guard every night, obviously because it's so safe and they're not worried about any crime. But yet New York City, which has one of the most fantastic police forces in the world, you had a Venezuelan migrant in a shelter stabbed by other Venezuelan migrants. Bullets fly through windows, bullets fly through siding, and it's my house that could potentially be a target with my two little kids at home. So yeah, I got concerns because it's my neighborhood. Is anyone in this council within view of this building at 400 Riverside Ave? Just posing the question here. Anyone?
[Clerk]: Ma'am? Justin? Direct your comments to me, Mr. Mayor.
[Nate Merritt]: Okay, through you to anyone. I'd like to hear an affirmative or a negative, quite honestly, from all the members.
[Clerk]: We're happy to hear your comment, but our address is a public record.
[Nate Merritt]: Yes. And so it's a simple yes or no. I think that's fair.
[Clerk]: I think you know the answer to the question.
[Nate Merritt]: The answer is no. OK. So I am concerned. The neighbors are concerned. So if they can't find more housing, this is temporary five days until you just said, there's no housing available. So then what? What is preventing actually the children from being enrolled in school? Because how does the city stop it when the state law says that they have to be allowed to enroll in community? These are, I think, some critical questions we need answers to in the utopian ideal situation, all's well and they move away in five days. How long is this gonna go on for? How many years? There are some legitimate concerns, public safety. How are we gonna address that, even for the neighborhood? Trash and garbage and logistical things like that that happen. We have some questions, but apparently now it's a done deal. So the train's gonna roll over us and you have zero way to influence it, is what I just heard tonight. That's unsat. Madam Mayor, that's unsat. I'm looking forward to the community meeting I think you're gonna have some neighbors that are very concerned, and I hope this council can help us, at least like they tried to do during the Locust Street project. So, who's gonna pay for this? I mean, there's a lot of questions to get answered. Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: I appreciate you bringing this forward because this was started by a community member like yourself that had an issue. So I think we all feel the same pain of the lack of lack of information. And I think that that And we'll relay this to the mayor. I think we'll put it in a form of motion that when we do have this meeting, that the information is put out the robocall for all the residents in that neighborhood for at least to get those questions answered. Because I think that one thing we all share are these same questions. You know, we understand the situation that we're in that we're put in, but I think the biggest biggest concerns right now is getting the answers to the questions that we have so we can move forward. And this is the big problem with what you see in most communities. When there isn't transparency, there isn't lack of there is a huge lack of. communication. But this is truly coming from, you know, the state level, where I think that, you know, looking at the governor's office and making sure that they hear us and they that that meeting when that meeting does come, come to fruition, that the message is sent loud and clear. It's, it's, it's, you know, this is this is an issue immigrations of It's a big issue. It's a bigger issue than we have right now. That's why I know Mr. Pagliarulo brings up good points in the sense that this is a federal issue. We're a mess. And it's not fair to the families that are brought here either. I've had the fortune of coaching a lot of these young people that are forced to come into our country because they don't have anything else, and they thrive in our country, and they try to make it make it through as legal as possible to make sure they want to be American citizens. So it's a hurdle. We understand on every level. But with this situation that we're talking about right now with the Riverside issue, there are a lot of issues. And something that I'm going to stand strong on, we don't have the infrastructure. That has to be stressed to the governor through the MOU. This be stressed that the mayor, we don't have the infrastructure in place to house number of families and people for more than what they're saying. I appreciate Councilor Lazzaro bringing that question up. And there is a state law that says that truly, I've talked to teachers today, talked to teachers from both the McGlynn and the Roberts that called me about this issue. St. George, we truly don't have it's we're filled to capacity. And with the lack of support that they have in the special needs department, it's it would magnify things to a degree that we could never recover from our kids will not recover from, you know, so you bring a lot of good points, you know, trash health department being involved, the police making sure how do we how do we police that area that a friend on on zoom talking about health concerns and vaccinations and making sure that people that are coming into our country, listen, we can't come into the schools, our kids can't enter schools without being vaccinated. So if they're coming into this, into the housing, we're the United States of America, we should be able to vaccinate these young people that are coming in and make sure they're as healthy as possible if they're going to be in our community. So there's a lot of pieces that we all share. I think that, you know, it's not something that this council is for or against. We just provided, we wanted to provide an avenue so people can come up and talk. It's not, this isn't you against us, it's not. I think that we've got to find the middle ground. We got to find the process to make sure the communication and the answers are met from everybody. We feel the same way. We all have the same questions. I mean, you know, just because we're city councils don't mean that, doesn't mean that we have the answers. You've seen it a thousand times in different formats. So, you know, I appreciate you bringing this forward because I think that that's what this, that's what a good community is about. There's an issue, community member steps up, city council step in when they're not being heard and we share, we give that avenue. So I appreciate that and understand that. We feel the same way you do in the sense of getting the word out. Whether you're for it or against it doesn't matter. The truth of the matter is we need a line of communication so everybody feels safe. Whether you live in the hills or whether you live right on Riverside Ave, these are big concerns. Because like you said, It's not just people that are, you know, the same people that are moving in with these health issues, vaccine issues. They're going to be shopping at Wegmans. They're going to be playing in the parks. They're going to be, you know, in our libraries. We, that possibly, so it's making sure that we have everything in place to make sure that we're giving them the best opportunity to thrive while they're here. So I appreciate it. I just want to let you know that. Thank you.
[Nate Merritt]: Thank you for your comment there. And I guess just to the for the record. I don't think I'm a bigot. I'm just a neighbor who's concerned and I have neighbors, you know, that are, you know, fellow neighbors that are concerned in the neighborhood. And this can directly impact and people like, Oh, what do you mean trash? What do you mean? Whatever. I find shopping carts in my yard all the time to begin with, I'd be happy to take them to some other person's address. right and load them up in my truck and return them that way. It's silly things like that. But also, like I said, in New York, I'm not making this up. This is on the news that there were people getting stabbed and I don't I'm sorry, I don't want that in my neighborhood. So how do we fix it? And if someone says, Oh, we're going to detail a state police officer at this building every day, then okay, great. That's a potential solution. But without any answers. to get in front of it, right? Are we just going to sit there and wait for all the problems to boil up? I've heard from a reliable source that, for instance, that the state has had to train certain migrant communities, that it's not okay to sit there and grope a woman. Because culturally, that's okay from where they're coming from, but it's not okay here. So I mean, there are some serious issues that don't necessarily fall into the optimum narrative. that we really need to address it for the good of everyone.
[Scarpelli]: So think of what people want, you know, of me, but this is why I'm Bruce America, far from a bigot, you've come up here and spoken in favor of many different issues, and it didn't matter what the issue was. So I think that if that's, if that's the Facebook army that's out there, that's that you don't have to we got just to just erase it, because, you know, you've come in, you've come 1000 times to this podium, and support of many different people didn't matter what whatever color they are, race they are, whatever gender they are, you're always there to support people. So, I think that that should be mentioned. So, thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. We're going to go to Zoom. Jacqueline.
[SPEAKER_21]: My name is Jacqueline Cervone. I'm an 18 Powderhouse Terrace in Medford. I am a Massachusetts registered nurse. I share the same health concerns as Lorna and many of you do. You know, people are talking about their ancestors coming. My grandparents came from Italy. came through Ellis Island, had to be quarantined for a while. People were treated for illnesses and vaccinated with whatever they had at the time for vaccinations, and had to be cleared medically before they came here. So that's obviously a huge concern of mine. I'm also aware of the TB cases that are popping up in Massachusetts now. But the other issue is, and I agree with what everyone has said, you know, we pay our taxes. I can't even get the cedar to come and cut a branch off a tree that's leaning on my wires to my house. But we can house these people. see there are homeless people in Medford, there are homeless single mothers, there are homeless veterans, and what do we do for them? Nothing. Nothing. But, you know, and I understand there are people in need. I'm sure many of those people are wonderful people, I get that, but I think our own people need to be taken care of. I find it but it sounds like this is a done deal. So, you know, you can hear us out, and everything, but it sounds like what no matter what we say, this is going to move forward. But my question is, so this building that they're going to be housed in, it's right now a vacant building, from what I understand. Is that correct? There's a
[Scarpelli]: It's a vacant office building, it's not a hotel.
[SPEAKER_21]: Okay, so they're going to completely furnish this, completely overhaul the plumbing, completely furnish the kitchens, the bedrooms, et cetera, for a five-day visit? That sounds a little suspect to me.
[Clerk]: I don't think we have the answers to that question.
[SPEAKER_21]: I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
[Bears]: I said I don't believe we have the answers to that question.
[SPEAKER_21]: Yeah, I mean, does that make sense to you, Mr. Bears, that you would completely furnish this place with multiple, you know, I assume the offices are gonna be little apartments for families and whoever's coming. To go through all of that for five days, I just have a hard time believing that. I actually a hotel would be make more sense because there's already beds, there's already food, there's bathrooms, there's things like that, but to completely furnish an entire building for how many migrants did you say were coming? Like 250 or something?
[Bears]: That's what the mayor's statement says. Okay. Councilor Lazzaro for a second, Councilor Lazzaro has a comment.
[Lazzaro]: Okay. of information I spoke with the mayor's office they are they're doing some plumbing retrofitting and they will have bathrooms smart bathrooms built and I believe what happens is it'll be five days her sort of family, and then they'll cycle through and it'll be the next group that will come in, it wouldn't be just open for five days, and then.
[SPEAKER_21]: Oh, so, so it's going to be several groups at five day intervals. So it's not just five days, it's going to be five days at a time for different groups. So it's going to be more than five days for us.
[Bears]: Yeah. So let's, I think we should just step back, and there's a few facts here. So number one, this is a private property. The state is making an agreement with this private property owner. So that's the arrangement here. The mayor has secured a bit of understanding, but this is an agreement between the state and a private property owner. The state is paying for this. State government is paying for this. And as councilors are set, the building will have to meet certain basic standards, such as the plumbing code. The issue here is that the more permanent shelters, such as empty hotels, motels, and other structures, have hit their maximum. And these are going to be temporary places for people to stay. I think a few weeks ago, if people were reading the news, they were using the empty conference rooms at the Department of Transportation headquarters to house people. So this is meant to be a better solution than using empty conference rooms to house people. And I think if folks are also watching the news, they would know that Governors and leaders of states on the border have decided to weaponize this issue and start shipping people to other states for political purposes. So that is another reason that we're seeing this influx where there may be other places that could certainly handle this, but the leaders have chosen to kind of try to go against federal immigration policy and best practices.
[SPEAKER_21]: Um, well, I mean, what goes against our constitution and the law is the open border, but I don't, I'm not meaning to disrespect anyone. You know, people have a right to a home into a clean bathroom. I understand that. I understand that there's going to be people, families with children. I respect that. I understand that my concerns are health. And all of these people aren't going to be nice little families. Let's face it, we've seen a lot of fentanyl pouring over the border. We've seen, you know, a lot of child trafficking happening. It's, it's, it's concerning. It's concerning. You know, I would love to think that they're going to be just a lot of nice families that are just looking for a better life. But that's not the reality. So I do have concerns about health and safety.
[Bears]: Thank you. Yes. And the state has said that these will be families and also folks who are in these facilities have been processed legally through the immigration authorities at the federal level. Okay. Thank you.
[Leming]: Yes. I'd like to thank everybody who has come forward to speak so far. And I appreciate Pete and I appreciate that everybody sees this as a place where they can to express their thoughts. I'd just like to bring up one point that's been coming up in a couple of different public comment periods, which has been the safety issue specifically. Safety concerns can stem from several different things when it comes to violent crime specifically, which I think was a sentiment in a few public comments. I did some reading this past week, which is influencing my own thinking about this. I'd just like to share it, which was a paper that was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2020 comparing crime rates between undocumented immigrants, legal immigrants, and native-born US citizens in Texas. So it's one study, but I think it's pretty relevant to this, which You can go through the whole thing online if you'd like, but the significant section says, despite its centrality to public and political discourse, we lack even basic information on fundamental questions regarding undocumented immigrants and crime. This stems largely from data constraints going beyond existing research. The authors in this study utilize data from the Texas Department of Public Safety, which checks and records the immigration status of all arrestees throughout the state. Contrary to public perception, we observe considerably lower felony arrest rates among undocumented immigrants compared to legal immigrants and native-born U.S. citizens and find no evidence that undocumented criminality has increased in recent years. Our findings help us understand why the most aggressive immigrant removal programs have not delivered on their crime reduction promises and are unlikely to do so in the future. While the news does report on unequal rates about crimes that happen in immigrant communities versus everywhere else, I think it is important to keep in mind what the scientific research says. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor. I'm going to let Jessica Taddeo
[Jessica Taddeo]: Hello, everyone. Jessica Taddeo, 50 Feldsview Ave. in Medford. I first and foremost want to thank Councilor Leming for bringing those statistics forward because this was actually something I would like to mention. I wasn't planning on speaking. I actually didn't join the meeting until a bit after it started, but I have been on long enough to be appalled by some of the comments that I'm hearing and if you hear my voice shaking a little bit it's because I am really emotional. I grew up in Medford and I went off to college in Rhode Island telling everyone how grateful I was to receive an education where I was sympathetic towards people's backgrounds and lived experiences and had a great experience being in such a diverse community. And I am so saddened hearing the way that some of my neighbors are talking about people who are coming to this country for the same reasons that their relatives did. I work in my mother's school. She works in Lynn. It's a majority-minority school district. A lot of the kids don't even speak English. And I'm just now thinking about how some of these families staying in these temporary homes could go to the Mississaugas or the Roberts and have their first experience in a classroom and have a really positive one. And that experience wouldn't be afforded to them if the federal government, the state of Massachusetts didn't set up or at least develop an infrastructure for housing migrants. I don't think it's fair. for people to sit here and, you know, discuss the nitty-gritty logistics of whether or not the apartments are going to be furnished. Like, these families deserve a roof over their head, and if Medford can play a part in making sure that can happen, then we should all, we should all without a doubt be in support of that. When I hear talk of crime and safety and disease, and those words are being used in the context of talking about immigrants from non-white countries, that's not just a racist dog whistle. That is something that makes me uncomfortable, knowing that somebody in my neighborhood feels that way about someone who just wants to come here for a better life. And so, like I said, if Medford can play any part in making that happen, whether or not they communicated the initiative poorly or not, I think we have a moral obligation to these families who want to come to Medford. If we can provide them a roof over their head and a place to learn and a place to be happy, then who are we to say no to that? So I just encourage members of the community to be really mindful about how they're talking about this issue. And I encourage them to do a little more reading about the actual statistics of trafficking, drugs, And all of the rhetoric, the way that we talk about migrants, like, please, I encourage you to look at multiple news sources because some of the facts that I'm hearing are nothing but falsities. And so just that's all I have to say. And thank you for your time.
[Bears]: Thank you, Mr. President.
[Scarpelli]: I think that again, I think we're missing the point here. I think that what the biggest concern is communication. I think the biggest concern and what people are saying are valid valid points. If it's offensive, I can understand that too. I can understand how some people might feel that way. But they're legitimately valid points when you're talking about, you know, Are we communicating enough? Is it transparent enough to understand that if we're allowing this to happen, are we giving the support to help these families thrive? So I think some of these questions like, are they being vaccinated? That's not just for protection for the people that are in our community, but for the people that are gonna be in the same area with them. So it is a legitimate question that when I reached out to different communities like Cambridge, like Revere, these are the same questions. Again, I don't want to cloud this as being something that was really racist or this should be failed, it's not. I'm a first-generation American. My father and mother came through Ellis Island. I understand the situation. I work with kids that are from Lynn, same type of children. And I understand what they go through every day. And I feel their pain and I work for them every day. But at the same time, with this situation, Let's not muddy the water and understand something very simple. This is just about communication, making sure that not only our citizens have the answers they want to be protected, but also let's not forget the people that are coming into these houses and understand to make sure that we're doing the right thing for them. So I think it goes both ways. I don't think it's just this shouldn't be pitted again. Like I said earlier, this isn't something that one against the other. This is something that we need more information to be distributed to all parties. To make sure that we're making sure we're taking care of not only the visitors that are here, but also the residents that are here. And I think that like, from what I heard from the most part, from the phone calls, the emails, and people that are coming to this podium, it's really not understanding why they're not being heard or why the messages are being sent. So I thank Representative Donato for being here. I understand the mayor has sent multiple messages about not truly knowing or getting the answers that they need, but that's why having that meeting with them. Is it a done deal? I've heard it was to and then I heard it wasn't because nothing signed yet. But again, the council bear said this is an issue that it's coming directly from a landlord and the state. And What we're hearing is our political leaders don't have the power to get that information out that we need yet. So like I said, I'm hoping that with getting this meeting out and all the parties are understanding, because I'm sure Representative Donato is going to go back to the state level and they're going to hear what Medford's saying and forward against it. And I think that we need to have that meeting that really answers these big questions. And again, it's not just, you know, for the last caller, it's the last person on zoom, it's, it's not just to protect our citizens. The truth of the matter is, it's really protecting those young, especially the children that are in that in that location. Because no one's giving them any answers. And listen, for someone that's worked in this field, and worked with this demographic for the last 1520 years, 30 years, I understand how difficult it is for these families, and what they're going to be going through. But I would hate to say that we're rushing this process through just to say we house them. That doesn't do people any good either. We have to make sure we're protecting their safeties as well. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. I'm going to go to Eileen Lerner on Zoom.
[Clerk]: Eileen, name and address for the record, please.
[Eileen Lerner]: My name is Eileen Lerner and I live at 9 Adams Circle in Medford, Mass. And I just would like to say that I really appreciated both Councilor Scarpelli's remarks and Jessica Taddeo's remarks as well. I agree with Councilor Scarpelli that information is essential. And I think it's possible that a lot of details are just being worked out now in the state and that, you know, when they make a final decision, then then possibly we'll get to know. But, you know, I think, Councilor Scarpella, you can't. You're overlooking some of the some of the fear and animosity and stereotyping that we have heard tonight. And it just goes against all the statements about how welcoming a city that Medford is. And it's just so uncharitable. You know, I taught English to immigrants for about 20 years. About half of our population, these were adults, were undocumented. And their stories were heart-rending. And very few people understand what these people have gone through. You do, Councilor Scarpelli, and I appreciate that. And I wish you would communicate to your constituency a little bit more of what you understand, because it really is upsetting listening to you know, propaganda from the right wing. And, you know, this is primarily a Christian city. What about the Good Samaritan and all that, you know? Don't you want to help people? And yeah, we have to make sure they get the healthcare they need because yeah, They're going to be among us. And we don't want to get any kind of diseases. So that means we have to take care of them. God has placed them here in our community, whether we like it or not. And we need to take care of them. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Eileen. Is there anyone else who hasn't spoken yet who would like to speak? All right, and I saw a couple people who had already spoken. I'll go, Mr. Merritt, if we could, you know.
[Nate Merritt]: I'll keep it short.
[Bears]: Yeah, I don't think we're going to solve federal immigration policy tonight.
[Nate Merritt]: No, but I did want to address. something that Councilor Leming had mentioned. I appreciate statistics, I'm a scientist also, okay? So definitely some mind meld there. That said, my particular home is probably the outlier. And again, this is directly across the street. So this is where I'm coming from. When my wife was pregnant with my oldest child, just a few years ago, we had someone break into our house Right? Not okay. And the only thing that saved her from getting hurt was me putting a door in front of that person. Medford PD was great. They came over the detectives, you know, did their thing, right? I scared the person away. And they eventually caught up with them down the street. Okay, that's a terrible thing to happen to anybody. This is where I'm coming from. Not only that, during that incident, I found out from Medford PD that, oh, yeah, we arrested someone under your porch a couple years ago. Really? When the officers are familiar with my backyard, because they've had to come in and find people, I think it was shoplifters or something like that. This isn't about race. My concerns are literally because number one, there's crime in my neighborhood. It's a real thing. The businesses that are there actually are concerned about, like there's a lot of mechanic shops and so on and so forth, right? Vehicles, I'm sure you've heard like a legitimate thing where people were cutting off Cadillac converters for cars. I mean, there's real things that are happening in this city. So I'd love to hear from the police chief right, what the actual crime is by zone to help give you some real data to work from. But I'm going off my personal experience. So now there were two, two crimes committed, literally in my house. Right, like I said, Wegmans has a police officer for a reason, not because they want to go spend money. And, you know, like I said, it's great when the police can show up at your house. But at the same time, what happens if it's one of my kids? Who am I blaming? Who am I suing? Right? If we don't protect our people here first. So that's where I'm coming from. It's I don't care what your race or any of that is. I really don't. But I also know when you have like the Occupy Wall Street, when you've had a lot of clusters of people in places that aren't homes, they're not built for homes, bad things can happen to everybody. So I'm a concerned dad. I'm okay to say that, but I'd rather not have statistics thrown in my face and say, oh, you know, you're just a, you know, you're just a right wing nut job. No, I'm not. I'm a concerned dad where already bad things have happened in my neighborhood. That's my concern.
[Bears]: Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I mean, I just wanna say, I think we can also appreciate There's outliers, and then there's statistical averages. And outliers aren't part of statistical averages. And we're individual people. But on average, if we're talking about crime in the city, crime is down massively in the last 25 years in this community. And that's what the statistics that the police chief provides to us annually show. It doesn't mean that crime doesn't happen. It just means that the number of crimes is down. And on average, it's a much safer community than it was even maybe 10 years ago when someone was under your porch. five years ago. I'm going to go to Lorna Wilkerson. Ms. Wilkerson, you've already spoken once, so if you could try to keep the comments short and direct, and then we will move on the question as amended.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: Just a quick question. This is a private homeowner. Is this private homeowner benefiting from tax from the citizens of this city?
[Lungo-Koehn]: Just a quick question.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: This is a private homeowner.
[Bears]: Our understanding is that the state is signing a contract with this private property owner to rent the property for the purposes that the state would like to rent it for. The property owner pays taxes to the city.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: So this individual is going to be able to make a decision that's going to affect the entire citizenry of this town?
[Bears]: That is how private property owners have that right, yes.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: And the City Council is okay with this?
[Bears]: City Council cannot violate the Constitution and take private property without due process, and I don't think we want an eminent domain in this building. I don't think we have the money to do so.
[Lorna Wilkerson]: Oh, no, it's quite the opposite. I'm not asking about eminent domain. I'm concerned that this citizen can affect 56,000 other people. And in turn, as had been discussed before, that the state could take the property from the members of this town if they can't fit enough people who are immigrants into appropriate shelters. Thank you.
[Bears]: On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by Councilor Scarpelli, to request a robocall to the neighbourhood once the date and time and location of the public meeting is scheduled. Is there any further comment? Is there a second on the amended motion? Seconded by Councilor Callaghan. All those in favour? Opposed? Motion passes. We do have the election report. I know this went a little—could we maybe take that?
[Collins]: Motion to suspend the rules and take 23-474.
[Bears]: Motion by Councilor Collins to suspend the rules to take paper 23-474, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favour? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. 2023 Municipal Election Process Errors and Accountability Report, and I believe the longer motion I don't have in front of me right now, but this was requesting both a written report and that the Elections Manager and Elections Commission join us at this meeting to discuss the 2023 election, what issues and errors were identified, and what process improvements will be made going forward to address them. And I will turn this over to Manager Ripley, Elections Manager Ripley.
[Melissa Ripley]: Good evening. Thank you for inviting me before you to discuss the election of 2022. I submitted to you the after action report that was presented in the agenda packet last week. I'm happy to answer any questions you might have about the after action report and any other questions you might have about pertaining to the election.
[Bears]: Any questions or comments from members of the council regarding the after action report? Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you for being here tonight. I know it took some time, but this is obviously a very bothersome situation. The way the process was handled in many different levels was very alarming to us. Like the lack of communication was alarming to us, but I see some of the protocol in place that I'm reading. I find it a little alarming where the biggest thing as we went through this process and how difficult it was and the concerning issues that we saw, probably the biggest thing that affected me personally is how many people mentioned to me long time voters said they would never ever vote. in a local election again, by the way, the optics looks now, there was nothing wrong, I guess that everything came out that you did the refill, there was a recall or recount for for numbers, everything. It wouldn't nothing would change. It wasn't this this conspiracy theory that was out there. But what I do know is what I saw firsthand and what I heard firsthand election day. And what I do want to make sure that we do moving forward is making sure that people that are involved in the election process, whether it be your office, our commissioners, whether it's our poll workers, or whether it's people that are working the polls, and that's where I'm going to come from. You have people that exercise their rights to go and work polls, and I'm reading the criteria, and I've been doing this since I was a little kid, neighboring communities, and understand that this is a process that's legally in place. And there's something even here that says that what people don't understand, what I'm speaking is poll workers, people that don't know that are watching. candidates have an opportunity to build a team to make sure they're working their team to most efficient process to make sure they get their voters out on election day. So people work very hard to set up these teams that at each polling location, they had what's called the poll watcher. And a poll watcher would sit in an approved area by law, they would, I know that it said that they're not to provide a chair or table, we understand that. We have here that this is the process. This is where we wanna help people feel comfortable and understand the process. And there's this part here that says they're not to sit down, even if they bring their own chairs. That's something I would question. Okay, I think that's terrible for the fact that it's exactly why we're here tonight for these little things. The understanding of educating our workers, the process of the new pads. Now, what we trained, because I was part of one of these teams, they were trained, the poll workers were trained to understand this. As a person comes in, they're asked for their ID or not. They were then asked for their name and address. Then they would say their name and they would repeat back their name and address. What we saw firsthand though, because I was there, what I saw was it would say, they would show their ID and then they'd go right through. It wasn't repeated in some cases. In some other cases, their names were given but they weren't repeated back. So the whole format was a mess. The way that poll workers that volunteered to come out, the way they were treated was horrible. So as we're moving forward to this process, now, whatever the process is, if it's just putting out the markers, where to stand on election day, because we didn't do that this year. Why? I don't know, but we didn't do that. So we had people at different locations moving anywhere they wanted. And you had some areas with some aggressive poll managers that are coming out. I forgot what we call them, but, and then we had other areas that we didn't have it. So it was inconsistencies. So the process in total, I'm reading this, and I'll be honest with you, I'm not truly satisfied because when some of these issues occurred with the ballots and who got what ballots and the misprinting of the ballots, we as a council found it to be a problem. We said, quote unquote, that perception is reality. And if we need to do anything, please, let's work as a team to figure out a way, whether it's approving money, whether it's hiring people, whether it's getting people educated, we didn't do that. Instead, we just ran with it. And it was exactly what we were afraid of. It was a mess. It was completely a mess. Then the process moves forward with people getting ballots that they shouldn't have. Then we have, we've corrected that. Then there was some ballots that, you know, that had the wrong dates and we corrected that. And then, then we go to the election day and there were multiple issues with people not understanding the process and how people were treated. Then you move after the election process and understanding that there were legal documents that were sent out saying, for instance, The mail-in ballots will be tabulated here at City Hall and posted at eight o'clock at City Hall. That was never done. Questions that people have asked. We talked about when it stopped, polling stops at eight, the voting stops at eight, and 8.30 things will be posted. Well, we didn't get posts, we didn't realize the final numbers until one o'clock in the morning. So these are all legitimate issues. And I read through this report, and it sounds great, but I think it needs more substance. I think it needs more, I think the biggest part right now, especially when we talk about the election day, is the education and the fact that the poll workers are valued. And if we have to find that if value is by by expense, for those important dates, then we should find whatever we need to make sure financially they're valued. So we get more people interested in this council talk about, you know, what we're going to talk about in a minute about a rate pay raise for school committee and saying we'll get better candidates if we pay. But let's find a way to make sure that we're putting everything in place so the March elections, we don't have the issues we have. Because like I said, I hate the fact that we had to feed into the narrative of what we saw. And some of these issues are concerning to me. I still, I don't like the fact, this is part of the election process. And poll watchers, and I know for sure, because I'm married to one of them, that some of these people are angels, and the way they were treated, and the way that when we were then presented to explain to them the laws of Massachusetts. that we had and then being treated the way they were was appalling to me. And what we did was not only did we let questions and let perception become reality, the biggest concern I had right now was we lost good people that dedicated their voting rights to this community every time we had. And we have to find a way as a team to do is to. Commission your office in this council, the mayor's office to make people feel confident that they should come out to vote that their vote does count that if they're part of the process of a they're given every right that they're supposed to be given to the law. And at the same time, educate the people so they understand the process. So again, I hate to be harsh because I tell you what, when I say love, I love some of your commissioners. I go way back with the commission. There's no way to blame here. But I think my frustration came, especially right after the election, was the lack of communication. and the lack of understanding. And so, you know, here we are, January. the 20th and we're talking about the report that was passed in and I think that this is a good start. But for this councilor, I would recommend that we start a subcommittee, Mr. President, with this process that we meet with both commissioners and the elections office to make sure that this council is working, working step by step to make sure you're getting everything you need. So we don't have the lack of the lack of employees downstairs. We saw it firsthand. We know it's not easy. We know that it's a it's an undermanned process. But we're saying if this is the council, we our our strength is making sure that we vote on a budget. And we're working hand in hand with the commission and the elections office that we're working through this all the way through the budget season to make sure that we're staffing a staff that's gonna give it the respect it deserves moving forward. Because I think this was, there were a lot of concerning issues. And again, it's someone that's built up a lot of sadness and anger for the simple fact that people that were there, people that dedicated themselves to the election process, and people that just came out to vote have now found themselves not wanting to do that anymore. And to me, that is a disgrace and it's sad. So thank you.
[Bears]: Chancellor Schrapp, I think you, just to clarify, you wanted a motion that we, me and the Governance Committee, we continue to continue to review the updates and reforms listed in this report and check in on them in advance of the March election and afterwards. Yeah. Meet with the Elections Commission.
[Scarpelli]: It's the commission's fault. It's the election, the election department's fault. This is something that if we really want ownership of this, we all have to have ownership in this. And I think that, you know, we don't, I take blame in it myself because, you know, we let that happen. We let that office go down to one person. We saw the mistakes, so is that okay, Mr. President?
[Bears]: Yeah, I got emotional and governance committee meet with commission and staff to check in and make sure that their needs are met relative to the, yep, got it. Okay, Councilor Callahan, Councilor Vice President Collins, Councilor Callahan.
[Callahan]: Thank you. So, when I was reading this after action report, I assumed that it would include some explanation of the things that had gone wrong, and why they had gone wrong. And I, I just don't see anything like that in here I see a lot of things like, you know, I mean, As Councilor Scarpelli said, we often have these results by 9pm, and yet we didn't have the results until 1 o'clock in the morning. And rather than any sort of explanation of why that happened, it says all ballots must be counted on election day. The tabulation facility will post the tabulated tapes in the same method as the individual precincts. Unofficial results will be released once, like there is nothing in here that explains what happened. So my first question is perhaps I misunderstood what this report was supposed to be. So I'd like to ask what the report was supposed to be. And I think it would be incredibly helpful to have some sort of understanding of what it was that actually went wrong because I don't see that in here at all.
[Bears]: I will look for the original motion language. If you have anything else you want to say, I can go to Vice President Collins and get back to you with the Vice President Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Pierce. Manager Ripley, commissioners, thank you so much for being here today. I appreciate the diligence and effort gone into the after action report. I appreciate my fellow councilors' comments on this so far, and I think that my initial observations from the report follow the same trends. really appreciate that this is kind of a comprehensive overview of the beginning to end of the process. But I agree, I think that, you know, for myself as one Councilor, I was hoping for kind of that diagnosis of, you know, these issues that we raised before the election, on election day, after the election. You know, I think that Everybody can relate to, you know, when you're looking at something that didn't go the way that you wanted it to. You have to start out, okay, what exactly, what were we shooting for? Didn't quite happen. You need to know the why. We need to know the why. None of this is personal. But as Councilors, as electeds, as representatives, as a community, if we're going to have faith that our three very consequential elections this year, which are going to see much higher turnout probably than the one in November did, if we can trust and tell the community to trust that those are going to go as well as we know that we can, we need to know exactly why, exactly what we're going to do differently than what we did in November in the lead up to it. So, you know, for example, you know, I appreciate For example, under election preparation, you're noting every part of that process. You mentioned at this point in time, we have destroyed all old supplies from the state, talking about the information sheet that was sent in and mail-in ballots that referenced an election in 2022. That's great. For example, I would love to see or maybe talk about in subcommittee, if that's a more reasonable timeline for this, what is our policy for when old elections materials are destroyed or removed from the office so that we know they will never be put in a ballot for which they're irrelevant, that kind of procedure. You know, similarly, I know one of the issues that I was hearing the most about on election day was the interfacing of wardens and voters at the polls around things like voter guides or how people were checked in. Totally heard that most of the wardens did a fine job, you know, did the role that they were hired to perform. You know, this is one of the areas of the city where we really have to strive for perfection because voting rights are inalienable and we have to It's just essential that everybody has the full accessibility to their vote and everything that comes along with that. So this is why this has been a project for us to deliberate on this and meet on this and want to go over this to make sure that we're all entering into a resilient election year together. And I think that the interfacing between the poll workers and those going to the polls, that is an issue where we have to, again, we have to strive for perfection every single time because it's a voter enfranchisement issue. It's a confidence issue. I know on the issue of staffing, that's one that we brought up when we raised this paper to begin with. And among our questions and directives, it's not just for this report. And again, I really thank you for the detail you've put into this. We also had a motion to the administration to say, clearly there's a staffing need. There's a demonstrated, there's an articulated staffing need. We wanna know how we can help expedite that. I think this council is pretty young. The previous council was unified in saying, the election department needs staff, let's get it staffed up. But if we need to dial down on that to get specific on here's exactly what we need in the next budget cycle for a fully staffed elections department. Let's have those conversations. If we need to get specific about here's how many wardens and poll workers that we had for the November, 2023 election. And it was a little thin and we know that turnout is going to be different. So here's what we need to shoot for. And let's talk about and communicate and make public the plan for getting to that number as close as we can to it. I think that these are conversations that would really behoove us to go over publicly, you know, for our edification and again for that project of reestablishing some of the confidence that has been lost. And ideally, hopefully to, you know, add to the efforts of advertising the poll worker positions. I appreciate Councilor Scarpelli's motion to continue this conversation in a subcommittee of the government's committee. I think that that will really help us to flesh out some of the additional detail and specific next steps that we'd like to see beyond this report. And again, I thank you for your time and for all your hard work all year round.
[Bears]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. be it further resolved that the report include specific responses to, one, the misprinting of ballots, two, the inaccurate instruction sheets provided to voters with mail ballots, three, trainings that provided incorrect information to poll wardens and workers regarding voters bringing materials to assist them in the voting booth, and four, persistent issues with the counting of ballots in a timely manner and release of the incomplete, unofficial results to the public, be it further resolved that the mayor provide the council with a supplemental appropriation request, to restore full-time staffing levels in the Elections Department. That was joined with Councilor Scarpelli's paper, be it resolved that the election coordinator report back to the City Council with a detailed report and findings detailing the municipal election, which includes, but is not limited to, absentee ballots, polling rules and regulations, complaints, and malfunctions. And then that was amended by Councilor Scarpelli, offering a member requesting that the election manager and election commission come before the Council to explain in detail what happened during the election. Thank you for being here. Councilor Tseng offered an amendment that any report comes out of this that should include reference to the funding problems and full-time staffing issues in the elections office. And Councilor Schaffer also requested that the council send a letter to the Secretary of State's office asking them to look into the process. So that was the original, that was the two motions joined and amended from our November 14th, 2023 council meeting. Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: Thank you, President Bears. I think my thoughts are in line with the councilors who have spoken already. I want to first thank you all for putting together this report. I know oftentimes we request reports and they kind of go into the ether to have an I think, um. Pretty thorough report back is helpful. Um that being said, you know, there's still some questions that we have that aren't necessarily settled in this report. It might be better and wiser to, um to meet and subcommittee about it. Um that way we can give you all time. We can come up with our list of, um of more specific questions that we have. I think to restore that confidence, it's helpful to have some document as kind of like a guide for someone who doesn't know how elections are run. I think reading this part of the gap in terms of what we're perceiving and maybe what the intention was comes from the fact that you all just understand how elections are run. And so there are basic underlying I think underlying steps, procedures that are just very obvious to the Elections Commission that aren't very obvious to us as residents. And so I think we can work together to think through what those questions might be. Something in my mind is the question of central tabulation, and what seems like a shift from an old system where we used to count at polling booths to now this mixed system where we have some votes, some ballots counted at polling locations, some ballots counted here as a central tab. I think further clarification on what determines what's counted where, why have we made that decision versus why have we changed this new system would be helpful. I think There are outstanding questions I've heard from constituents about even though the numbers ultimately did add up, a lot of these numbers were found on different sheets. And so why was that the case? How can we make sure going forward that the sheets that are published by the city the numbers all add up and are final. I think some over the last few election cycles, some residents have been a little confused as to why we're giving an update at 9 p.m., let's say, and another update, a final update at 1 a.m. instead of doing it in one complete batch. I think these are just some of the larger questions that residents might have that you might know the answers to that maybe are a bit evidence to you all but not as evident to us and would be helpful to uh to have in a report or to talk about in the South.
[Leming]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Leming. We appreciate that there's not enough staff working in the elections department and that the folks on the commissions are I'm a member of the community. I'm largely there as volunteers of the community. So that is that is an issue, and I have sympathy for the, uh, lack of capacity to complete the work required for all the elections that you need to manage. Um. I do sympathize with what Councilor Callahan said about the expectations for the report in order to If I were a person that knew nothing about the election and I read this report, I don't think I would be able to recount events and all the issues that happened. My idea with what a complete detail-oriented report would be is if I could have that being somebody who knew nothing. In order to know everything that happened on the election, you would have to have This report, you'd have to have a number of different posts on the Internet, and you'd have to talk to a number of different people to find all the details, notwithstanding things that have already been mentioned by my colleagues here. So. That is what I was expecting and that is what I would like to see because it's important to know in details all of the issues that you experienced and all of the ways that you are potentially lacking support, which may have caused these issues to come up to begin with so that we can then try to fix them. So that is... That's all I'd like to say. Thank you very much for coming out here tonight.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Leming. Any further comments from Councilors?
[Scarpelli]: Just one more. Thank you. I think Councilor Leming brought something up that I had as a concern. I think that we have two commission members that have done yeoman's work and gone above and beyond, and we see you two everywhere. You're everywhere. And that brings me to the question that I had that we talked about even during the process with the school committee and looking at commissions and boards that we feel that are that important that we have to look at it in different ways. So, one question I brought up was everybody knows who the two of you are. But I asked for a report to say, what is the attendance record for the other members on the commission? Because I think that's important also, just for the fact that if two people are doing the job that realistically a commission of five or seven, we really need dedicated people that, hey, we heard so many people say this so many issues. Well, then put up a shut up. And these are the opportunities that we have in our community that come and help the commission and be part of that commission and be part of the commission all in. It's a volunteer position, you guys. And for the most part, I've seen the commission, these two members of the commission, very active everywhere. But for the most part, most other people don't know who the other commissioners are, unless it's election day or they have to be in a certain spot. And I think that's a problem as well. And I think that's something that I'll be bringing forward myself because I think that in the totality of commissions and boards that we have in our community, and who's responsible for putting them into place or what they their weight, their responsibilities of weight, whether it's financial or whether it's weight other ways, maybe, maybe it's, we look at our assessor and say, maybe there's a tax break for residents that have these backgrounds, that we can bring people that are qualified to really support that. You know, it's no different than, you know, we have commissions right now that we have nothing in place right now that we have commissions and other boards that don't even live in the city anymore. And that's something I'll look forward to meeting with and try to change those. But I think that's another concern that I have that in totality, this isn't, this is something that we need more, more effort and more support to in every level. So I wanted to share that as well. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Stroud. Was that a motion? Was there a motion in there? You had the previous one. Was there a further motion? Okay. Attendance?
[Lungo-Koehn]: In committee? Yeah.
[Bears]: Thank you. And I think if we look at the governance committee, this is on there already as well for the next several months for us to take a look at. I have some questions, but I will wait since we've heard from everyone else. I will go to you guys since my colleagues have had a chance to speak. If you have anything you'd like to say this time or any questions you'd like to answer.
[Henry Milorin]: Yeah, good evening. My name is Henry Mullen. I'm a member of the Election Commission. That will be room 102 here in City Hall. I live in 8 Temple Street. One of the key thing you look, the report you receive was strictly done by election manager. That was something we designed to be done right after the election. Am I happy to be standing in front of you today talking about election? Hell no. Most of you knows it. Yes, the council asked for and a voice message for attendance, we have that, okay? What I put together is something totally different based on what I'm observing, it's what I can offer with the department to say, we need to get our process better. But the night of the election, what took place wasn't there, no one saw it coming. Suddenly you have five precinct, that zero back in, okay? Let me explain it so people understand it. Once you shut the tabulator down, until the memory cards are removed, don't touch it. Any attempt will be to zero back in. That's the reason we lost it. But I do thank you, Councilor Zak, at the time who reached out to me, at the time was Vice President, now President, who reached out to me as a gentleman, what you observe and we share it, you know, politely, we work it out, and we end up, whether it takes long, when I hear people say, you gotta have it by 830, by 930, there's no specific time for an official result. It will be fair. That night, I was standing right here, I was so happy it was gonna be there. But I'm gonna share something with you where I said, that's mostly I said it before, not here, but in many other communities. Irregularities in election, they will be there. It doesn't matter how much you do. Somebody is going to do a dumb mistake, it's going to cause a lot of problems. Because anytime you have human interaction, they're subject to it. But what I did, That night, I said, we need to identify and investigate irregularities that took place. We put together the evidence. We tried to do everything we can do. One of the things we haven't done for the first time in Medford, we did it, but we didn't really exceed on it because we had other things that prevented. We put together a survey. because the people you want, people stalking from the side and say, this didn't go wrong, this didn't go right, this was supposed to be, the people who's gonna tell us what's right, what's wrong, are the people who work the polls. I used to be a poll worker. I worked every, from inspector to clerk, from clerk to warden, I end up being here, but it's not by choice, but by love. We put that, if we put that survey together, that will allow us to find out from our poll workers, okay, to find out what didn't work for them. Then we can come back to the manager and say, this is where we need to adjust. We didn't do that. Why didn't we do that? Because immediately after that, we were challenged by a recount. The recount took away everything we wanted to do. And we're still trying to do, because if you look at it right now, excluding today, we 41 days left until the next election. And I'm not saying, I'm talking about on the day of election, I'm not including early voting. I'm not including the census. We have a lot of work that we have to do. We need just like one thing I heard today, it's established. an independent investigation, a group of people who can really work together, not a group of people who's going and solve together. Because then I tell you, I've been living here for 55 years. maybe not all of you knows me, most of you knows me, okay? That name means something in Medford. If it doesn't mean in Medford, it means something in the country. First time in my life, I'm receiving threatened call, okay? First time, I said that to you, you know, try to say it, not as a Councilor, but as a friend, I said, this is what's going on. At one point, for me to go to my wife, I said, I gotta return a lawyer, okay? That's unacceptable. Not in the city of Medford. But like I told people, I'm already a dead man. You think I care? I don't. Okay? Because I'm closer to dying than living. So, that doesn't scare me. I'm going to continue to display what I say in twenty twenty. My love for the city of Medford is what guide me. Not my hate. We say we review voter registration and eligibility. When somebody is calling me and a ballot by mail and I didn't apply and then when I come to City Council uh office, election office and said, hey, uh Josh told me, okay, they didn't apply for vote by mail and they receive it and then they pull out the application. That's a lie. That's an insult, okay? Because your application is right there. So, that means you submitted that application. So, process need to be changed and irregularity need to be done. What really messed me up is the the you saw how we did the recount. The recount was done. You were really involved. We we we we did an excellent job that night. That day. Okay. But the thing is that what we need at that didn't change the process too long and I guarantee I I was on the phone The result on the night of election was at one o'clock. I have it stamped here, 12.01. You and I are standing with a group of other candidates standing in the hallway, okay, and we're going over it. I have it here to prove. So these are the things I said. Here on this side of the rail, you guys elected official. You are elected, you're representing me, every single one of you, okay? Some of you used to be my friend, maybe I don't have it anymore, it's okay, okay? I wasn't made to make friends, I was made to serve the city of Medford, which I'm doing. The thing I'm trying to do, words are important. There are things that are being said here on this side. That's a brand new council. I'm not blaming you guys. You all do. I interact with every single one of you. The thing is, the words are important. But tonight, what I had in mind is not what I have to talk about because of what I heard. If we can sit down together, we can work better. We can do better things, just like we did on election night. Okay, two phone calls came to me and said, Henry, something is wrong with that. I said, I'm looking at it, something is wrong with it, but I don't know what it is. Now, I'm pressuring the guy who did it. At one point, I sat and requested SLOG, right? Now, most of you probably don't know what everything has a backlog, everything. So I requested from the expert, I will call him the expert, okay, who was helping us. I said, something is wrong here. Those numbers doesn't match to me, but I don't know what's wrong with it. So we challenge him in a way. brought down, think about, you know, getting the owner of the company to come here, all dressed up, whatever he was partying to, we broke that, we say, you gotta come here, he came here and did it for us. But now we have a better process, but perhaps the process we put in place, when we sit in that meeting, you're talking about, we can share with you as a group, then you realize, you say, well, they're proactive, they're not really reactive, they're proactive, something to, went wrong, and this is what we're doing. By the time we get it, we should have the, when I heard people said the in-house early voting should be posted by certain times. That's not true. Early voting is incorporated into the tabulation to come up with the unofficial. That's how it works.
[Scarpelli]: If I can, to Ms. Miller. I will provide, the commissioner with the letter that was sent to the candidate that that morning, what there was said that the votes will be tallied here and posted at eight o'clock.
[Henry Milorin]: I will get that letter. Okay. I appreciate that, which is okay. So that may be, but the thing we're trying to do, enhancing transparency and monitoring the process is important. In order for us to do something, we need everybody together to work on it. And I will appreciate that will be it. But see, the point I'm trying to get here, it says, We need to establish a better control. For instance, we're looking, we talk about poll observer. I heard that tonight. There's a law, and I said it too many times. I work almost, I mean, we have 18%. I think this cycle of election, I did maybe five, okay? Not like I did 16 the last time. But the thing is, I told the warden, listen, the people that are observers, They're Medford people. They're friends of Medford people. You are the official, you can treat them better. Because I give them example, I say, as the law said, you're a police officer, it says 25, because I catch you doing 35 doesn't mean I gotta give you a ticket. The law say I give you a ticket, but the law say I can say, hey, guess what? Slow down, okay? Go. So it's the same thing we can do. You have something you brought here, the council which was really reasonable, okay? What do you do before election? I think we talked about that either yesterday or today and we've been talking about it. You go to the site just like you saw us doing here on recount. We marked everywhere you're going to be sitting. This is where the candidate can be. This is where 150 feet where your sign can be. This is where the observer don't be sitting but Training is, we know it. We haven't have the time to conduct training. Already, between that report, there's a place, I believe, it's in your report, that says we don't have to try to train clerk and warden twice prior to an election, inspectors at least once or twice prior an election. Because we're dealing with people my age. If you do something with them three months prior to the event, they forget. If you do it a week, two weeks prior to the event, then remember, not everybody is sharp like Henry is, okay? But that's the thing. The law is complicated. So with that, I will lay it over and wait for the invitation. We can sit down and have a conversation because what took place on November 2023 is unacceptable. Okay? Why? Because we need to work with the police to tell them, hey, if I need you, I need to call you. We need to establish a better communication with the warden. Call the warden if I need, I need to get you. But this is the thing that we're missing. If you're calling someone and tell them what's going on. Can you imagine somebody We're going to sue you. We're going to sue the city. You know, for election, that's not fair. So I need to work. We need to work together. Until we start doing that, we're still going to get the same mess, regardless. OK? We have to change the process to produce different results. And I will rest my case. I don't want to question a little bit more of it. I look forward to whatever you guys have.
[Bears]: Thank you, Henry. And Chairman Loren, I appreciate it. Thank you, Manager. Thank you, Member DiBenedetto, for being here. You have one more thing?
[Henry Milorin]: Yeah. The most important thing I have to say, right, is the fact tonight we were supposed to come here and present you with the election calendar. Election calendar for 2024 has to be shared with the council. We sent it to law. because we were directed by the state to send to our law department to review to make sure we're in compliance, which we all normally do. So if we had to keep it, what we're gonna do, once we get the go, the green light will probably electronically get it to you guys, yeah, that whatever mean to the clerk office, and then post it on our website. But the most important thing that we're facing right now, less than two days ago, we get the confirmation One of our polling location, which is walking court, will not be eligible in this cycle of election. So we need to relocate that. We're talking about something like 2,600 voters that we have prior to March 5th. even before March 5th, because we don't have early voting, to tell them, okay, where to vote. And we haven't, we're gonna relocate them here. That's the only place in Medford we can relocate that site. We cannot go to Tufts, because Tufts doesn't anymore give us the room that we will normally need, and that a different polling location. We cannot send them to American Legion. We're facing parking issues. Uh, the only place is here. So, we working with, we look at the, what's the church name, Wellesley? We look at Wellesley Church, because the ramp at Wellesley Church, on Winthrop corner of uh, what's the name?
[Lungo-Koehn]: Dearborn.
[Henry Milorin]: Dearborn, corner of Dearborn. See, she knows that, that, that. So, there has a ramp there, I believe the ramp was built by the city, but I checked the ramp, it's no good. It's not good. We will have to do that all over again. It will be a lot of money. So I see no other alternative to bring it in. And we wanted to share that with you guys, because if we had to wait as of tomorrow's 41 days, we will have to wait until February 6th, which is your next meeting to present. That would be too long.
[Bears]: Yeah. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will come back. to my comments about the report, just specifically on the call to election and the approval of polling places, if you could share. My understanding is that we do have to approve those as the council pursuant to state law, even with the transition from the registrar system to the elections commission system. If that is not true, if you could send me the KP law opinion that says that, just so we have that on record. One quick question on this. Did you ask about around Breed Memorial Hall at the corner of Winthrop and Boston Avenue as a possibility? It's a tough stone building.
[Henry Milorin]: That's how it took. Because the first place we looked was the old library. You know where we had the library temporarily on 200 Boston Ave? Yeah. That was the first place where Elizabeth Grady. Yeah. We look at that too. It's all gonna, that whole section is out. I even went to look at the corner of North Street and Boston Ave. Yeah. You see that place where they had the chair repair and all these things. I tried to get, we've been working for years to see if we can even find the owner and see if we can rent that place. We couldn't get it.
[Bears]: And Tufts wouldn't make the Breed Hall available? Not enough parking.
[Henry Milorin]: Tufts is another issue. Okay. We attempted, we reached out to Rocco. The place we would have had would have been Gauntlet, right? Which is underneath. You want to talk about that? Come on, you can't.
[DiBenedetto]: Hi, Aaron Benedetto 21 Dearborn Street, so I know they are very well that's my word. Really City Hall is our best location based on availability of parking ADA compliance and just generally available for all people to come and vote. I know it's a little further than some of the other places you have, but we have vetted those places and they are not as accommodating as we need either for the reasons I stated before.
[Bears]: Understood. Yeah, totally. And the only reason I ask this question is the first time we've been before us. So, you know, just want to make sure we get, and I think we all agree in a timely manner, and you mentioned the time clock on this one, calls to election or notification, whatever the legal opinion is that what this council's action needs to be, of course, we will do that. But we do want to get it in a way where we can ask the questions and just ask the question. I know you guys work hard. I'm sure you've vetted it all out. And my guess is we'll be able to go back to Walkley when the construction is complete. Which may take years. In a couple of years, yeah. Until further notice. Okay. All right, back to some of the report, and I hear there's the motion to continue having detailed discussions to really get into the nitty gritty of it. I will say, I think the point of Councilor Callaghan of saying, you know, it's one thing to have the after action report. It sounds like this was something you were going to do no matter what that was the plan for the election. I think we requested something a little bit on top of that, which is kind of. a call and response, you know, if there was something that was identified as an issue, name what the issue was, you know, kind of what your office, how you interpreted the issue, what your definition of it was, and then what your response was. And I think that would have helped new councillors, an average resident who may not have all the context, to better understand, okay, this event happened, here's what we're doing now to make sure this event doesn't happen again. And so that's just what I want to put out there. And I appreciate in the communications privately and tonight that we've had open and honest and direct. This is how we're feeling. Henry, very clear about that. I don't think this is about friends and not friends anymore or anything personal. We are all friends. I think we're all friends of elections in different ways as well, having participated in them, all of us, in many different ways, including this last one. So, but I think that spirit of radical candor is the most, maybe in your office, is the most, needs to be the most radically honest of any office, because it is the office that allows them from which flows all of the rest of us to do the work that we do and the legitimacy of our city government, right? And it's when these, you know, minor mistakes or irregularities or issues or things that we want to say, when you have a couple of them build up, then you have people calling and threatening. And I'm sure you've experienced that. And then you have people calling illegitimacy on the whole process and calling for recounts when recounts may not be necessary given the margins and the races, right? So it's being so open as to say, even though it is probably counter to every instinct that we may have, We made a mistake being so open, like not just we made a mistake, but we made this mistake at 7.41 p.m. and 13 seconds. And here were the three people involved. And then here's the process that we're putting in, because if we have that radical candor, if we have that deep transparency, it undermines bad faith arguments. that are made in that longer run. And I think we all agree on that, but I just think that's why we're taking it so seriously. And I think the other piece of taking it so seriously is we moved to this new system recently, and it's different than it was before. So there are three things, kind of three things in the report I just want to lift up, and it sounds like we'll have further discussions on it, but the first one is the staffing and resources question. And I read here, you know, one big challenge was not having enough regular staff members to assist with the amount of work when prepping for the election. The Election Commission is working to address this by hiring additional pre-election team members and working with HR to hire the open part-time election staff position. I think that is, you know, that's an answer to the question of staffing and resources, but I also think it's an answer that we have heard before. And I understand that your office doesn't set the budget or make appropriations, but I think, you know, we've had this discussion. We had this discussion November 14th. We've had this discussion in private. there used to be several more full time staff working on elections in the city than there are now is the replacement of those staff members with temporary, you know, pre election team members. Is that sufficient? Is this part time position which because of its structure has gone unfilled for a year? Is that sufficient? I think this council would say This answer is we can't have the same answer to the question when this was the answer last time and it didn't produce the results intended. So how can we sit down as well with you guys and with the mayor's team to say, OK, how can we build something where there's a full time position where we can get it filled? Or and maybe it's not a full time that it's always in the elections office. I know for a fact that there are offices around this. building who would appreciate a little bit of extra support at different times of the year, and maybe half of the year that's in your office, right? So kind of trying to think through those unique solutions. So I'm hoping that's somewhere we can go there. The second piece for me, I know I discuss this often, was the training. And Henry mentioned it, you mentioned in the report, there's need for more training, there's need to update the training. Pursuant to our issue, you know, the issue that we raised on election day around the checklists being brought into the polls. I see that is addressed here in here, so I appreciate that. I think maybe one other thing to put in the training is just make sure that all of the election workers are reading the Voter Bill of Rights that the Secretary of State's office puts out. I think that's a valuable piece of something that has already been created separately that can answer some of those training questions, but I think it To me, it's like, hey, look at this. This is a list of what voters are allowed to do and not do. It protects them. It protects you. And that's just a level of understanding. The third thing for me is back to the tabulation of unofficial results. And I really think this is part of that radical candor is setting fair expectations. both for you and for everyone else in the process. If a letter went out that said these things will be posted by 8.30, that's now an expectation that's been set. And if that expectation goes unfulfilled, then people are going to say that expectation went unfulfilled. So I think being really clear, and I see in here, we're going to add this cross-check process. I have a question about that in a second. We are, you know, we're going to post the tabulator tapes. I have a quick question about that. I mean, it seems like there's more going into this than that has happened in November 23. There was also the partial release in November 22 that was corrected. So it's it is a persistent issue. But I think the communications from the office. maybe pulling back on over promising. I don't, sometimes I have the problem of sitting in this chair and over promising is something that I would just suggest and put out there because I think that's where, you know, it adds another ticker, another check on that list. And now if we have one issue with the ballot and an issue with the observer and an issue with the voter checklist, and then you have an issue with the expectation being set that results should be available at a certain time, then you can have people who are not acting in good faith take that list of things and turn it into a whole hullabaloo, which is what we experienced. I have two specific questions and then one further thing I want to get into. In terms of the central tabulation facility, we'll post the tabulator tapes in the same method as the individual precincts. Does that mean that there would be 16 tapes at central tab, or one tape would be posted at central tab?
[Melissa Ripley]: So central tabulation can print a 8.5 by 11 report. Everything is on the report, so it's one report. It wouldn't be separate tapes.
[Bears]: OK, it would not be separate tapes. And I just think, you know, same method as the individual precincts, I might be expecting a thin ticker. It's just those kinds of things. I just want to be setting that expectation, clearly.
[Henry Milorin]: But simple tabulation will provide you with a number of votes. Right. Number of votes, like in conversation you and I had, that's what we look at early voting. We had put by mail, and we have two different entry forms. So, when you take that, you add them, but the part that is missing, and I want people to really understand that, and it's a learning process. We have the tips that are printed. They have numbers. That's what your observer look and call your campaign. Okay. That's what they used to report. That came here. One come with the counters, one down with the office. Now, the part that really aggravate me and we miss that is when you take the memory card, you read it. Let's say we do 100 quotes for the first read, for read number one, whatever is the precept. When you read card number two, if the number was 100, and when you read card number two, the number is still 100, guess what happened? You read nothing. You see the scenario? Yeah. So because that was zero, so when we read the last five, and they have nothing.
[Clerk]: Right.
[Henry Milorin]: Now, it was smart that night for one of the, being that time we were talking, everybody was talking, I add your number minus seven, what seven one you didn't add. When I pressured the gentleman, he had an issue, then one of our commissioners said, we got the tip. It's at the tip. At the tip, then we come up with the 13,300 something instead of 10,400 something. But while he was doing that, instead of people to appreciate it, and I think it could have been the wrong place to do it right here in face of everybody. Because whatever you do, you're cheating, okay? But he or she was investigating to find out what missing. Immediately you take the total number from the tip, and reduce the total number of the unofficial account, the first unofficial account that you have. We're missing a lot of it. close to 3,000 foot, yeah, that's what you have to do. So that part, we know how to fix that going forward. And when we sit with you and say, this is what, and I had nothing to do with it, I will give her all the credit for putting it together and explain it to me. Just today, we're talking about acid, there's only one part missing, okay, that we need to do it. So that way, when you get it, you're not getting from one source only, you get it from everywhere. So at the end, it's like balancing a check. I think that's what we can do. Right.
[Clerk]: Yes.
[Melissa Ripley]: So let me clarify. The central tabulation is a high-speed scanner, just like the tabulators. It's one scanner. So it's all the wards and precincts, but it's one scanner. So the report comes out as one report, whereas the individual tabulators, it's the individual wards and precincts. So I hope that clarifies a little bit.
[Bears]: So you would have essentially 16 Ticker strips. 18, sorry, because we have the two A's now. And then you would have one from the central tabulate, and all of the precincts would be combined on that one?
[Melissa Ripley]: You can see them individually.
[Bears]: You can see them individually, but if you want a sheet of paper. That's correct. Okay. And I think that's the kind of thing, you know, just setting that expectation. This is what you should be seeing when it's all over. The other piece that it sounds like, and this was going to be kind of my suggestion, it sounds like maybe you've already gone down this road, and I understand that you've been talking about it. is that cross-check, right? Like to me, if you have the memory cards and you have the tapes, you know, and maybe it's not as easy for the central tab piece of this, and maybe that's where some of this issue is coming in. But you could essentially have a spreadsheet pre-made that is getting populated by whatever's coming out of the memory cards, VRIS or whatever that system is, or the LHS system. And then you could take the tapes and manually enter those into a spreadsheet. And then you'd have two independent sets of two sheets with two sets of information. Do the tapes match what came out of the machine? if the answer's, is that the cross-check kind of we're talking about?
[Henry Milorin]: You need to know the joke, I think you get that one.
[Melissa Ripley]: So the idea is the tally tapes and the memory cards come back to us. The planner brings them back to us before the end of the night. When they come in, we check them. We have the memory cards, we have the tally sheets, two people initial it. Then when we run the results, we do the same thing. Tally sheets, memory cards, results. we initial it to make sure they're right. If they're not correct, we have to go back and look at it. And I think part of what happens is we want to give the results as much as everybody wants to get them. And I think we need to set different expectations, as you've discussed, to really say, OK, so we don't want to give you wrong information and have people be upset and concerned about the results. So we have to take back that time and just say, OK, this is how we're going to do it. We're going to slow it down. We'll have a waiting room for people to wait for the results and we'll work as a team to make sure we cross check before we release anything.
[Bears]: Heard. Thank you and I appreciate that.
[Henry Milorin]: You saw that, that's a cross-reference we had here on December 9th.
[Bears]: Right, and that was really valuable to have.
[Henry Milorin]: That's exactly how we did it. For those who were present, that's what we did. You call the number, and somebody double-check and see exactly what was the number, and call that number on another piece. So that means there's three steps to verify, make good verification that the number call was the actual number.
[Bears]: Right. And then I think, you know, so that makes sense in terms of getting them out. I think just in terms of the other piece of it, which is making sure machines aren't zeroed out early and making sure machines are zeroed out before the day starts, because that seems to have been how we got to the point of the recount and the disparities and discrepancies between some precincts were undercount, some precincts were overcount. You know, in some sense, I'm glad we did the recount because I got a hundred more votes, but you know, it's, it's, it should never, never, ever, you know, that, that, that is the other piece of this question that really, I think we need to flesh out. And I think there's some in here procedurally making sure that that doesn't happen, but that's where that other piece of error can happen. And then, and then, you know, that's that little tally list where people can then take that and use it for, for other, say other things about it or be honest and say, I'm concerned there's six things. I'd like to see the recount because it, you know, it didn't change who was elected, but it changed the results of the election in a significant way. 100 votes is not insignificant. Yes, Manager Ripley, I have one last thing when you're done.
[Melissa Ripley]: Okay, so I do want to say that we were in the process of auditing the results. We would have seen the the blanks in the sheet much faster, but because we had the recount petition, we had to put on hold going through and auditing the results. So, because we had to jump into the hoops after the 10, you know, we had to wait 10 days to get the, sorry, the recount petitions. We had to wait the 10 days, and then we had to work with legal counsel in order to make sure that we were following all the protocols for the recount. So we would have been able to give you more detailed and more accurate data with regards to the blanks if we'd had more bandwidth and more time and not the recount. So my apologies that we weren't able to do that cross-check, but that is the reason why we weren't able to do the cross-check.
[Bears]: Got it, and I appreciate that. And I appreciate the discussion. I don't want to end on a little bit of a down note, but I think it really, and to me it's not so much I really hope that the mayor and the chief of staff are listening here when we talk about the need for additional staffing and resources for the department. came to my attention this evening, people noticed we were talking about the election, that a communication went out, I'm not sure if it was with the census or not, that says offices that are on the November 2024 ballot and offices that aren't on the November 2024 ballot. And it says offices items not on the November 2024 ballot, state senator and state representative. And those are on the November 2024 ballot. And it also has the districts are swapped, right? It has the Senate district as representative, the representative district as Senate district. It's not the end of the world, but it's not the level of accurate information that we want to be putting out there at all times to the process. And when we have four elections in a year, and then a recount on top of it, and then we're sorting through everything in the basement, and we have the new commission from the registrar, it's like, I understand the circumstances that get us to a place where an error like that happens. I understand where the circumstances get us to a place where some of the errors happened in November. And I understand that there's a really good faith attempt here to really try to correct them. But I don't think it's fair to put up on you guys to fix everything, to say you have what you have, fix everything. And so that's my call. I may be stepping a little bit outside the boundaries of the role of the chair tonight with this discussion. Obviously, I'm passionate about it and I've looked into it. But I really, really think we need to, as part of the sit down, hear more of the details about the checks and processes we're going to put in place. I hear that in good faith. But the level of resources and staff support that is needed to effectively do the work of your office, and that we had prior to the transition from this model to this new model, it isn't in place, and there's things that slip. And now the checklist for this election, we're not at six, but now we're at one. And that's just where, again, I don't, I think that to get the same answer back, and I understand that you can't appropriate new funds, but to get the same answer back, we're gonna try to hire for this position we haven't been able to hire for for a year, and we're gonna try to get more people onto the pre-election team. I don't think that's a sufficient answer. So I appreciate you hearing me say that. I know maybe agree or disagree or can't agree or can't disagree the powers that be hear that. And I hope that at least in private, they can hear it from everyone involved.
[Melissa Ripley]: We are advocating for to fill that part-time position. And the HR department is working on it. As we speak, there are five candidates to be reviewed. So they are working on it.
[Bears]: OK. That's good to hear. Any further comments from Councilors? And I appreciate your deference to me on this topic. Councilor, Vice President Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Bears. I want to again thank you for the level of depth in this conversation tonight. And, you know, I know that there's always an appetite for going deeper and working together to help us better understand the workings of your office and go over your goings-on, you know, talking about successes as well as the problems that, you know, I know that we have a shared goal of shoring up every year. And I'm glad to end this conversation or put a pin in it for now, you know, on the issue of resources and capacity. And I think in our ongoing conversations, I think that we'd all, you know, benefit from taking the time when it's available. Certainly I can understand that November didn't go the way that any of us thought that it would. And of course, that has an impact. There's a limited number of hours in the day. To have those conversations about the specificity that we're looking for so we can have that transparency piece, the prescription, the what would fix it, and a prescription is not a solution. You know, the solution is we're going to get the prescription will be implemented. And I know that that is a multi-agency effort. So I'm hoping that we can What was that? I'm looking forward to that collaboration. And thank you for your, thank you for your willingness.
[Melissa Ripley]: And I appreciate all the candor. I really do. This is not a, it's a process. It's ever evolving and there's always new ways to look at things. So I do appreciate it.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you. Councilor Scarpelli. I just want to say thank you, because I think that this is uncomfortable. I mean, I think we all mean, we all have the same intention. I think everybody here loves Medford, and there was nothing done with any ill will or intent. So I think that you coming here tonight is a huge step that starts that healing in this, in the fact of those people that I told you about that really affect that. No one's hiding anything. You're in front of us as a commission and the commissioner and say, hey, this is what we need to do in this council. Look ourselves in the mirror, like my father taught us in his Jesuit schooling, that you always look at the person that you're looking at and put yourself in their shoes and say, what do you, how would you do that? And make sure you understand the process. So I think that that's why I'm stressing the subcommittees and sitting down and truly being part of it because, you know, even just to hear the fact that, you know, while we're going through the process of recount, we still don't have enough staff to still even try to do something to assist them by moving forward. So I really do appreciate you coming out tonight and giving us these answers.
[Melissa Ripley]: We're always looking for people to help in the elections office.
[Scarpelli]: You know what, I would like to bounce here, Justin Singh, for the presidential election. I thank you. No, not that one. Oh, no, not that one. Not the presidential. No, that's not going to be contentious at all.
[Henry Milorin]: Well, I hear they're having a blast in New Hampshire. For reference, at the time, Counsel Zach, in his first term, he tried to work on the election. He got thrown out.
[Bears]: I know. I know, I did.
[Henry Milorin]: He wasn't the first person you threw out.
[Bears]: No, but, you know, it's like, oh, all hands on deck, and suddenly my hands are not allowed. I think we get something. Ah, the ultimate wisdom.
[Melissa Ripley]: None of you are on the ballot in March.
[Bears]: Well, I am from Ward Committee and I'm pretty sure that means I think that was the exact situation, right? It's like, oh, the very uncontested Ward Committee. Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Any further questions, comments from councillors? Anything you guys want to add or any comments from members of the public in the room or on Zoom? You can raise your hand if you're on Zoom or stand if you're here in person. All right, seeing none, thank you very much. On the motion to refer this report to the Governance Committee to meet with Commission and staff and discuss, check in on any needs and discuss how the Council can be supportive to make sure that these issues are addressed and that resources are provided to the Elections Commission, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. All those in favor? All opposed? Motion passes, thank you very much. Is there a motion to revert to the regular order of business? All in favor of the motion of Councilor Tseng, to revert to the regular order of business, seconded by? Second. Seconded by Councilor Callahan. All those in favor? Aye. Aye, opposed? Motion passes. 24-018. President Pierce? Yes, Councilor Collins.
[Collins]: I'd like to withdraw the motion.
[Bears]: on 24-018 by Councilor Collins is withdrawn. Councilor, 24-019 offered by Councilor Tseng. Give me a second here. Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Medford, pursuant to Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 71, Section 52, that the following rates of compensation be set for members of the Medford School Committee effective on July 1, 2024, school committee member from $12,000 to $17,052.80. School Committee Vice Chair from 12,600 to 17,900. School Committee Secretary from 14,400 to 19,075. School Committee Chairperson from 13,200 to 18,750. Be it resolved by the City Council of the City of Medford pursuant to Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 71, Section 52, that the following rates of compensation be set for members of the Medford School Committee effective of July 1, 2025. School committee member from $17,052.80 to $22,105.60. School committee vice chair from $17,900 to $23,200. School Committee Secretary from $19,075 to $23,750. School Committee Chairperson from $18,750 to $24,300. Fiscal impact in fiscal 2025 is $35,736.20. Fiscal impact into fiscal year 2026 is $71,472.40. Councilor Tseng. Thank you.
[Tseng]: to introduce this proposal. Let me give some background about how I arrived at these numbers. I reached out to, I looked at what former and current school committee members have said in their statements about their thoughts on the original proposal by former President Morell in December of last year. I also reached out to various teachers, and school staff to see what people were willing to compromise to. And at the end of the day, I arrived at this, this proposal, which essentially increases over two years, the salary of school community members to approximately $22,100. which is in line with the research I've done with Medford Teacher Association contracts over the last 25 years, going year by year, line by line, and matching their pay increases. This proposal would essentially stop in 2025 and so there would be no increase after that. It also, in contrast to the original proposal, phases in this increase over two years instead of having it start immediately upon passage. This is time, I believe, will give us a chance to finalize our financial picture and make sure it's in line with the information that we're hearing from finance staff currently. It also gives us a chance to start paraprofessional negotiations throughout the process to make sure that we address that part of the criticism with the original proposal. I have to emphasize that this is a compromise that we arrived at after engaging stakeholders, and that I believe that this is a compromise built off some logical ground, which is that of the previous MTA contract increases. I believe that this is a reasonable compromise. Not everyone will be happy with this, surely, and I'm sure that there are folks who would have liked this number to be higher, would have liked this number to be lower. This compromise, I know, also doesn't live up to all of the ideals that we may hold both on this side of the rail and on the other side of the rail. But So goes compromise. This is the nature of work. And we must be politically responsible actors here. We must also, instead of viewing this as a compromise that we can live with, understand that this compromise can be a win-win if we take advantage of it. If stakeholders can take advantage of it, we can lift up by lifting up one set of workers for schools, all workers for schools as well. And that's why I believe that we should pass this tonight. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Just before we continue, I do want to note that this has been reviewed for form and the motions are worded properly. Pursuant to General Law, Chapter 71, Section 52, this requires a majority vote. and is not an ordinance and will be, does not require three readings. Mr. President. Councilor Starkley, then Councilor Callahan, then Councilor Collins.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, so just, I know that some information that, first I want to share, I think that one of the questions was the fees of the structure for the 2024 paraprofessional wage scale pursuant to Method Public Schools from their records of proposal. So it's given the, just for a point of information that the kindergarten aids right now. One of the questions was if there was one, one group that one paraprofessional group that was making less than what was going to be asked that this would be this would be a question. I think that they paraprofessionals stand at $20,500 with their contract ending. this year, so they'll be negotiating again as we move forward. So I, for one, I will applaud the effort by Councilor Tseng of finding common ground. I think you've done your due diligence, I will tell you. I applaud that immensely for the fact that you listened and you tried to get to a resolution. I will tell you I will not support it for the fact that I really think that until we really know. I think if this resolution and this compromise came after understanding what our budget looks like, even for a dollar, I think that I would support it wholeheartedly. I will be honest with you with that. I think that this is the sense of compromise that I wish that the teachers and paraprofessionals were there moving forward. And I think that this gives, like you said, I think that this gives our school committee and administration the same, hopefully the same type of attitude and mentality when it comes to supporting and rewarding our teachers that need it the most and that's mostly our paraprofessionals that are getting the short end of the stick right now. So I think that Again, like I said, I want to applaud that. But at the same time, I think that not knowing our fiscal situation right now is the reason why I can't move forward with this. So I thank you. And like, again, I'll say it again, that's a very, very well thought compromise. And I'm sure that the teachers will feel that as well. So thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello.
[Callahan]: Thank you. It's been 24 years since a school committee has gotten a pay raise. I believe that the school committee is overdue for one. We need the school committee to be paid enough to ensure that enough people run so that elections are competitive. We need the pay to be enough to attract people who are less wealthy, people who cannot afford to spend up to 20 hours a week doing something that you know, doesn't pay or pays very little. I see raising the school committee salary as a pro-democracy reform along with many other types of pro-democracy reforms that I will mention later. Reforms that I have presented in communities across the country for seven years that are deeply important to me. As I said last time, pro-democracy means not just people who are willing or dedicated. It means having people sitting in those seats who represent, for example, the lower 50% of wage earners in our city. These are not the people who usually run for or win elected office. Pro-democracy reforms usually happen in the next cycle because it is not about paying the people currently sitting in those seats. It is about getting diverse people to run. Many cities and states have it in their laws that any change in salary for elected officials cannot go into effect within the same electoral cycle. I did not look hard for these, right? So just in three minutes of Google searching, Illinois and Georgia both have state laws for all municipal elected officials. stating that you cannot raise the pay within that electoral cycle. Even in Massachusetts, and again, no exhaustive search, Watertown and Everett both have city codes that say that any pay increase for school committees specifically must be voted on in the first 18 months of the cycle and cannot take effect until the next cycle. On the question of pay parity, I tried to find examples of pay parity between school committees and city councils discussed anywhere. I found almost nothing. No well-known elected officials, no organizations that I've heard of or haven't heard of discussing this issue. It came up for a vote in Fall River. a proposal to bring the school committee pay up to the city council pay, it did not pass. In Worcester, there was one school committee member who wanted for the school committee to be paid the same as city council, but that is not allowed by the city charter, which in Worcester states that the salary for members of the school committee will be equal to 50% of the salary established for members of the city council. So unless they change the city charter, They cannot do that. And I will say that across the country, school committees getting paid 50 percent of the city council is pretty standard. That doesn't make it right. Right. But it is the norm. I also tried to find anyone talking about this issue as one of parity between men and women. I could not find, please correct me if I'm wrong, but I could not find anyone talking about this issue. I did look up some numbers. So according to the National School Boards Association, 51% of school board members are men, 49% are women. We should note that this is a much higher percentage of women than in other elected bodies. 28% of Congress is women, 33% of state legislatures are women, 32% of city councils are women. Northampton, which is a pretty progressive city, commissioned a study on compensation for elected officials in 2014. That's a little while ago. The end result was a recommendation that they pay their city councilors $17,000. That was a raise for both city council and school committee. That they pay their school committee members $9,000. They have less than half the people living in Northampton as we have in Medford. It was 10 years ago. I don't think that we should look at those specific numbers. But it is interesting to note that their commission did have a difference in pay between the city council and the school committee. I am not stating that this is right, that school committees across the country are paid approximately 50%, but there appears to be nobody except for us here and in Fall River, even discussing this issue. I believe without a doubt that a pay increase for the Medford School Committee is long overdue. I personally believe there are many reasons why it is appropriate that pay increases for any elected officials come take effect the next cycle. I would like to make a motion. It's somewhat long. I can email it to the clerk, the president, the vice president, or whoever is appropriate. If it is possible to vote on it tonight, that would be great, but if not, that's fine. My motion is to send the following pro-democracy reforms to study in the Governance Committee. Salaries for elected officials, public financing of elections, rank choice voting for single elected offices, allowing 16 and 17-year-olds to vote, and allowing non-citizen residents to vote. along with that, a request that the Governance Committee prioritize the salary discussion and come to a recommendation on this issue before December 31st of 2024, so that the City Council can vote on whether to implement those salaries starting January of 2026, which is the beginning of the next electoral cycle. Also a request that the Governance Committee consider the following factors in their salary recommendations, in addition to any others they deem important, getting enough people to run so that elections are competitive, enabling less wealthy people to hold elected office, and gender pay parity.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Callaghan. Just to summarize, I think that was a motion to refer to the Governance Committee a number of democracy reforms. If you have that in typed form, if you could send that to myself and to the clerk, that would be great. Is there a second on that motion? Second. Seconded by Councilor Leming. And I will go now to Councilor Collins. And by the way, that motion is a B paper, which means it's a separate paper that will be referred out. It will get a new paper number. And we'll go to the committee. Council Vice President Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you. Appreciate the discussion around this. either the third or the fourth time that we've discussed this in these chambers. And I, as we've said before, I appreciate the dialogue with my colleagues about this. I appreciate the very many community members that we've heard from about this. I withdrew my motion and I'll second Councilor Tseng's motion because I believe that this is the most actionable compromise that we have on the table right now. My alternative proposal went even further. It would have achieved pay parity between the school committee and the city council by 2027. As I've said at the beginning of all of our conversations on this topic, I really believe that pay equity between the school committee and the city council is the right thing to do. And I think that somebody has to be the First person to do the right thing. I don't know if that'll be us. I think that we need to move the ball forward. As a Councilor, I don't know what the, I don't know what a day in the life of a school committee member looks like, but I know a little bit about the role. And I know that the role is different in every community. I know a little bit about what it means in our city from our charter. And I believe that our roles are equivalent. I believe that the role of the school committee is mission critical. I believe that there's no space for passivity in that role. And that's why I believe that our role should be paid equally. Um, so this proposal advances compensation for school committee members at percentages that are aligned with MTA contract increases over the past 24 years. In any case, I think, you know, to the headlines of this issue. It's been 24 years since there's been a pay adjustment for the school committee. This is a one-time adjustment spread out over two years, and then it stops. We've already referred to the governance committee, apart from the motion that will vote on from Councilor Callahan, the recommendation to study within the concept of our, sorry, within the review of our city charter, which we'll be doing later this year, a mechanism for triggering some sort of automatic or regular evaluation of all elected salaries. And I think that's important. not so that the salaries necessarily go up, but I think that part of the issue here has been, since there was not any sort of regular mechanism other than the city council deigning to consider an increase, we've gone 24 years without considering it. And that's why the initial proposal was for a triple-digit percentage increase, because we had so much time to make up for. So with all that being said, I'm glad that we're going to have that conversation later this year so that we can continue having this conversation about how to align compensation with our goals and our values and how to promote the elected bodies that our community deserves. And I'm looking forward to voting on compensation increase, one that I believe is fair and reasonable and very certainly the product of compromise tonight. So thank you very much.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Any other comments from members of the Council? All right, then I will give my comment just shortly, which is I think that it is a long overdue action, and while it does not address all of my concerns or meet all of my principles, sometimes that is what a compromise looks like. I also want to add We're voting on this, and then it's back to where we were, which is the Council may deign at any point to maybe consider at some point looking at this. Yes, we have some motions to talk about it. Yes, we have some motions this or that. But that's what we're voting on. We're voting on a half measure to get some of the way towards a further goal. It leaves it right in the hands of the council in 20 years to let this go for 20 years and never address it again. And then we're there again, but that's where we are. So this will be put to rest other than the fact that we will have some discussions around the classification and compensation study, some discussions around the city charter. Maybe there'll be some action that comes out of that, but this is what it is. So there'll be, if this is approved, raises this year in July 1 fiscal year 25 and fiscal year 26 to address 23 years of no change in compensation. Given no further comment from members of the council, we'll go to members of the public. You can come to the podium and give your name and address for the record. You can also raise your hand on Zoom. We will alternate between the podium and Zoom. Name and address for the record, please.
[Patrick Clark]: Hi, Patrick Clerken, 50 Princeton Street. A lot of great comments made here tonight. I just wanted to add the comment that I felt like I think we've gotten significantly past this, but I think when this was first brought up by Nicole back in December, the initial argument for it. was a little bit reductionistic in the sense of bringing pay parity between council and the committee, just because I understand historically the difference between men and women and that still exists to some extent, but because the committee and the council are both mixed at this point, it's a little bit comparing apples to oranges. So I wanted to request if possible, just for public edification, a simple diagram that compares basically what council does and what school committee does and how they should be potentially brought up to equity or not. Is it based on the hours worked overall? Is it based on the content of the work? Because it's not necessarily the same. I don't know for sure what, and I think probably a lot of people in Medford don't know for sure what each of these two bodies does, and so it would be difficult to understand how they could be brought up to parity or if they should be brought up to parity. And I just want to add that just like when you're talking to people and you meet them for the first time and you hear their name and it goes in one ear and out the other, a lot of the times if we don't have these diagrams or simple ways to understand these things, when you just hear the information in a stream, it just goes right out the other side. So anything with this issue and with future issues, that's like a simple diagram or something that could be posted in a public place would really help. So thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. Seeing no hands on Zoom, we'll go to the podium. Name and address for the record, please.
[Penta]: My name is Robert Penta, Zero Summit Road, Method Mass, former member of this August body. First of all, let me start by saying, what does this pay raise have to do with education? That's number one. Number two, there's no demanding from the public for any pay raise for the school committee. And lastly, there's no professional city population job description pay report that even substantiates or supports what the council has alluded to. The gender issue that was alleged this past December is nothing more than a sexual red herring allegation of discrimination that has no merit to the issue before us. The job is what the job is. The responsibility is what it is. It doesn't say it has to be male or female. That's the red herring to the whole thing. But if this proposal were to pass, should we now compare all our municipal positions with the same amount of financial equity and equality as compared to each position, especially with those having different responsibilities? Fire, police, school teachers, they all have different job duties and responsibilities. But if we're looking at something that's now saying the school committee should have equity pay to that of a city councilor, well, you're setting a standard here. And this standard should be compared to, right now, what is presently found in your municipal contracts. Additionally, if this proposal is to pass a comprehensive review, should be undertaking to set a years of service pay scale to be compatible with all of the municipal employee negotiations, comparing newly elected newcomers to both the city council and the school committee at the beginning of the pay scale formula. Therefore, for the new members in the council, as compared to the new members on the school committee, why should either one of you reap the benefit of the maximum pay when in fact all other municipal employees start at a base pay and they go through a process. So if you're looking at this equity for both and all sides, then let the council and the school committee also be put in the same type of position. Okay, as such by granting the city council additional type of raise without having increasing any educational value, without having any community support for it, and without any professional city population job description report only demonstrates the power of behind the scenes internal politics, where the power of the dollar personally overpowers the needs of our public school educational needs. We have surrounding communities, and I took the six surrounding communities that we have. Arlington, they get paid $3,000 a year. Everett, they get paid $11,500. Malden, they get paid $7,000. Somerville, they get paid $16,600. And Methodist, they get paid $12,000. Methodist is the second highest paid school committee of the surrounding areas. You serve in these jobs for the quality of giving good education to the community, not for how much money or you should be paid equal to that or in excess of our total to the amount of what a city councilor makes. Last December, the pay concerns for paraprofessionals, classroom assistants, custodians, substitute teachers, et cetera, were discussed, but they've yet to be addressed. This hall was full with almost 200 teachers. At the city council, the school committee pay raise increase without any proposal to differentiate the differences between the city council and school committee responsibilities. As the gentleman just stated, showing the need such raise or pay equality has yet to be proven. Therefore, at last meeting on December 12, these were the issues that were of concern. A, needing additional instructional hours for students, AP classes, class size needs, athletic programming, student activities, school library resources, counseling services, school security, custodial school maintenance, after school programming, and something that's gonna creep up on you fellas, it's unprepared for migrant student educational studies and support. Now, these are all dollar amounts that need to be addressed. And if you are going to take on the proposal that's before us over the next two years, approximately $76,000, you're taking that $76,000 away from your school department educational budget that could be used somehow to get into some of these programs, if not all of them, to some degree and a percentage of whatever it might be. The pay scale for those caring for these programs was at issue, and yet as of today, nothing has been done to resolve any of the issues as presented. The City Council School Committee pay raise proposal does not recognize and connect to the short and long term needs of our public schools. So when and if you folks are sitting here and you're discussing these needs, and you think that the school committee should be making more money, and you have a school committee that's been around for so many years, allegedly for 20, if that's what the issue is, well then let's, what do we need to motivate and show that their need and they're worthy of it other than You know, they should be making the same as in Worcester. They have an audience that does say up to 50% of what a city council makes. But their job responsibilities may be entirely different. Do you realize right now, a kindergarten assistant, if we were to follow this pay raise as proposed, a kindergarten assistant who works five days a week and is subject to everything in that classroom as every other teacher, will be making $1,000 less then this pay proposal for a school committee person, okay? Makes no sense at all because a school committee person doesn't have to sign in, doesn't have to check in, has no responsibility as it relates to, you know, what am I doing on a daily basis that says I'm doing something that's educationally correct for this community. By granting from the city council, let's put it this way. There should be some justification before you folks from, and it can't be from the at present school committee because there'd be a conflict of interest because they have a financial gain from it. So it's gotta be as according to the state law, the chapter is gonna come from your folks in the state council. But what has this school committee done, especially with its new members that has said Medford's education is better, Medford's discipline is better, and that's seriously questioned as to what's going on up at the high school. The sports programs is getting better. Parents are getting more involved, but also at the same time, where is the educational standard in comparison to other cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth of Massachusetts? Has the school committee made such great strides that, hey, they're working together with the teachers and their organizations. When you had here last week, and I know you have some new folks that are here. On December 12th, there was almost 150, 175 teachers that were here. And they explain to you the plight of not only being in the classroom, being attacked, where their pay is. Some of them have to work five years, five years before they even make $25,000 a year. That's unconscionable. Justin, I understand that you want to give them a pay raise, you know, but I didn't hear your logic behind it.
[Bears]: Please just direct your comments to the chair. Thank you.
[Penta]: Well, he's the one, it's his resolution.
[Bears]: I know, but just direct it to me. Through the chair to Councilor Tseng. Pardon me? Through the chair to Councilor Tseng.
[Penta]: Okay, through the chair, Justin, I know you wanna give them this Bay Race, okay? But you haven't said anything, none of you have expressed any comment as it relates to, they deserve it for the value of what they do. Can anybody explain to me, If you really want to give somebody a pay raise, isn't the job description and your job duties and your employer supposed to do the review of you? Now, of course they can say, the Medford taxpayer is your reviewer and you run for office and they elect you. Okay, that's all well and good. But the Medford taxpayer doesn't pay your salary, it's the Medford City Council according to state law. So the Medford City Council, by right, can make a great demand on this school committee. If you really want to improve it, we'll look at this in two years. Let's see what this new school committee does over the next two years. Let's just see through your intervention with the Medford Teachers Association and from the superintendent all the way down, that everything that's taking place in all our schools, from kindergarten all the way up to the high school, has gotten better. Grades have gotten better. Discipline has gotten better and under control. That would make a big difference. And maybe people might say, hey, okay, you're working toward it. But when you have a job that you don't have to sign in, check in and give any report as to what you do and why you're doing how you do it, and expect to start off at a higher rate than people who have been here for years. That's just not fair. And the last thing, let me just say this as it relates to that, and I told you Arlington gets $3,000, Everett gets $11,500, Malden gets $7,000, Somerville gets $16,500, and Method gets $12,000. We're the second highest one of the surrounding communities. A kindergarten through the chair to Justin, a kindergarten teacher assistant after the second year gets $21,568. That's $1,000 less than what you wanna propose to a school committee person who doesn't go to this job every day, like the kindergarten teacher goes to school every day, five days a week, and does everything that education says of that person. Maybe you should have a sit down. with the school committee. Because they can't tell you that they want it because it would be a financial benefit to them, that would be a conflict of interest. But somebody needs to understand, just because they need to get paid more, because they're not getting paid enough now. Well, they're getting paid $12,000, and if they don't want it. And through the chair to Mrs. Callahan, not for anything, you made the comment that you think that, you know, to get good candidates, you need to pay more. I'm gonna respectfully disagree with you. a good candidate is someone who wants to run for the job because they believe that better things can be done and I can do it. And if I can't do it, then the people won't reelect me that salary has got nothing to do with it. And the salary should not be used for your own personal gain. I'm going to make $30,000 a year now more 24,000, whatever it might be. And the sad part about the whole thing in conclusion, If this proposal were to go through, you're taking $74,000 a year out of this Medford School Department education budget. It's bad enough now for them to work on a daily basis without having enough of the money that should be in there. Now you're gonna take another $74,000. And you know, where does that go? How do you explain that to the Medford taxpayer? You can't explain it to me because I wouldn't buy it. Because right now, The Medford School Committee is working with all they can do just to maintain their budget and to get by and to start taking more money away to give it to an elected official who does absolutely nothing to enhance or embellish or make better school education. That's, it just doesn't make any sense. So if I understand you correctly, I believe you said you would like to have this go and have a decision come up by the end of December of this year. I believe that's what you said. That would be okay. But to vote on this tonight, I think it would be wrong. I think it would serve no purpose. And I don't think it would be good for Medford public school education. That's my opinion. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, former Councilor Penta. Just to clarify, there was a list of things in Councilor Callaghan's motion around a variety of pro-democracy reforms. Quite frankly, even though there was a suggested date of a report, we may not have the answers to all of those questions by that time. So I would not personally, I'm going to vote for that B paper, but to me, it is not to say there will be more. I think this is gonna be the swing of the bat for a while on this question, probably for years.
[Penta]: Can I ask a question to the chair? Sure. Did I misunderstand Mrs. Cowell? Did you say in part of your questioning there is, I think you- She listed a variety of different reforms, rank choice- All right, it was one of the things that you said you wanted illegal aliens to vote. Did you say that?
[Bears]: Undocumented immigrants to vote. Did you say that? No.
[Callahan]: Non-citizens.
[Bears]: Non-citizens. Non-citizens. Non-citizens. So documented non-citizens. Green card holders and the like, I think. People who have green cards.
[Penta]: Oh, okay. I'm more than happy to answer any questions.
[Bears]: Thank you. We have two folks on Zoom. I will go to M. Paige Lieberman. Name and address for the record, please.
[Matthew Page-Lieberman]: So my name is Matthew Page Lieberman, 15 Canal Street. I really appreciate all the Councilors that have brought this forward. And I especially appreciate what Councilor Callahan introduced beyond this. There is one thing that was an idea that we should consider is about waiting until after an election. And I think that that should apply for the same body. So the city council could not continue to simply raise its salary in between elections. But I'm not quite sure if it should apply when we're talking about raising the salary of a different body of the school committee. But, you know, Councilor Bears, you talked about how it may be another 24 years before this is reconsidered. And so, you know, one of the questions that I and you, and this has been repeatedly referred to as a compromise. And so my question is, is before this compromise was kind of hammered out. Was there any degree of talking about, you know, like doing it with a call like a cost of living adjustment in the future, or, you know, tagging indexing it to the rate of inflation? If that's not I hope that that can be pursued in the future. And at least for the minimum wage here in Medford indexing the minimum wage to the rate of inflation. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Matthew. Yes, I did work with counsel and the way that the law works, it specifically has to raise the salary from one amount to another amount. So you could not say it should go from 12,000 to this and then thus shall go up with an inflationary measure or some sort of other measure. It has to be from one amount to another amount. The only way to do what you're talking about would be to put it in the charter in some way. But under the chapter, 71, section 40, sorry, 52. And I keep misplacing that. It must go from one number to another number, so you can't peg it to something such as inflation or another metric, a COLA. I'm going to go to Ricky on Zoom.
[Ricky Cormio]: Hello. Ricky Cormier, 150 Middlesex Ave. This whole idea just seems ridiculous to me. You guys are creating a problem that doesn't exist. Nobody cares about this except for like six of you. This is just nonsense. You just said the entire country, nobody else has equal pay for the city council and school committee. And you guys are the only ones thinking about that. It's because it's not necessary. The idea is just ridiculous. You guys are responsible for like 60,000 people in the city of Medford. The school committee is responsible for like 6,000 students. That's 10 times the amount of people you guys are responsible for. So why would you get paid the same? It doesn't make any sense. Furthermore, you shouldn't do a job just for the money. That's not why you run for an election. You run for an election because you want to do it because you want to be a school committee member, not because you're trying to make an extra buck. So This idea is just a problem that you guys have created. There's no need for compromise because there's no problem. Just leave it the way it is. Maybe you give them a little raise. Sure that everybody deserves a raise now and then a couple thousand dollars maybe, but the double, triple their pay. It's just nonsense. So I hope that this gets shot down. I'm sure it won't because you guys just do whatever you want, but I hope it gets shot down real quick. Thank you.
[Bears]: David Scormio at the podium. Mr. Navarre, name and address for the record, please.
[William Navarre]: William Navarre, 108 Medford Street, apartment 1B. I just want to speak to this idea that, you know, when you pass this kind of thing and the change to the salary, you know, you're taking away from paraprofessionals, you're taking away from the school budget. You know, it was pointed out last time that, you know, the things that happened here, the day-to-day basis in terms of policy. But here, I mean, the city council, that could have a really big budgetary impact every time. And there's a lot of zero-sum thinking. And government is where we come together, and government should be a positive something. And I think this city council gets that. We heard arguments earlier that if you are a refugee and you come here, that's why we can't help our veterans, can't help our homeless that are already here. Sometimes we hear, if you move here, you're like a gentrifier. You're displacing somebody else. I think the city council is doing a good job avoiding that kind of thinking. We could have more housing going up. We could have more expanded tax base for businesses. We can make an effort that, as a community, have a positive sum. In terms of economics, not just in terms of the democratic idea. But there's also the economic idea that when we come together, we can do more than we can do separately. And that's what government can help us do. And this city council seems to believe in that. And they believe that, you know, if we need a prop two and a half, then that's something you gotta pursue, a prop two and a half override. Basically, I think this city council is prepared to make sure that we're not in a zero sum kind of thing. kind of situation, you know, that there is enough to go around for everybody. And the City Council doesn't have the power to do that on their own. And so it takes cooperation from other areas of government as well. and from the residents. But ultimately, I think that that's the project here. And I think that's the way forward is to make sure that we are raising revenue where we can, that we can get a raise for the paraprofessionals that need it, et cetera. We're a very desirable place to be. People really want to be here. That's our biggest asset. So I think we need to recognize that we're well-situated to create wealth in a good location where people can earn money at jobs and open businesses and everything that they need to do in order to make sure we're not always in an austerity situation. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Mr. Navarre. On the, any further comments? I'm seeing none. If I can. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Just for point of information, I think that receiving emails and people understanding that just so they're not misplaced or forgotten. But again, school custodians have been without a contract for years. Our parking department still hasn't had a contract. Our inspectorate services have no contract. DPW superintendents and recreation department have no contract. So again, these are all Teamster positions and other Other positions in the city that it's that dollar figure that's got to come from somewhere, whether we increase it $35,000 or $75,000. it's going to trickle down. So I just wanted to make sure that I mentioned that because I did receive emails and support of not forgetting that these very important positions are left without a contract for years. So thank you.
[Clerk]: Thank you. Councilor Coates.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Barras. Sorry, is there a song going on in the chambers? I thought I heard something. I've already made my thoughts on this clear in our subsequent couple of meetings, but just before I move the question, just to put a couple facts out on the table, especially since I know a lot of our deep conversation about this occurred in committee of the whole last week, but residents, I think it's easier to tune in during these regular meetings rather than committees of the whole. I wouldn't want this conversation to seem truncated. So just to remind folks that There was a whole conversation, discussion, disagreement, predicating this conversation and vote that we're going to take tonight. I said this the first time that this issue came before us, but where I'm coming from on this is really that I just completely believe that we can do more than one right thing at a time. This proposal, the original proposal, which this is less than, was 0.05% of a $200 billion operating budget. I think that we need to challenge ourselves to do more than one right thing at a time. And I really appreciate the reminder that if we think that paying one city employee fairly is a grievance to another, then we are phrasing the question incorrectly. And this has always been a tough topic to talk about because We have so much work to do when it comes to paying all of our city employees fairly. And I think what's been painful about this process is the knowledge that so many of those issues are unresolved. And that's not okay, and it's not acceptable. This is the one opportunity that this council has legally to instigate a pay increase for any city employee. This is the one appropriation that we get, and it's kind of a weird quirk of our power. But as folks who are familiar with our work and the parameters of our jurisdiction know, when it comes to the budget and its appropriations, we get to vote yes or no, and that is it. We cannot appropriate. And so this does put us in this awkward position where we can instigate these compensation adjustments, and we can't do that directly for anybody else. And I think for that, that we do in these chambers the entire rest of the year. This is a really unusual topic for us to be talking about the entire rest of the year. I think we can be we can challenge ourselves to be the allies that the community deserves by supporting all other city employees and bargaining units by one vocally supporting them and standing with them and advocating for them and also by doing the bulk of the work of this council, which is doing the ordinances and the zoning and the business development work. in this chambers in collaboration with the administration, in collaboration with private partners that will bring up the city's bottom line and enable us to, as swiftly as we can, roll out improved living wages for all city employees, because that is all of our goals. I do not believe that this stands in the way of that goal, and that goal is not diminished by this change. And that's my opinion. Move the question.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor, Vice President Collins. Mr. President, if we could be brief.
[Penta]: Yeah, just a point of information, just as a notice for this council, I think it was three, maybe five to six years ago, there was a report that came back from the Department of Revenue, Mass Department of Revenue that said, the old school thought was in the council budget, you could only decrease, but that's not true. You can now make appropriations that go the other way. So I think it's just something I think you really need to take into consideration as it relates to something that you might see in the budget, where the old school was that you only could reduce if you wanted to save money, so there would be no way that you could transfer that money to another section, but that's not true because now you can look at certain sections within your budget as it relates to appropriating for or making something less. And I think that would be very key, so let's stick to your, Councilor Collins' comment as it relates to this could be a beginning step. If it's going to be a beginning step, it should be a step that parallels every single municipal employee from step one. Some school teachers, I believe, have 10 steps before they get to the top, but an elected official has no steps. It's never been that. So if you're going to put everybody into the same genre, so to speak, well then maybe An elected person can maybe have five or six steps, whatever it might be. Don't forget, one of the real benefits of an elected official is if you serve for 10 years or more, you get a pension. You get a pension from here, okay? There are some cities and towns that don't offer pensions. So besides the salary, you're also getting the benefit of a pension with a minimum of 10 years. So I think that really needs to be taken into consideration when you're talking about pay scales and pay raises and whether it be for the council or the school committee. And one of the things that seemed to be a juggernaut in the school and the municipal side is just that particular issue, whether it's in the fire or the police department when they're in their pension areas. So it's really something that serves you folks with a good benefit, school department issue. school committee person, same thing as a city councilor, but you really, you just don't want to throw that aside without realizing that you're getting a benefit that a lot of cities and towns do not offer. So just thought I'd let you know.
[Bears]: Thank you. Unless, yes, unless there's a motion to end the debate and move the question. Sounds like we have one last person.
[Patrick Clark]: Once again, Patrick Clark in 50 Princeton Street. I just wanted to be simpler with what I said before, which is it basically comes down in my eyes to, if this is a question of equal pay for equal work, you have to make sure that you're comparing equal things. If it was comparing a school committee that was all men and a school committee that was all women that were getting different pay, that would be one thing, but you're changing multiple variables. You're comparing not just men and women, mixed bodies, but you're also comparing a school committee and city council. So you either have to demonstrate that it is equal work or if it's not equal work, you have to demonstrate why there should be equal pay for an equal work. That's basically what I wanted to say. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. The clerk has reminded me that a B paper would retain the same paper number, so if you do not mind, Councilor Callaghan, if we could adjust your motion to refer a new paper with a new paper number to the Governance Committee containing the motion that you sent.
[o9F0qYH9Geo_SPEAKER_05]: Great.
[Bears]: Okay, thank you. And the second on that was Councilor Leming, I believe. So, on that motion to refer a paper regarding several pro-democracy reforms to the Governance Committee for further consideration, seconded by Councilor Leming. All those in favour? Opposed? Motion passes. On the main motion by Councilor Tseng to approve the paper 24-019 pursuant to General Law, Chapter 71, Section 52. It was motion by Councilor Tseng, seconded by Councilor Collins. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callaghan. No. Vice-President Collins. Yes. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Lazzaro]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Leming. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. No. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Bears.
[Bears]: Yes. Five in the affirmative, two in the negative, the motion passes. Call for participation. Is there anyone who would like to participate further? We've had extensive public participation, but if there's public participation on a topic we have not otherwise discussed, you may come to the podium or raise your hand on Zoom now. Seeing none, is there any unfinished business that any Councilor would like to address, or is there a motion to adjourn?
[Callahan]: Councilor Kelly, are we not covering 2402?
[Bears]: Oh, geez, you're right. I totally skipped. I'm so sorry, Councilor Scarpelli. No, that's totally my bad. Thank you. My apologies. I messed up the order there. 24-020, resolution on city council and school committee blended salary sponsored by Councilor Scarpelli. Be it resolved that the council lower its own rate of pay to a blended salary, that is the difference between the pay rate of the city council and the school committee, then follow the schedule proposed by Councilor Tseng for increases in 2024 and 2025. I had the opportunity to review this and look at the law, whereas the school committee salaries are subject to Chapter 71, Section 52. Salaries for the Mayor and the City Council or otherwise Board of Alders, etc., are subject to Chapter 39, Section 6A, which says that the Mayor and members of the City Council shall receive for their services such salary as the City Council shall by ordinance determine. No increase or reduction in such salaries shall take effect during the year in which an increase or reduction is voted, as is noted by Councilor Callaghan's research. That is very different from the law around school committees, which explains why various town and city charters go to pains to try to align those two laws. So under Chapter 39, Section 6a, I'm going to rule this paper out of order. All those in favour? All those opposed? The motion passes and the meeting is adjourned.
|
total time: 38.33 minutes total words: 6856  |
total time: 7.46 minutes total words: 1118  |
total time: 32.41 minutes total words: 5333  |
total time: 2.23 minutes total words: 344  |
|
total time: 14.15 minutes total words: 2518  |
total time: 4.05 minutes total words: 603  |
total time: 0.05 minutes total words: 8  |
total time: 6.89 minutes total words: 1146  |
|
total time: 0.52 minutes total words: 77  |
total time: 14.37 minutes total words: 2524  |
||