total time: 9.12 minutes
total words: 1453
total time: 18.24 minutes
total words: 2997
total time: 15.9 minutes
total words: 2498
total time: 3.32 minutes
total words: 483
total time: 0.1 minutes
total words: 16
[Callahan]: Hello, welcome. We are convening the Medford City Council Public Works and Facilities Committee meeting for January 31st, 2024. Mr. Clerk, can you call the roll?
[SPEAKER_07]: President Bears.
[Bears]: Present.
[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Lazzaro. Present. Councilor Dunwoody is absent. Councilor Scarpelli. Present. Chair Kelly.
[Callahan]: present. And I want to recognize Emily Lazzaro as our vice chair. We will go on to the action and discussion items. And the primary one here is is 24-006 offered by Isaac bears Council President, the resolution that each council committee review the 2024 2025 Council governing agenda as amended at the January 24 2024 committee of the whole meeting. So we do have that agenda in front of us. And as with the other committee meetings, we can go ahead and just run through those items to discuss how we are going to move forward on them for the next year or two. We will start with our major projects, and I'll start with the street and sidewalk repair and accessibility. and sidewalk repairs. Um while we don't implement street and sidewalk repair as a city council, um, we do want to be, um. Aware of and to also provide residents some awareness of what the city is planning to do in terms of street and sidewalk repair. And one of the the administration, which of the proposed plans in the 2021 payment management study we have chosen, or if we haven't chosen any of those plans specifically, then what are our plans for the next five years, including both the funding as well as which streets or category of streets we will be repairing? Comments from city councilors? President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Chair Callahan. Yeah, I think this is so important. I think it's an issue. If you're asking me if there was a top three issue, this is one of the one of the three. Everybody, regardless of whatever else they may believe, is frustrated with the condition of our streets and sidewalks. And I think that's really the ultimate question. You know, we've been trying to, I think, and trying to get it from multiple angles, I think it's really valuable. We've been trying to get at it from the budget side. What's our what's our investment going to be in streets and sidewalks, we have this payment management plan. It says we need to start spending x by x to maintain the mediocre condition of our streets and sidewalks, nevermind to. actually start making improvements in the condition or the rating, they have this numerical rating of condition. So I would move based on your statement, Madam Chair, to request that we receive, and let me see if I can get this exactly right, and I don't have this in advance, so I'm sorry, Mr. Clerk, to create a new paper in committee and the Public Works and Facilities Committee to request an update on the payment management plan from the Department of Public Works, including the plan, the financial plan recommendation that the city adopted based on the payment management plan, what that financial investment has looked like in the fiscal year since that plan was published and when the plan will be updated. And hopefully we can get answers to those questions and also have Commissioner McGivern or whomever from maybe multiple folks from DPW to present some answers to those questions and also allow us to have a discussion.
[Callahan]: Do you think that we can request that for a month from now when we have our next
[Bears]: Yeah, I think, you know, I'm happy to, at the discretion of the chair, to forward that motion to the commissioner, and if he says I need this much time to get answers to your questions, then we can put it on an agenda for next month or two months, whatever they need. But the timeline, the discretion of the chair is fine with me, and based on availability and capacity of the city staff.
[Callahan]: Yeah, do we have, this is a motion, do we have?
[Bears]: It's a motion, yes.
[Callahan]: Do we have a second?
[Bears]: Second. Councilor Scarpella?
[Callahan]: Seconds the motion. All in favor?
[Hurtubise]: Oh, yes, please do. Read it back, and then we can have a discussion. Sure. Yes, and I think also,
[Bears]: what the city has spent relative to payment management since the plan was published.
[Hurtubise]: I'll also include what the city has spent on payment management since the plan was published.
[Bears]: Yeah, and like by fiscal year. Yeah, and you don't, you could also, we could discuss my motion more if people have further discussion.
[Scarpelli]: I think that probably first, maybe on its own paper, I think that's something that was relevant years ago. And we're seeing the fact that our roads, especially our sidewalks, seeing the negative impact, especially after all the bonding that we've provided. And then the feedback that we've heard back was that a lot of the lack of functioning of the projects is due to lack of license contractors that can do the job. And then see because the season, something I put out a few years ago, I'd like to bring it back and maybe put it as a motion or with this or a separate motion that we asked the commissioner to do a cost analysis of starting again, our own sidewalk and hot top crew. When we presented this, I think my first term, I had a the ability to take the DPW director in the neighboring community who actually broke down the equipment that's needed, the type of vehicle that would be needed, the three staff members plus their benefits, and what it came down to is having a crew that worked through the warmer weather and working at our pace to do that, the sidewalk repairs and sidewalk management plan, it really benefited neighboring communities where Medford, what my bone of contention is, I'm sure Councilor Bears remembers that when we keep when the administration keeps coming to us with $2.5 million bonds to redo sidewalks and stump removal. And to this day, another piece to this is having that list updated and reporting back to us. I think that it'll be good for the new council to see what we've done with that $2.5 million and how little gets done with that in a certain amount of time. So I don't know if we can add that or maybe as a second motion, ask follow up with the director of DPW commissioner to maybe put together a budget request for a hot top and sidewalk crew. with the staffing and materials needed. And that doesn't have to be done by next month, but it might be something we could look at for the budget season and saying, well, look at this impact. Let's do the math. If it's 2.5 million and we've only done 400 panels, sidewalk panels, and what's equivalent to neighbor communities, what does it take to do 400 panels, and we see that there's a drastic financial difference, I think that we should really entertain that. I think that we've offered it, and I know some DPW directors in the past have wanted to do it, but it's always been frozen at the administration level. The other piece to that is the benefit of having a sidewalk and hot top crew with potholes all year round, if there are down times that those three staff members could also be used in the parks department if needed, could be used in different departments when needed, you know, when you do see a lag. So if that's okay with.
[Callahan]: Councilor Scarpelli, thank you so much. I love that idea. I might suggest that we add to this motion that we have a report back not only on the pavement management, study, which is specifically roads, but there's also a sidewalk study. So maybe that belongs in it and then maybe a separate motion for a comparison of the price of having our own sidewalk. And yeah.
[Bears]: versus uh the way that we're currently doing it that's a good idea add the sidewalks to that and then i'll i'll make the second motion okay yeah and my apologies for the i intended it to be pavement management and sidewalk management um i like that i think um and we could add that further amendment the sidewalk management we could also add when we talk about the spending over the since those plans were released, including the bond orders as part of that, like how much work was done on each bond order, how much remains to be bonded. I think that's really it. Right. Right.
[Scarpelli]: the time for our new members is that weather got in the way. Lack of I believe at one point we're hiring landscape contractors to do sidewalks because there were so limited for for licensed contractors that typically do this with having some time to do it. So yeah, we got that desperate. So I would hate to do that. You know, because I think we might see the ramifications a few years down the line when you bring in people that didn't do things the proper way if that's the case.
[Bears]: So maybe it would be the bond, what was done under each bond, how much remains to be bonded, and whether or not the availability of licensed contractors affected what projects were conducted. That's good.
[SPEAKER_05]: This motion is only about two full pages. Well, if you could leave the motion I'll make sure that that's the one you send me what you've written.
[Bears]: And then I also was wondering if, when you make your next motion on the as chair Kelly and said on the sidewalk payment hot top crew. whether potentially they could also serve. Another PPW priority that we had was the main streets and sidewalk, the major sidewalks, snow removal pilot that we had. I don't remember. There's a big map in that desk from Commissioner Karen's of these are the main routes in the city, and could the city take responsibility for sending out a Luke sidewalker, for example? And that is the name of one of our sidewalkers, by the way. Look it up, Google it. Back when we had a newspaper that was newsworthy, somehow. But could this crew potentially also, in addition to being available to the other departments, would that maybe be also an alternative?
[Scarpelli]: As part of their equipment.
[Bears]: Exactly. Part of their equipment, part of their duties could just be a sidewalk maintenance. Thank you.
[Callahan]: Councilor Zero.
[Lazzaro]: I support all of the requests for reports, just I would want to keep an eye toward not giving the city staff enough time to generate those reports. So it's not overwhelming as we request them, just like with respect for how much work they have to put up to do those reports.
[Scarpelli]: All right, this is something for budget season, my request. So it still gets some time, so. Awesome.
[Callahan]: Great. Is there more discussion? Do people feel comfortable, even though this is a very long motion, do people feel comfortable voting on the motion?
[Scarpelli]: I love listening to Adam get cramps in his fingers, so I think it's great.
[Bears]: I do think for timing's sake, we should split them. One is like, what is the information of the stuff we've already done? And one is like, can you come up with an estimate and an idea of a new thing? And that might, as Councilor Scarpelli and Lazzaro noted, take more time. And maybe it's waiting on the deputy commissioner to be hired. There's a bunch of factors there.
[Callahan]: But I believe that currently we're only considering your motion right now. Oh, OK.
[Lungo-Koehn]: Good. You're good. Sorry. Yes.
[Callahan]: Great, any more discussion on the first motion of President Bears? All in favor?
[Scarpelli]: Aye.
[Callahan]: All opposed? Motion passes. Councilor Scarpelli, do you want to make that motion now?
[Scarpelli]: Would you like me to repeat that motion?
[Hurtubise]: Let me give you what I have. I was not able to capture everything. in house.
[Scarpelli]: Right. And to add Council business comment that other look at the cost for a Luke sidewalker. to also add as one of their duties. So I think that rounds off a whole team. When you look at sidewalk, hop-top crew, slash snow removal on main sidewalks, that's a pretty complete position. And I did Google it. He is right.
[Hurtubise]: please use loot sidewalker.
[Scarpelli]: Yeah, if you want to use Chewbacca shovel, is that in there too?
[Bears]: I think the intent is to say what would the equipment and the personnel cost be for in-house maintenance sidewalks on top and snow removal on priority sidewalks? Is anybody else watching this? There's a second gavel. Give me the second gavel. Please, second gavel. It's in the second drawer. It's smaller.
[Callahan]: Does it go boing?
[Hurtubise]: It actually just hit me right now. Seriously, isn't it? He did say snow be one for nobody.
[Bears]: I said nothing of the sort. You said that.
[Callahan]: Wonderful. Any more discussion on this motion? Seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. All in favor?
[Bears]: Aye.
[Callahan]: All opposed? Motion passes. Great, let's go ahead and breeze through some of these other ones. We have one under City Facilities and Equipment. Is there anyone who wants to speak on this one?
[Bears]: Yes, and I'm happy to volunteer as the lead on this. This has again been something we're trying to get our hands around in the budget side of things. What are all of the facilities we own? And what is the cost for us to bring them all up to a state of good repair? And then what is the annual cost to maintain them in a state of good repair? Big questions, but also essential questions. I saw we had an email from Mr. Krause about Chevalier and about Condon Shell. So maybe he wants to talk about that as part of this as a member of the council's representative on the Medford Brooks Estate Land Trust Board. That's another property that is city owned that has needed significant support to get to a state of good repair to get into a functioning business model. You know, Chevalier has come a long way, obviously, in the last 30 years to where it is now really. an economic heart of our downtown, but it still needs serious maintenance. It's an old building, it needs new things, it needs maintenance. Those are just two properties. We have the Hegner Center, which is abandoned functionally. We have all of our fire stations. We have the new police station, the new library. Maintenance was an issue for the new library in the last budget. I know it's difficult. We now have a facilities manager. It's a 1 person show. Um, a lot of I'm sure his time is spent actively managing minor repair projects on, you know, and maintenance projects across the city's facilities inventory. Um, but. Figuring that that main question out of, uh. What is everything that we own? What would it cost to bring them all up to a state of good repair? And then what is the cost to maintain those buildings at a state of good repair? We're in another building right now where we have punched out panels in 80 to 100-year-old windows. I mean, it's pervasive across all of the city-owned facilities except for basically the library, the police station, and I don't even know anymore about the DPW yard. We're coming up on 15 years, 10 years of that being a new facility. One, if we're going to be building new, we're going to be building a new fire headquarters. If we've just built these new buildings, we need to be investing in maintenance. And if we're going to have, you know, Brooks estate has no devoted line item right now from the city, the Chevalier, I believe Mr. Krause said that the custodian line item that got paid not out of the general fund last year that came from money that should have been going from the casino fund to Chevalier. So. you know, when we talk about not having the resources we need, whether it's on the operational side to have a hot top crew and the equipment that we need, or we're talking on the capital side to have, you know, on the operating side for maintenance, for capital expenditures, and then the capital side of like deep investments in renovations or reconstruction, we need to be able to answer those questions to give the scope to the community of, of where we're going to go. So it's not a motion, but that's just, I'm happy to take this one on. I think it's a major project. I think we should do something similar maybe at our next meeting to not necessarily have him at our next meeting, but the motion we just made around streets and sidewalks where we have a little more progress. Perhaps in our next meeting, we can have a discussion about and maybe I'll put something on the agenda to refer to this committee to invite the facilities manager to have a similar discussion.
[Scarpelli]: And if I can, Madam Chair, I think that what's important is I don't know if you can effectively do that job unless you have a true understanding of what, like you said. the facilities, what's needed, how to have a working document, because as we said, it could be windows one day, but as the windows need repair, it might be flooring, and then understanding how that breaks down. So I think that, I know that we've in the past had a comprehensive study done for all the buildings, but I think if we invite the, I've yet to meet the facilities director, maybe inviting him to one of our next meetings and asking them if they do have a comprehensive plan, you know, with what Councilor Bears was saying, so we can see. you know, what a working document looks like to maintain or bring these buildings back up to par and making sure that we stay ahead of things. I think that the other piece of that, there are so many things that we need, and there are so many avenues that we can use, but there truly isn't a point person that, at least I haven't heard yet, that can look at different grants and different avenues that we can use to fund these projects. So, I know it's a good start to have a facilities manager, but I would love to see what other communities have. I mean, most communities have a facilities manager that has an assistant manager that also has a facilities crew that does electrical. They have an electrician, a plumber, and a carpenter that's on staff that you're not wasting time or money bringing outside contractors to do things we need. in most cases at a minute's notice. So I think that that's how most facilities teams work in most communities. You know, I remember when Medford, the school department, used to have its own maintenance team. They had a locksmith, an electrician, we had a plumber, we had a carpenter, we had a painter, that they worked. And again, this is with the old schools, the neighborhood schools, that they kept them up as much as they could. But we're looking at what's so-called the new schools now that are now outdated and in desperate need of upgrades. So I think that having the new facilities manager come to us, and believe me, I don't expect the person to come up and say, yeah, this is what we need. I think we might have to look at asking the mayor to bring in a consultant that goes through the whole building, like Weston and Sampson, that other communities use, that go through all of our buildings and come through with the honest assessment of what we need in our priorities, starting high priority first. So thank you.
[Callahan]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. I completely agree. I think having some sort of assessment. And I do think that if with a new facilities manager, that is exactly the time for them to be given a task like this, as long as they have enough time, because it really sets them on the right path of being aware of all of our facilities and the shape that each one of them is in. It'll help them to get all that information on board quickly.
[SPEAKER_03]: Great.
[Callahan]: Any other discussion around this one? Moving on to public restrooms in Parks and Squares, and Councilor Tseng is not here, but it is fairly self-descriptive, just developing plans to have more public restrooms in our parks and squares. Moving on to ordinances, is there any discussion? We're good. Ordinances, the lead ordinance, Councilor Beres, do you want to introduce this one?
[Bears]: Yeah, absolutely. And I believe this one is awaiting a paper number. I don't think it's been formally introduced yet. That's correct. I'm happy to work on it with you, Madam Chair. as well as our water and sewer superintendent, DBW commissioner. I know that there are communities that have adopted lead ordinances, neighboring communities pursuant to federal regulations and similar ordinances around lead in water. So they have kind of a template document that they're looking at. So I'd be interested to sit down with, get that template, work with them. Maybe the two of us can sit down with them We can bring that here to this committee to begin the process of passing that ordinance.
[Callahan]: Any discussion?
[Bears]: This would be about private. This is about private connections to the public. Yeah.
[Callahan]: Great. Moving on to a homeown petition to increase excise taxes for large trucks. This is Vice President Collins taking the lead on this. Is there anyone that wants to introduce this one?
[Bears]: I'm happy to. I just think that's my true title.
[Callahan]: That's what rings in my head.
[Bears]: I think Councilor Collins' intent here is that because of the significant, that we know that very large vehicles and heavy vehicles damage our roads much more than lighter, smaller vehicles should, given the impact on road conditions, should those, should we all be paying the same flat rate on our excise tax just based on the value? You know, you could have a, I could have a, $100,000 sports car that weighs very light. I don't. Maybe Councilor Scarpelli can get me in on the solar industry and we can figure that out. Or I could have a 5,000, 6,000 pound 25-year-old truck, right? And I'm paying almost nothing on the truck because it's worth almost nothing, but it's damaging the road way more than the lighter, more expensive higher value car. So the intent here is to at least ask the legislature if they would let us assess our excise tax based on impact on road condition in addition to just the value of the vehicle.
[Callahan]: Any other discussion? Moving on to the oversight and engagement, public utility accountability. Cerulli is looking at holding utility companies accountable to provide services and benefits to the community and mitigate impact of their assets and poor asset condition on the city.
[Scarpelli]: I think that we've seen, Madam President, through the chair, I believe it's a I think that we're seeing our city engineer being more proactive when we're opening our streets to private entities, let's say a resident wanting to change from a lead pipe to copper water pipe. I believe the new policies in place now that the homeowner now has to pay the contractor to go curb to curb, which if what bothers me with that is that I don't know. There's still question, I think, to ask the city engineer that when the utilities come in, are they mandated for the same type of restoration? If they open the street from what I've been told, they're not. They open up the area that needs to be open that they can get to, they resurface it, they let it sit one cycle, and they come back and resurface it. But I think that's not fair. I think the basic resident, the homeowner, or, you know, The landlord that has to pay for the safer, you know, transfer of lead to copper has now bringing up the rate that's falling back on the consumer because now the contract is not saying, okay, let's keep it the same price. They're boosting the price to an unimaginable fee. And I'd like to know if we're seeing the same with utilities. Our biggest issue right now that we've seen and heard from time and time again, using Winthrop Street as a good example, That street has been opened up, I think, maybe 10 times in the last 10 years. And you're looking at the same. The same areas being opened up, but there isn't collaboration with. national grid gas work to Medford's infrastructure, water pipes that I think that if there could be a better way to communicate that to minimize any of the resurfacing of the roads. But I think that the biggest thing with I believe this is the having the utilities coming in and going curb to curb as well. So I, I believe that's something that we need a better understanding, maybe through a motion, is just asking some clarity with the city engineer just to give us a report of what the utility standards are when opening streets and for private residents that want to make, you know, change their water lines. Just so we have an understanding and then because I, you know, we've heard it for years now, the biggest concerns and issues we have in our roads and sidewalks are the fraudulent work done by the utilities when they come in and not being held accountable. The biggest part of that is also that most communities have what's called a clerk of the works, that when they are doing a job, permitted a job, you have a clerk of the works for the DPW that watches and oversees the opening of the area, the closing, then the cleaning of the area. So that's something we asked for in the past. I believe we asked for that if we could ask for a fee to be added to any road work that would pay for Clerk of the Works and we were told that can't happen. So that they told us that that's, something that we can't request. But if we can get that motion to the city engineer to give us a better understanding of the utility side of the roads, and hopefully we can police that a little bit better.
[Callahan]: Thank you for mentioning that. It also reminds me that I heard this same thing that you say that you have heard for many years I also heard this talking to neighbors at their doors. And also I wonder if we can fold into this. to understand from the administration how much coordination there is, because in some other cities, they put a moratorium once a road is truly repaved and brought up to like a number one.
[Scarpelli]: There is, I believe it's five years, a new road.
[Callahan]: And my understanding is that then there are a lot of emergencies, and that this happens all the time. So to really have an understanding from the administration of what that moratorium is, what can get in the way of it, how often it happens, that, in fact, it's torn up much more quickly than every five years. So I think that might fold into that, or it could be separate. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Lazzaro]: In addition to the ripping up the roads issue of public utility stuff, I think there's something That's a big concern about the functioning of the substances themselves, like the gas, the gas leaks, and various things like that. I would be very curious to keep track of. that everything is moving along properly. I remember when I worked for Christine Barber, she was working on a gas leak spill and I was just trying to research if that ever passed. This was like 2017, 2018. But that Somerville at the time was one of the one of the municipalities that had the highest density of gas leaks. And it was, what happened was some of the residents or every resident pays for the leaks that as the gas leaks, the rate payers pay for it, the utility doesn't pay for it. So the bill was to say, you know, fix the leaks obviously first, but also if you can't fix the leaks, you pay for the leaks and then the rate payers shouldn't pay for it. The fact that that wasn't happening was utterly insane. I'm not even sure if it passed. I'm still trying to research it. But, um, yes.
[Scarpelli]: So we do have and if they can update us with that, because they have in the past where they tell us what level we have. So that might be helpful to that. And then we could see, you know, sorry. Sorry, Adam.
[Hurtubise]: I have an update.
[Scarpelli]: Yeah, good.
[Hurtubise]: Several years ago, it creates feedback when I turn it off. OK. Several years ago, you were on the council, and the council passed an ordinance asking utilities to report gas leaks within the city, and they had to be reported to the clerk's office. I sent out a round of letters, didn't get a response. So then last year, I sent out another round of letters, and I got a response from one utility that said federal law says we don't even have to respond to this because there's a whole different standard for utilities, and they're governed by federal law more than state law, and they don't even have to respond to municipal legislative inquiries. So I'm about to send out this year's letters, but I'm going to get the same response.
[Scarpelli]: We don't have to. allow permits. I mean, it's very simple, like, what's good for the goose?
[Bears]: No, if I could to that point, I've had some good conversations. I think maybe the clerk and I and, and the engineer had a conversation in the hall a couple weeks ago. That's basically where we're at. So things are not being issued until backlogs of promised repairs and maintenance begin to happen is essentially my understanding. I don't want to go beyond the scope of a short, informal conversation versus what I agree with the motion to have a full conversation. But, you know. That was my understanding of where we're at, certainly with our friends at National Grid. Obviously, I don't think the MWRA and others are of the same scope, but I'll leave it at that. There is also, and I'm trying to find it in here, there is some stuff in the, there's some provisions in the, Municipal Empowerment Act proposed by the governor regarding some accountability for the utility companies. It may have just been double poles. I'm trying to find it right now, but it would give the city more authority around double pole enforcement. The section allows cities and towns to enforce the statutory prohibition on double poles. Penalties authorized to be imposed are limited to $1,000 per occurrence.
[Scarpelli]: To that, I believe Councilor Marks spearheaded that process, and I don't believe we have many double polls left.
[Bears]: Yeah, that's probably true.
[Scarpelli]: I think that with that announcement, I think Councilor Marks was very proactive with making sure, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that all of the double polls have been converted back to the single pole. So let's get an idea, maybe ask, I think, I think, Mr. Randazzo might be the person to ask, you know, I'd be happy to.
[Bears]: And I was just pulling this up, because I couldn't remember if it was just double poles, or if there was a more expansive state law around giving us a little bit more authority over the utilities. It looks like it's just double poles.
[Scarpelli]: That's funny because when we asked the gas company, I think the, uh, was it Harvard street? We had the issues with some serious, uh, high level, uh, gas leaks. They were pretty forthcoming with the report of how many we had. And I don't think it was really meant to poke the bear, but it was really made for just, uh, information gathering. So we stay at the top of things with the neighbors that called. So, That's a little alarming that the utilities would say that, though. That's pretty disheartening. Yeah.
[Callahan]: So there, yes, Councilor Lazzaro?
[Lazzaro]: I don't mean to interrupt you, but I do think that if we can, as this active council now sort of pick up the work that's been done without replicating it and carry it forward, I think that's really important and keep staying on top of the utility companies as as we move through this term. I think that's really important. I'd be happy to do that, or I don't know if Ken's script probably fills that part. You do have the institutional knowledge. Yeah, I'd be eager to do that. Because I wouldn't want to waste the energy of like, if somebody's been doing it, and this kind of the double pole thing is already covered, and stuff that has been discussed is, you know.
[Scarpelli]: I think we can pull old papers back You know, I think maybe bringing in the representatives that we work with, with especially National Grid, was super, super helpful when we had the Harvard Street issue. So maybe just having an open conversation with one of their leaders to say that might have been policy sent from a letter, but more of a personal level, maybe there's a way that we can get some information that we need.
[Lazzaro]: Right, like once people are just talking to each other, it's not, it doesn't need to be contentious. You can just give us the information you have and we can go from there. Yeah.
[Callahan]: Councilor Scarpelli has a motion on the floor and as we read it back, if you wanna, no, no, just let me know if you think it makes any sense to add in something about the moratorium and how often it is broken. So let's go ahead and read that back.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli moved to ask the city engineer for what the utility standards are for utilities open to streets and for private residents who meet the streets open for work on their water lines and other issues.
[Scarpelli]: for the engineer, motion for the engineer.
[Hurtubise]: So the idea is the discrepancy between the utilities, what the utilities have to do, what private residents have to do.
[Scarpelli]: Just understanding the policy. I think that's the first thing. Once we understand the policy, then I think we can move on something to this committee. All right. And then Councilor Lazzaro had maybe something that.
[Callahan]: Do we want to have a second for this motion?
[Scarpelli]: I have a second. I want to second that too. Second.
[Callahan]: Maybe. We can always add my stuff as a different motion or something.
[Bears]: My little joke gavel. One of the blow up ones.
[SPEAKER_05]: One that goes, eek, eek. The squeaky ones.
[Bears]: Trust me, when we get to the budget, it'll feel like that for all of us. We'll all be wearing big red noses.
[Callahan]: Any more discussion on the Councilor Scarapelli's motion? All in favor? Aye. All opposed? Motion passes. Great, we are near the end here.
[Lazzaro]: Did you have a motion? Did you? Do I need a motion to say that I and I would move to, let's see, I would move to lead the oversight and engagement of public utility accountability. with Councilor Scarpelli.
[Lungo-Koehn]: Sure, I'll make that motion.
[Lazzaro]: So moved. Do we have a second? I didn't, I don't know what it was. Motion to co-lead the oversight and engagement of public utility accountability with Councilor Scarpelli.
[Callahan]: Seconded by Councilor Caraviello.
[Lungo-Koehn]: Seconded.
[Callahan]: All right, Councilor. Already?
[SPEAKER_03]: You need to do it.
[SPEAKER_05]: I'll take a second.
[Callahan]: Do you want to read that back, and then we'll take a vote? We'll have a discussion and vote.
[SPEAKER_05]: Councilor Lazzaro moved to decode. for the oversight and engagement of public utility accountability with Councilor Scarpella. That was a second from Councilor Scarpella.
[Callahan]: Any discussion? Great. All in favor?
[Callahan]: Motion passes. The final thing on our list is simply the tree planting volunteer network. That is really something that we're at a very early phase. We're just at the point of like talking to city staff and kind of seeing, you know, they're like talking to city staff and also looking at what other cities have done just to get an idea. So we're not, I think, at the point of any kind of an ordinance or taking action. So the idea is that the city would allow certain volunteers, residents to, with training, with the proper placement, with the proper trees, with the proper depth, and with all the training to be enabled to participate in the planting of certain city trees.
[Scarpelli]: just I know that just probably having the union president involved and making sure that that's the biggest issue we talk about any sort of volunteer work, especially when it comes to DPW. And I remember that. And most of the time, it's not a big deal. But I think that even cleaning up behind the high school, remember the hill? And we came in with about three teams full of kids that wanted to clean that area, and just making sure that DPW gets paid overtime to do that, just we're informed and they understand. I don't think that it's ever been a problem, but I think it's something that just they want to be part of the information. So whenever we do anything with volunteering, I think making sure we have that as a priority just to make sure that they're in the loop.
[Callahan]: Great, wonderful. And I do think also that as a, like if this becomes something of a resolution or who knows what exactly it will become, that it will be for, it's kind of stopgap measure, that the purpose really is to have a larger tree planting crew, but that at the moment, while we are dealing with budgetary difficulties, that this might be able to help us to increase our tree canopy. President Bears?
[Bears]: Yes, just 2 things 1 on this topic, you know, we have, we have seen some very, very targeted increase in the forestry department. I think we added 2 tree climbers last budget. Not a ton, but a little bit of movement there. So, you know, I know. and Representative Donato and the administration and I were able to pull together a bunch of money for tree planting and stump removal last year, a combination of CDBG, state ARPA earmark, a little bit of bonding that we did. So there's been some movement on this. The only other thing I wanted to add was I just wanted to note Because I put it in as there's a paper and committee holdover from actually now three councils ago 19-554 is a resolution to add noise barriers along Route 93. It actually was a resolution offered by Councilor Scarpelli end of 2019. It is you handed out the the item report. Thank you Chair Callahan. I just wanted to note that's still in committee that has not been done. I do believe we were on some emails with Rep Donato in 2020 or 2021 about an update, but we were still very far down the list.
[Bears]: panels then yeah but then it fell apart so it again was still in yeah that's still going and they ripped all the trees down so there's even less really it's even worse now yeah so that whole fountain street area all the way up to gillis field all the way down to salem street rotary really and down from the river something rotary to the river quite frankly could use it too but um
[Scarpelli]: It's funny if you go down the road further to more affluent communities, they have the soundproof barriers all the way down 128 supporting their city. So it's a little disheartening. I know, and that's not Councilor Donato, I mean, Representative Donato, he worked his tail off to get what we have right now. And when we first did 93, when they first did the 93 project, They, for some reason, they asked for it on that side of the highway. But for some reason, we didn't ask for it on this side of the highway. So that was the biggest issue.
[Hurtubise]: And then, but when I worked at the transportation department, he called me and asked me.
[Scarpelli]: He called everyone.
[Callahan]: Does anybody have an idea for what is the next step for this?
[Bears]: No, I just wanted to note that it's, it's, it's still there. I am not on the governing agenda, but it is a paper and committee that has been held over as an active paper from prior councils.
[Scarpelli]: So, yeah, it might be something we can ask the state representative just to get us an update. But yeah, I don't think it's. Yeah, I think he's pulled every rabbit out of every hat to try to make it work. So, yeah. Just so you know, if I won the megabucks, that was one of the things on my list. Wow. Just, you know, $500 million gets you a lot. I'm going to buy me a house first. I already bought that. Oh, already? Yes.
[Bears]: Already. Yeah, I'm going to live under a solar panel at the Scarpelli residence. Butler Street, rear.
[Callahan]: Do we have any other public comment, any discussion of anything else as we've reached the end of our sort of list of things that we hope to cover in this committee? What we were just talking about just now. Oh, I apologize. Yes, 19-554, resolution to add noise barriers along Route 93.
[Bears]: Yes. It was not formally called.
[Callahan]: It was discussed.
[Bears]: Yes, it was not. Sorry. It was discussed.
[Callahan]: I did not call it from my chair.
[Bears]: It's not on for discussion tonight, but it was meant to, yes, it's a new way of doing the agenda. It's kind of an unfinished business item, but I'm sure we can entertain any comment. Of course. We just had an informal conversation about it. Yes.
[Callahan]: Absolutely. Please do. Absolutely. Can you state your name and address for the record?
[Lungo-Koehn]: I got it.
[Castagnetti]: I want to congratulate all the new Councilors that were elected, first of all. I also want to thank all the other political figures that ran and spent a lot of time and effort and cash. And I want to thank them for trying hard. I came because on this agenda, it does say 19-554. I didn't realize it was six years ago when I brought this up. and before that, and it says resolution to add noise barriers along Route 93 on the north side. So I'm here to correct this because it was done, well, first of all, I should back up to like more than 10 years ago, I believe, when, as you mentioned, Mr. Donato, the state rep, he had done great things for the city, including getting Chevalier all kinds of seats, and you're speaking about trees, et cetera. So he's had some good clout in the state house. However, when he came forward and said, I have the cash in place in order to add a sound barrier on one side only, and that was the west side. which is the West Medford side of 93, in my opinion. So I said to him, and he didn't like it. I said, Mr. Donato, if you're gonna give it to one child, why not give it to the other side of the Route 93 child? And he made a comment, I don't want to misquote him, but it's something to the effect like, oh, I've had a few complaints from some East side residents on the East Medford side. So my reply to him was, I can't see how a few people can sway You, as an individual, not to give it to our east side. So I don't recollect if there was any comment after the fact. As a matter of fact, there probably was not. So I was ecstatic to see this on the agenda yesterday, and that's why I am here. However, I'd like to see this corrected to state that on the east side of 93, not the north side, because this is west, east is on the opposite side, and it's not north. And as Councilor Bears, I believe, mentioned certain areas that should have it. And I believe he said, and he's right, where I am near Riverside Avenue, it should start not just at Riverside Avenue, further south, about a football field, three, four, 500 feet, probably. Actually, we're right on top of the river, on the bridge, behind the Senior Citizen Center, because there's at least five condominium complexes there, and houses on the Ship Ave and Marine Street area, which is, that alone has gotta be, 500 units.
[Callahan]: I think that our clerk actually has some some answers for you.
[Hurtubise]: I can give you an answer on that at least at least on why it says 93 north as opposed to the east side of the west side. Sure. It's because it's because when the petition goes into the transportation department it's identified by the road and so the road is 93 north that which is why which is why the petition goes in that way. So it doesn't make, when you look at the petitions that go into the DOT, it's identified by the road, not by the location on the road.
[Castagnetti]: Also 93 goes in the opposite direction towards Boston South.
[Hurtubise]: But South has noise barriers. If I could read. Correct.
[Bears]: if I could I just have it here the full resolution from 2019 was be it resolved that the city administration looking to adding noise barriers along route 93 on the north side to mirror what is on the south side of route 93 and I believe it if something we're saying it's it's 93 north and 93 south there's barriers on the 93 south side but not on the 93 north side which would be the east side right
[Castagnetti]: So I think there's a semantics by my mentality.
[Bears]: It sounds like it's worded properly to satisfy the Department of Transportation. I agree with you that that that the 93 North is on the east side.
[Castagnetti]: I got a pretty good compass rose in my head. You know, I know my directions quite well. And also, who wrote up the resolution? Does it state where it starts and where it finishes?
[Bears]: I was councilor Scarpelli in 2019, not to put it anywhere.
[Castagnetti]: Does it state where this barrier would start and where it finishes?
[Bears]: It does not.
[Castagnetti]: Who makes that determination, us?
[Callahan]: Well, unfortunately, I think that the reason this has been stalled for six years is because it's really up to the state. This is not something that we can decide and our administration can implement.
[Hurtubise]: There's a whole federal formula involved with noise barriers. I'm a little rusty on it because it's been a while since I did that when I was on the transportation side of things for the state. But there's an entire federal formula involving traffic and age of the road and how recently it was updated and when it's scheduled to be updated again or when it's scheduled to be overhauled or repaired again. There's a whole big numerical formula goes into play on it.
[Castagnetti]: So do we know when this, if it ever gets started, when this will start?
[Hurtubise]: I don't know the answer to that one.
[Callahan]: Yeah.
[Castagnetti]: Can you ballpark that timeline?
[Callahan]: No, we can't because it's really up to the state. So we don't have any control over it. So what we're suggesting is that we reach out again to our state representatives to ask them for some information, but it's nothing that we are able to.
[Castagnetti]: I really would appreciate that for at least half the population of the city, over 30,000 on the east side. We keep getting the short end of the stick.
[Callahan]: Yep.
[Castagnetti]: And we supply more real estate taxes than all the other three sections of Medford combined probably.
[Callahan]: Thank you so much. Thank you.
[Castagnetti]: I want to say thank you, but it would be nice if it was done from day one, east meets west.
[Callahan]: Fantastic. Any other public comment?
[Krause]: Thank you. I'm Ken Krause, 50 Mystic Street, Medford. I'm also on the board of directors of the Francis Schreiber Auditorium in Gene Mack Gym. I just want to thank the members of the council present and past for putting this agenda, the governing agenda together and for kind of revamping the committees and committing to regular scheduled meetings where I can see some potential for a lot of productive work to be done. I'm very excited about this particular committee. As was mentioned, Shibaiya Theater has a lot of needs, many of which there's no really dedicated funding source to address them. The Shibaiya Commission's capital improvements committee was recently reconstituted and as probably 25 items on a on a capital plan project list that we're starting to look for funding for them as Council President Bears mentioned we have the facilities director now on hand for 13 months has had a very detailed introduction to the facilities particularly Shabir and I think his insight now into what would be most useful to have in the budget to enable us to kind of catch up on things that haven't been addressed and also put in the budget. funds for preventive maintenance so we're not, you know, kind of chasing problems and doing things in a reactive fashion. But I just really want to say that the commission, the friends, the arts community is very eager to contribute and participate and give insight and support to this effort. I think the capital improvements plan that came out a year or two ago actually didn't mention Cheballier at all and that was disappointing to see, so I think we can correct that here by looking at the facility holistically, and I think this will be a very useful exercise, and I look forward to being engaged, and thank you again for putting this out. Appreciate it.
[Callahan]: Thank you so much.
[Krause]: Thanks, Ken.
[Bears]: If I could, yeah, and I just want to mention, yeah, there's, and this is where it's kind of, I think the crux of this whole issue around facilities and streets and sidewalks, we have a capital improvement plan or investment plan, whatever the acronym stands for. that is not attached to, at least in a way that I can meaningfully see, and if I or we cannot meaningfully see it, I would guess that most cannot meaningfully see it, to the assessments, pavement management plan assessment, the sidewalk assessment, and then the yet-to-be-completed facilities assessment. And that's where it's, I think I said this when the call-in center was on, the call-in center was like, oh, well, that's impossible, basically. And I was like, that can't be impossible. It's just math. to say, okay, yes, so we're investing a hundred whatever million over the next six years of capital improvements, great. How much does that accomplish? How much of the actual need does that get us down the road to fixing? How, what does that, and what are we getting from that investment where we're bringing something to state of good repair, where we're not spending good money after bad, or we're not being penny smart and pound foolish. And that's, again, just where the real frustration for me comes in is, great we're spending you know it's we all we can all say it's the same thing i think i said the other night about the budget it's the biggest budget ever of course it's the biggest budget ever inflation is the highest it's ever been everything costs more than it's ever cost before every sequential budget better be the biggest budget ever otherwise we just cut a bunch of stuff So it's the same question here. We're spending $140 million on capital improvements. Great. If we need $2 billion, then we're getting 5% of the way over five years. So it'll take us 100 years to get there, which means we'll never get there. So sorry to rant, but thank you, Madam Chair. I'm missing my position down here on the floor.
[Callahan]: OK, all rants aside, cut you off, President Perkins.
[Bears]: I've been up at the podium all month. All rants aside. I have to get it all out.
[Callahan]: Is there any other discussion? No, there's not. Does anyone move to adjourn?
[Bears]: Vice President Collins is not here, so. Keeping the leadership team happy. I'll second.
[Callahan]: Great. Motion to adjourn from Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Zach Bears. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Thank you very much to everyone. See you all next month.
|
total time: 9.12 minutes total words: 1453 |
total time: 18.24 minutes total words: 2997 |
total time: 15.9 minutes total words: 2498 |
total time: 3.32 minutes total words: 483 |
|
total time: 0.1 minutes total words: 16 |
|||