AI-generated transcript of City Council 08-14-24

[SPEAKER_11]: In a meeting, Medford City Council, August 13th, 2024 is called to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan. Present. Vice President Collins. Present. Councilor Lazzaro. Present. Councilor Lemi.

[SPEAKER_05]: Present.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli. Present. Councilor Sanz. Present.

[SPEAKER_11]: Present. Seven present, none absent. Please rise to salute the flag. Announcements, accolades, remembrances, and reports and records. Records. The records of the meeting of July 23rd, 2024 were passed to Councilor Callahan. Councilor Callahan, how did you find those records?

[SPEAKER_19]: Find them in order. And I move to approve.

[SPEAKER_11]: On the motion of Councilor Callahan to approve, seconded by? Second. Seconded by Vice President Collins. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor San Buenaventura?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Yes, I move the amendment. Negative, the motion passes. Reports of committees, 24-033 offered by Vice President Collins, Planning and Permanent Committee, July 24th, 2024, report to follow. Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you, President Bears. This latest meeting of the Planning and Permanent Committee was once again held with the City Council's zoning consultant. This was kind of a fun and unusual meeting. They arranged for us a mapping workshop where their GIS specialists printed out a whole range of zoning-related maps showing different characteristics of the city from a zoning perspective. everything from lot frontage to average income in different neighborhoods. We spread them all out in tapers in City Hall. We had a lot of department heads, members of the public joined us. It was really interesting. And that discussion and the takeaways and questions that came out of it are going to inform our further committee meetings with the zoning consultant, beginning with the next one, which is tomorrow at 7 p.m. to review the findings and questions from that committee and start going over some of our corridor strategies as well as global strategies for the zoning overhaul throughout the city. So I move for approval.

[SPEAKER_11]: On the motion of Vice President Collins to approve the committee report, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Levee?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Fares?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. I have an affirmative and a negative. The motion passes. Hearings. Petition for a special permit for hours for Panda Express. Legal notice. Medford City Clerk's Office. Notice of a public hearing. The Medford City Council will hold a public hearing in the Howard F. Alden Chambers on the second floor of Medford City Hall, 85 George B. Hassett Drive, Medford MA, and via Zoom on Tuesday, August 13th, 2024 at 7 p.m. A link to be posted no later than Friday, August 9th, 2024. On a petition for a special permit for hours filed by Panda Express, 491 Riverside Avenue, Medford MA 02155, the petitioner is seeking to extend the hours of operation of the restaurant in the commercial 1C1 zoning district at 491 Riverside Avenue, parcel ID Q-15-11. The petition seeks a special permit for hours, Monday to Sunday, 11 p.m. to 3 a.m. Petition and plan may be viewed in the office of the City Clerk. Room 103, Medford City Hall, Medford M.A. Call 781-393-2425 for any accommodations, aides. The City of Medford is an EEO-AA-504 employer. By order of the City Council, signed, Adam L. Herneby, City Clerk. Where this is a hearing, we will first go to the petitioner, and then I will go to councilors for questions, and then we will open the public hearing. Is petitioner for Panda Express available? Someone representing Panda Express to discuss their petition for a special permit. You can raise your hand and come to the podium in the chamber or raise your hand on Zoom. Seeing none, is there a motion? On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to table, give me one moment. The clerk has advised that we open the hearing and continue the hearing to a date certain if that's acceptable. I'm going to open the public hearing. Is there a motion to continue the public hearing to the date certain of, I believe our next meeting is September 10th. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to continue the public hearing to the September 10th regular meeting. Seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Calderon? Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, 70 from another negative that public hearings continue to the September 10th regular meeting. 24-457, request for amendment to previously approved grant of location, National Grid, to the City Council of Medford, Massachusetts, to whom it may concern. Please, enclosed, find a petition of National Grid covering the installation of underground facilities. This GOL grant of location application was previously approved, and this is a grant of location amendment request. If you have any questions, please contact Moses Okorokoro at nationalgrid.com. Please notify National Grid of the hearing date and time. To the City Council, respectfully, represents the Massachusetts Electric Company, DBA, National Grid of North Andover, Massachusetts. It desires to construct a line of underground electric conduits, including the necessary sustaining and protecting fixtures under and across the public way or ways here and after named. Wherefore, appraised after due notice and hearing as provided by law, it be granted permission to excavate the public highways and to run and maintain underground electric conduits together with such sustaining and protecting fixtures as it may find necessary for the transmission of electricity. Said underground conduits to be located substantially in accordance with the plan filed herewith marked Main Street, Medford, Massachusetts, the following streets and highways referred to WR number 30658427, Main Street, beginning at approximately 15 feet southwest of the center line of the intersection of Main Street and South Street, and continuing approximately 760 feet in the south direction, National Grid is petitioning to install 5-inch ducts between 101 Main Street and 151 Main Street, approximately 370 feet of 4 to 5-inch ducts from existing manhole MH186 to MH187, and approximately 390 feet of 2 to 5-inch ducts from existing manhole MH187 to MH188, mentored ma this link to approve previously approved grant location location approximately as shown on plan attached do we have a representative from national grid to speak to this petition please come to the podium in the chambers or raise your hands on zoom It seems like a no-show night. City Engineer Wattel, do you have anything you wanna add here? Just here. This technically isn't a table, this isn't a hearing, it's just under hearing. So your initial motion to table. The motion to table, Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Keohane. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_11]: 24-456, petition for a common victor's license, shop and go. Business, Liza Trading Inc, DBA, shop and go, 374 Salem Street, Medford. Petitioner, owner, Nazia Rashid, 11 Palmer Street, Medford. On file, business certificate 2024, number 134, petition received. Letter of compliance received, state tax ID received, workers' compensation received, treasurer-collector received, building department received, fire department received, police department received, and health department received. Do we have a representative of Shop and Go? If you could come to the podium, please, and share a little bit about your business, and we'll go to the Councilor Scarpelli as the Chair of the Licensing, Permitting, and Signs. We're gonna have to, there's a button on there. There you go.

[SPEAKER_14]: Yes, just we change the ownership, everything is same.

[SPEAKER_11]: Great, Councilor Scarpelli. Any other questions by members of the council on this common victor's license application? Seeing none, on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve, seconded by. Seconded by Councilor San Buenaventura. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Yes. Are you Mr. Rashid?

[SPEAKER_12]: She's my wife.

[SPEAKER_11]: Oh, okay. What's your name?

[SPEAKER_12]: Maria.

[SPEAKER_11]: Great.

[SPEAKER_09]: Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: When you're ready.

[SPEAKER_07]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: If I remember the negative, the motion passes. Thank you very much. Mr. President.

[SPEAKER_11]: Madam Vice President.

[SPEAKER_22]: I would motion to suspend the rules to take papers 24-455, 24-453, and 24-454 out of order. On the motion, I have Vice President Collins to take papers 24-455, 24-453, and 24-454 from the table. Seconded by? Second.

[SPEAKER_11]: Seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clark, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_11]: 7 in the affirmative, then the negative, the motion passes. 24-455 Executive Session, Various Litigations and Claims. To the Honorable President and Members of the Medford City Council, Medford City Hall, Medford, Massachusetts, 02155, Dear President, Members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend your Honorable Body enter Executive Session pursuant to General Law, Chapter 30A, Section 21, subsection A3, to discuss strategy with respect to litigation concerning Samari Montes versus City of Medford, MCAT docket number 22BEM02938. I also recommend that the council's agenda state in the executive session notice that votes may be taken. Attorney John O'Connor will be present to provide the council with guidance on this matter. I further respect the request and recommend your honor body enter executive session pursuant to general law chapter 30A, section 21A3 to discuss strategy with respect to litigation concerning Teenagers Local 25 and the city of Medford MUP-22-9555. I also recommend the council agenda state the executive session notice that votes may be taken. Attorney Jarrett Collins will be present to provide the council with guidance on this matter. Thank you for your kind attention. Sincerely, Rehan Alago-Kern, Mayor. Is there a motion to enter executive session pursuant to Chapter 30A, Section 21A.3?

[SPEAKER_10]: So moved.

[SPEAKER_11]: On the motion of Vice President Collins, seconded by, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Sanz? Yes.

[SPEAKER_11]: Vice President Bears? Yes. And the affirmative and the negative. Motion passes. We'll be entering executive session. 24-453, Medford call for election September 2024. Be it ordered that the Elections Commission be and is hereby authorized and directed to notify and warn such inhabitants of the city of Medford as were qualified by law to vote for candidates at the state primaries on Tuesday, September 3rd, 2024 to assemble at the polling places in their respective wards and precincts, and then and there to give their votes for Senator in Congress, Representative in Congress, Governor's Councilor, State Senator, State Representative, Clerk of Courts, Register of Deeds, and the polls of the said state primaries shall open at 7 a.m. and remain open until 8 p.m. We had further order that the following main polling places be and are hereby designated for use of the state primaries on September 3rd, 2024. The said polling places to be open 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. Ward 1, Precinct 1, Andrews Middle School, Ward 1, Precinct 2, Firefighters Club, Ward 2-1 and 2-2, Roberts Elementary School. Ward 3-1, American Legion. Ward 3-2, Temple Shalom. Ward 4-1, Tufts University, Gancho Santa Ria. Ward 4-2, 22 Wacol Court, Auburn and North Street, Fondacaro Center. Ward 5-1 and 5-2, Missittuck Elementary School. Ward 6-1, West Menford Fire Station. Ward 6-2, Brooks Elementary School. Ward 7-1, Mystic Valley Towers North Building Entrance. Ward 7-2, McGlynn K-3-8 Public School. Ward 8-1, Senior Center. Ward 8-2, South Menford Fire Station. And I will recognize the Chair of the Elections Commission, Henry Malone, and our a member Aaron Domenedetto to share anything they'd like to share about this call for election for our state primary on Tuesday, September 3rd, 2024.

[SPEAKER_02]: Well, actually, you did such a good job, Mr. President. I don't think I have anything to add to it, except when we get to the one, we'll talk about it, which is the same thing.

[SPEAKER_11]: Perfect. We're taking that next. Any questions for the Elections Commission on the call to election? Councilor Tsengeed.

[SPEAKER_04]: This is more about the voting locations. I know, Henry, you and I worked a lot a few months ago on getting the Walking Court polling location open for our residents around there. I see on this form that we have Walking Court again. Do we know if that's true for the November election? Is it the same building as it usually is?

[SPEAKER_02]: For the entire year, we probably will have to find another location in 2025, but we got lucky since February, we have it September and November. Great.

[SPEAKER_04]: I'm so happy that our hard work is continuing to work out there.

[SPEAKER_02]: When we work together, we produce things.

[SPEAKER_11]: That's so true. Great. And I am talking to Director Driscoll about some stuff around that too. I'll inform the council if it becomes relevant. and the president as well.

[SPEAKER_14]: Thank you very much. I know that you've worked very hard on this, but a lot of people have still reached out saying they just don't know, since we've moved some places around, they were curious how they can really know where they're supposed to vote. Is there a number or an office that I can direct them to and that we can maybe send something out publicly?

[SPEAKER_02]: I don't think there's much changes as far as election is concerned in Medford. We've been voting at the same location. The only time we've seen a change was when we come up with what 6 to 8, and 7 to 8. And some of the people get displaced. But that's been about something like three cycle of election. I'm sure they have it. Additionally, one of the thing we're working with the communication director is to send a message to the community telling them where to vote. On top of it, if they have an issue, call the election department.

[SPEAKER_14]: That's a great idea if we can get like a robocall to those residents to say, don't forget your new location or there's a lot of people it's funny because conversations that we have a big state state representative Donato has a big. big race coming up in September, September 3rd. And a lot of people are really coming back out that haven't voted since the last presidential race. So that's where the questions arose. And I appreciate that, if we can get that word out. And I think the other thing was, that with that race, is it district, Middlesex District? 35, what is it? We really, I think the other question is that people don't know that September is the election. There is no November with this race, because there isn't a Republican, correct? There will be.

[SPEAKER_02]: No, the one, two of the chair, the one in September is a state primary. State primary. see you referring to the 35th. The other six, there's three people on the ballot. So it's going to be reduced to two. And the two will be in November for general election.

[SPEAKER_14]: So the two will go in November. OK, that's confusing, because now we were told that

[SPEAKER_11]: the three candidates running on the democratic ticket that the winner that comes out of that race is the winner there's a partisan primary and there's a partisan primary there's a democratic primary there's three candidates yeah yeah

[SPEAKER_02]: you have that's what you have the first one because what it is you can only have at the general two people well that's that's for municipal henry um in this in this case it'll be one it will be that one will be the only person just like you see for 23rd. Right now we have a guy who's not on the post, only his name, but he's still sure on the primary.

[SPEAKER_14]: Right, right. No, I understand that, but I think people, people think that let's, let's skip the primary and we'll vote in November. In November, there'll be no race. It'll just be the, there'll be the candidate that came out of the primary.

[SPEAKER_11]: I think we should generally avoid going down this road, but yes, there will be one candidate on the ballot in November for the Democratic Party, and there's no candidate running, I believe, for the Republican nomination.

[SPEAKER_02]: That's where the confusion is, because if they're the same party, whoever wins is the one that move forward.

[SPEAKER_14]: And that's why I think that this is something that educating our voters and getting something out part of that 3-1-1 is making them understand that there is no Republican party running in this race. So in essence, the winner that comes out of the Democratic primary will be our representative. So we have to, it is very confusing as you just saw. So it would be imperative that maybe we, as a form of a motion, we ask the election department and the mayor and the city administration share a robocall throughout that district, those districts that are affected, that they understand that November is really just ceremonial. It's not the actual election for that race is the third of September. Thank you, Mr. President.

[SPEAKER_11]: I don't know that we can We could do a B paper to communicate to the public that there's an election coming up and that they can contact the elections department, 781-393-2491, or they can go online wheredoivotema.com to find out who their representative, what is district they're in, their polling location.

[SPEAKER_14]: If I can, Mr. President, this is what's terrible about not having a city solicitor, because I think this is a message that truly needs to be detailed.

[SPEAKER_11]: I think it's not very political.

[SPEAKER_14]: And I think, well, it's for all three candidates. It's not political. It's to make sure that everybody knows for all three candidates that you have a constituent that's going to vote for one of the three candidates. And they assume that they're in the assumption that we'll just vote in November. But the truth of the matter is not understanding the processes we just saw. that letting them know that September is truly the election for this seat. And I don't think it's, I'm not saying one party or the other. I'm saying for all three parties that are running for that seat should be given the respect and the effort by this body to ask if we can do that. Now, again, like I said, if we had a city solicitor, be very simple and say, let's make weapons city solicitor let's let's do that let's send it off as a b paper and we'll we'll get to that when we can but having it stop right now i think it's it's it's not it's not right it's not right all right uh that's fine i'm just what's the text of the b paper We would like the elections department in the mayor's office to work with a robocall and other messaging, whatever other messaging possible to reach that district that is voting in the, once again, I'm sorry, District 30. The 35th Middlesex. the state representative. We have three candidates to educate those voters on the importance of that race being the final representation of that position. Does that make sense, Mr. Clerk? I know that you're very good at fixing my mistakes.

[SPEAKER_07]: I'm going to read this back, Councilor Scarpelli, because I'm still, I still need to know.

[SPEAKER_09]: Sure, I know, go ahead.

[SPEAKER_07]: The fee paper is to ask the elections department and the mayor's office to do a robo-call and whatever other means possible regarding the 35th Middlesex. Quiet, please, I'm sorry, I can't hear. Regarding the possible 35th Middlesex district to educate these voters on the importance of that race being the final representation of that election.

[SPEAKER_14]: the September 3rd race, the September primary being the, right, yes, good, thank you.

[SPEAKER_13]: Thank you. Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you, President Rivers. And, you know, as a similar alternative you know I think I know the Election Commission is working part pretty much year round to publicize upcoming elections and, you know, not just make sure that people know the dates on the calendars and where to go but to do things like motor drives, you know if I would offer at the point asking the Elections Commission to add another layer to redouble their existing efforts to make sure that people know when to get out and vote. I would say, you know, there's there's a primary on September 3rd, not just in the 35 Middlesex, you know, it asked me, but we can just extend that to incorporate all voters within the city of Medford. I think everybody more people, you know, that we would think can always use a reminder about when to vote. And that goes for everybody within the city for September 3rd, as well as for the November election this year. So I'd offer as an alternative, you know, I would certainly support any efforts to make sure that people know and have that date circled on their calendar and, you know, not just one district, but citywide. So if we could, if you consider an amendment to have that just be a citywide effort at the point that we're going through the effort of a robocall at all, I'm sure that many voters across the community would benefit from it.

[SPEAKER_11]: Vice President Collins, if I could, just for our clarity, you requested to amend the paper that this be a citywide robocall to remind, and other outreach to remind people of where to vote when the election is occurring?

[SPEAKER_22]: Yes, for the September 3rd primary.

[SPEAKER_11]: For the September 3rd state primary.

[SPEAKER_22]: Through the chair.

[SPEAKER_11]: One second, Henry. Councilor Tseng.

[SPEAKER_04]: I was just gonna ask, is that an amendment or a B paper?

[SPEAKER_11]: This is already a B paper. This is an amendment to the B paper. Amendment to, okay. Yeah.

[SPEAKER_02]: We talked prior to September 3rd. We have to realize that we have the early voting that takes place from the 24th to the 30th. So that is coming out. It's not listed on any of the papers in front of you. In addition to that, we also have listed last day to register. If you don't register on time, you cannot vote on state primaries on the 3rd. We have that coming. It's not on the paper in front of you, because this is not what we're here for tonight. We also have the last day to request a vote by mail ballot. So all this information coming down the pipe to inform citizens of the city when they can vote prior to September 3rd. Great, thank you. And on September 3rd.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, and if folks contact the Elections Department, they can find out more about the early voting at City Hall, as well as the mail-out balloting in addition to voting on Election Day. That's correct. September 3rd. Got it.

[SPEAKER_14]: Thank you. If I can, Mr. President, another point with that, if I'm right, if I'm correct or wrong, I know that if there isn't a Republican candidate that I, a registered Republican can't, what is it, they report to the elections office to ask to, is it unenrolled so they can vote in that election?

[SPEAKER_02]: Is that possible? Unenrolled have the ability to choose a time of voting which party to vote for. That's the only one. Because they're not affiliated. They can come. If they're voting for three parties, they can say, who are you voting for? How do you want to vote today?

[SPEAKER_14]: You say, well, I want to vote as a Democrat. So that's important that people that don't have a candidate in this district that are registered Republicans can come to the elections office and ask to be unenrolled so they can vote as a Democrat? That's a technical question. Yeah, so that's something if we can ask you.

[SPEAKER_02]: That's something I can explore. That was a question that was brought up to us by... I'll get back to you on that one. I don't wanna give you the wrong answer because once you... You have a window.

[SPEAKER_09]: Yeah.

[SPEAKER_02]: If the window to UN enroll, you can come tomorrow and say, well, I want to change to this body. It can be done. As long as it's not violent.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Thank you. There's a motion on the floor as amended. If the amendment is accepted, I believe it now reads. Could you read it back, Mr. Clerk?

[SPEAKER_07]: Mr. President Collins has asked for a date certain citywide robocall and other outreach to remind voters where to vote for the September 3rd primary election.

[SPEAKER_11]: All right, so then that's the amendment. Do you accept the amendment?

[SPEAKER_14]: Yeah, that's good.

[SPEAKER_11]: All right, so on the motion, the B paper is to request citywide robocall to remind everyone where and how to vote in the September 3rd primary. Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Vice President Collins. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: On the B paper. Councilor Callahan?

[SPEAKER_09]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Vice President Collins?

[SPEAKER_09]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Lemi?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Sanz? Yes. President Paris?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. On the main paper, the call to election, Motion to approve by, sorry, it's been a while now, was it by Vice President Collins, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: on the main paper, Councilor Callahan?

[SPEAKER_19]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Sanchez? Yes. President Bears?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Senator Falco, and then negative motion passes. 24454, Medford election warrant, September 2024. Warrant for the Medford September 2024 state primaries election. To the residents of the city of Medford, Massachusetts, greetings in the name of the Commonwealth. You are hereby required to notify and warn the inhabitants of said city or town who are qualified to vote in elections to vote at. I've already gone through this at the polling locations from Ward 1 through 8. On Tuesday, the third day of September 2024, from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m., for the following purpose, to cast their votes in the state primary election for the candidates of the political parties in the following offices, Senator in Congress for the Commonwealth, Representative in Congress, 5th District, Councilor, 6th District, as a governor's Councilor, State Senator, 2nd Middlesex District, State Representative, 23rd, 34th, and 35th Middlesex District, Clerk of Courts, Middlesex County, Register of Deeds, Middlesex Southern District. Given into our hands this 13th day of August 2024, the Medford City Council.

[SPEAKER_02]: You already read all the location. The only thing we're seeking here is to have this warrant legally. We're seeking signature of the council members. Everybody have to sign it, but we have a deadline to get it done. That's the reason we're in front of you today, so we can meet our deadline.

[SPEAKER_11]: Do you have a copy that you want us to sign? Could you come behind the rail and have us sign it? We're down Larry today, so he would do that, but thank you, Aaron. Um, we do have councilor Leming remotely.

[SPEAKER_02]: Um, do we just, if he's here in the state, just like I did last year, but if you're six of us, it's fine. I get six. I'll go with it, but if I get seven, all right, thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: All right, on the motion by Councilor Tseng, seconded by Council Vice President, was that you Councilor Lazzaro? It's Council Vice President Collins to accept the warrant and introduce signatures. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli, Councilor Sanchez, President Beresford.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, none in the negative, the motion passes. 24449 offered by Councilor Scarpelli, and if I may request a motion to join, I have a similar resolution. Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. 24449 be it resolved. Thanks, Aaron. It was a thinner paper than I was expecting. Thanks. Thanks, guys. Be it resolved that the City Council discuss continued concerns dealing with rodent infestation in our community. Be it further resolved that we request a meeting with the Health Department and City Administration to schedule a strategic planning meeting dealing with a serious health concern across the City of Medford. And then I also have, be it resolved by the Medford City Council that the Health Department undertake additional efforts in partnership with Tufts Medicine and the City of Malden to provide significant additional rodent control to mitigate the impact of construction at the former Malden Hospital site on the neighboring community. Councilor Scarpelli.

[SPEAKER_14]: Thank you, Mr. President. I know that I appreciate Council President bringing his resolution forward, but in the past week and a half, we've been getting multiple phone calls from the residents in the Fulton Heights area, which is odd for road infestation, considering we live in a ledge, and you don't have, you know, you know, too many business districts in that area that promote rodents. But we're seeing that over the last few years, we've tried, we've talked, I know the director of the health department has made efforts to try to stymie the rodent infestation issues. We've even moved to put in ordinances that allow allow us to go on to private property. If we see nesting and try to do, we have to do more. I know that I've had a few phone calls. I know that the curbside composting is a great initiative, but you're seeing the fear that even though they can't open the lid, they're eating through the bottom. So, um, So there are questions that I think as we move forward that we need to now get more in depth. You see neighbor communities put together subcommittees and special task force that work directly with professionals from local colleges and local pest control companies and try to find different avenues to stop or or slow this process down. I know that my motion would be, Mr. President, is that we would convene a meeting with the health department, the mayor's office, the inspectional services, and the DPW to try to craft a task force. I know Boston's calling it the rodent czar. I think that Metro has to do something more to figure out the process in stopping this huge health scare that's growing across the community. And I think that what we're seeing is the different different forms of control. I think that some of them at one time worked to feed the catch basins to make sure that the rodents couldn't reproduce. It wasn't the fact that they were horribly destroying rats all over the community, but they were making sure that they were stopping so they couldn't reproduce. So there's gotta be something more being done other than calling the health department, which, by the way, we don't have enough staff to service the needs that we have right now, to then call the exterminator, come out to put bait boxes down and leave. It's not working. So my recommendation is that we move forward. I know that It's the work that we've done, the Council President's done with a few members of the community with Tufts Medical in that area, but it's just not that area. I think it's time that now that we have Tufts involved in this area, well, let's come together, let's pull everybody together, and let's find a solution for the whole community and how we can attack this problem, because it's only gonna get worse. So thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: I want to thank Councilor Scarpelli as well as President Bears for bringing this forward and for being so responsive to, you know, really just the latest wave of resident outreach about this. And I think Councilor Scarpelli is exactly right, you know, I think that the city has been Working hard with the available tools to try to stem the tide of increasing rat populations over the past several years, but it's always seemed to me that our approach is, you know, fundamentally reactive and everybody can everybody can see with their eyes, you know that that isn't doing enough. I think that the idea of a task force is potentially a great idea because there have been so many disparate approaches either tried already in the city or things that have been floated. I think it'd be great to collect some of the topics of discussion from the Solid Waste Task Force, which I was a member of a couple of years ago talking about. you know, how can we make sure that our evolving trash and compost receptacles are getting better and better at being rodent-proof, which is something that they are getting better and better at being rodent-proof, but it's important to share that information with the community whenever we can. I know that there's a lot of pioneering rodent innovations going on in neighboring cities that hear about time to time from residents. One, because they seem more effective than just sending somebody out when we get that latest call about where it's getting especially bad, and because we do want to mitigate the effects on other members of the ecosystem. And I think that we're all aware that just putting out a lot of rat poison is really harmful to the other animals that we do treasure in Medford. So everything takes resources, investing in the right tools and the right systems to really attack this. It's not going to get better without these major institutions pitching in to help us have a more systemic approach. So I would absolutely support this. I thank my fellow councilors for bringing it forward.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you, Vice President Collins. Councilor Tseng.

[SPEAKER_04]: Thank you. I wanted to thank both Councilor Scarpelli and President Beres for the resolutions on this. I think we all know that this is a really important issue for public health, for quality of living here in Medford. It's, as Councilor Scarpelli said, it's not just Fulton Heights. but this happening in Fulton Heights is particularly concerning because it's not the place that's used to this. South Medford and Wellington have been particularly hit hard by the rodent infestation over the last few years. Anecdotally, talking to neighbors, some of the methods we have employed seem to have been working. There is a slight decrease anecdotally talking to my neighbors about this. However, rodents are still there. I think it's really important to note that we did hold a Committee of the Whole on this a few months ago, where we had a long conversation with the Director of the Board of Health about methods that we could employ to combat this. this problem. Now, Councilor Collins has alluded to the public education piece, which really has to be a very, very big part of it. That message was reinforced over and over again at that meeting. It would be lovely to get this resolution passed, to sit down with the Director of the Board of Health and other stakeholders to get an update on those strategies, to see how we're doing, are there, what are the metrics that we're using to measure and how are we doing on those metrics? I think it's also really important to note that the council has been working really hard on this. We have a resolution coming to our, an ordinance coming to our next meeting about wildlife feeding, reduce, basically regulating that so that we're discouraging rodent behavior. Past councils have also passed ordinances tackling rodent infestations as well, which city staff have reported back with metrics showing that they have been useful.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Any further comment by members of the council? I'll go and then we can go to members of the public. But I just wanted to note specifically around the Malden Hospital site, I want to thank David Tedisco who sent around a number of emails, has been organizing his neighborhood. the city of bedford and the city of malden. tufts medicine at the malden hospital site is responsible for rodent mitigation and it is on malden land and so they have been very responsive. tufts medicine has made it clear they know they need to do more. mayor christianson as well and also director o'connor and mayor longo current have been involved in some of those discussions as well to to bring whatever resources we can to bear from the medford side. Thank you for noting the rodent control ordinance that we passed. The solid waste ordinance which really is going to help focus on reducing rodent populations in the commercial areas with the combined dumpster, for lack of a better word, in the private hauler program, which should really significantly improve both the efficiency and the requirements on the business districts and the businesses in those districts to keep their trash and waste away from rodents and to also centralize removal of it, which hopefully will help on a cost basis. I think the point is really well taken around funding and staff. We've heard time and time again from our animal control that we have been working on for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. We have been working on this for a long time. road and control right now, even though everyone in the city and everyone in this room acknowledges that we need to be spending significantly more on that. So we do the best with what we have. What we have is too little and we need more funding for the city to effectively provide services such as road and control. With that, I will go to the podium and name and address for the record, please. And you have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_18]: I'm Paulette Bartabedian, 27th Central Ave., Medford, Mass. Just want to commend Vice President Collins on bringing up the environmental impact of the road in control, and I know that it's a huge problem everywhere, and I'm not dismissing that. But I do hope that we as a city will look to other alternatives, other than rodenticides, which are the worst, worst thing. It actually is counterproductive to rodent control because many of the wildlife and wild birds that use rats, mice, things like that, as their meals are getting killed, due to secondary rodenticide poisoning. It also affects foxes, coyotes, other things that will feed on rodents. So it's really counterproductive. You're killing the things that will kill the rats. I did read that there is some population control drugs they're trying to use. And I just read that it's a fairly new process, I believe, that some of the, participants are saying that they're seeing more rats now than ever. That just may be a small percentage that we're seeing. It may not be the whole picture as of yet. But again, it's a multifaceted problem. Education, as Councilor Heng said, is I think the most important thing is to have people, businesses, et cetera, take care of their garbage. No food, no rats. No food, no coyotes. That's just common sense. So please as a whole, please try to avoid using rodenticides foremost amongst everything. And thank you very much. That's it.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you and I just wanted to note on that point, the new solid waste contract and the solid waste councils are can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe the new solid waste contract, because of how we can structured it with the State Department of Environmental Protection. We are receiving some funds specifically around an educational program around the solid waste so there should be more information going out to residents. through that education program. Now that is just limited to the trash, the recycling, the composting, um, funding for other stuff like the wildlife feeding, et cetera, would have to come from somewhere else. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_01]: Hi, Erin DiBenedetto, 21 Dearborn street. Uh, I live in the Hillside and the number of rats in the area has grown tremendously, especially this summer. I personally called the health department less than a week ago and they're extremely helpful and very receptive. I think accountability has to come in play. I think people aren't taking care of the weeds in their lawns and they hibernate in the ground and they make holes in the ground. So people think, and they live near food sources. So gardens, fruit trees, those types of things, and they need water. So they're gonna live near those things. My question is, if you do create this commission or whatever, would you go to different areas of the city and speak on this issue in a community way? Like, go up to Hillside, gather the people there, go to the South Methodist Fire Station, have a meeting there, go to the community and educate them in that way. It has to be hands-on, and if you really communicate to them, you're there in their area to help them and hear their concerns. I think that going out to the community rather than just robo calls and on the online, and you really see the people that you are representing. face-to-face in that they see how much you care about this issue, they'll all work together. They'll talk about, I mean, I have no problem ratting someone else for not taking care of their property. And that's how I feel because I am afraid of rodents. And that owner, and if they're renting, I'm like, you're collecting the rent, pay someone to do it if you can't do it yourself. If you're elderly, get some help, right? but don't leave it so the rest of us have to live with rats. That's one thing. So the community piece. The other piece is, Walkling Court is scheduled for demolition. Is there a plan in place for the hillside area on rodents? Is that part of that? How much money is allocated to that? What are we doing? What are we pre-planning? Because I live in that neighborhood and I haven't heard anything about that. I know they'll reach out to the media community about like 400 feet from the building, but what about the rest of us that live in that area? We need notification and we need notification about how, what they're doing to mitigate that before it happens. Cause everybody who's talking about it, I'm worried when that happens, just like the green line, which I walked by yesterday and I read this big, walked in front of me at 5.20 in the afternoon. I won't walk after seven o'clock because the rats come out. It's pretty bad when it's still sunny and they're walking in front of me. So I'm just, I'm really grateful that this is being addressed and I'm Thank you. My time must be up.

[SPEAKER_11]: Apparently, I didn't realize it was going to play you off like that. Zoom's getting a little snotty. On the Walking Court thing, there is a past mitigation plan that is part of the Walking Court project. The road and control ordinance that we passed, as well as some of the building code stuff that we've done, And maybe zoning requires all major project construction to have integrated pest management plans as part of the ordinance. And Director O'Connor can talk more about that. It'd be on file with the Board of Health in her office. And then I can also talk to Director Driscoll about trying to communicate out better that there is a plan to the residents.

[SPEAKER_01]: Thank you. Appreciate it. Thanks.

[SPEAKER_11]: Kurt, please, you have three minutes, and I'm gonna try to shut off that noise. Thank you for the time.

[SPEAKER_15]: My name is Galvin Murphy. I'm actually a Malden resident. I'm here because I'm a contractor for the city of Medford with the Iraq problem. I'm the guy that the health department calls when there's an issue in the neighborhood. I saw this on the agenda, and I thought maybe I could pop in tonight and take a beating like a man if it's necessary. I would like to let you know that next week, the Women and Pest Management Association is putting on a training program for health inspectors, and the city of Medford's sending three people to that training program. I know when they go through their sanitation training, they do not get any specific rodent control or rodent identification training, so we're gonna try and correct that issue. I do have seats available, although very few, if any city councilors wanna come over see what rats look like up close and personal. So I open that invitation up to each of you. If you want to come, please just give me a call and I'll make a seat for you. As far as what's going on in the city, with rats. I made a prediction two years ago at the National Pest Management Association Conference, it happened to be in Boston, and I was up speaking, and I do speak at different national level programs. I made a prediction, and nobody's gonna like this prediction, that within the next five to 10 years, rats are gonna become as common as squirrels and we're gonna accept them. I just don't see us changing our habits as people that's gonna bring these rats under control. Last woman said walking down the street, there's rats in front of her. I think it's going to pretty much stay that way. It's not a rodent problem. It's a people problem. I see it in this very city. I see it in every community in eastern Massachusetts that I walk in on a regular basis, that I walk into people's backyards and the garbage and the trash is just piled up. and you can't get people to clean it up. The conducive conditions are there, and I'm sure each of you have heard enough about this, and how do we get people to respond to that? I watch our health inspectors go out there, and they work tirelessly to try and correct these issues. And I see them just get pushed back by people constantly. I'm working on, I'm doing this. I know one site that I've been at for the last two years, and your health inspectors try and be cooperative and work with people and educate, and we're still dealing with rats at the same house. And it's just not getting corrected. Other neighborhoods we go into and people work with your health inspectors and they work with us because Your health department will pay me to go on their property and dispatch the animals using carbon monoxide or carbon dioxide directly right into the burrows. And it works great. And if we can get in there and they're going to correct their issues, we're going to do that. I've seen some neighborhoods really change. In other neighborhoods where we just have one person pushing back, it's just a constant pressure. But the reason I came up was to invite anybody would like to attend that meeting next week. It's Wednesday. I know everybody has real jobs and it's hard to do that. It's a daytime thing. If you want to try and make it, let me know and just let you know, you know, you have three people coming to it and hopefully they're going to come out with some new ideas of what to do. What time on Wednesday? It starts at 9 a.m. It's in my office to get done about one o'clock in the afternoon.

[SPEAKER_11]: If you leave, I would ask you, Larry, if you leave your phone number with Emily, we can pass it around to the council. And I just want to thank you for coming down and sharing that information with us. We do hear great things about folks who work with you when the city refers you out. But I think it's really helpful and sobering for us to hear what you're saying. That's the experience that we've had issues. We had some folks I don't know, six months ago, maybe eight months ago, from the Hillside neighborhood on the other side from here and up by like Osgoode Street, talking about a couple of problem properties where we were trying to get code enforcement out there to address overgrowth and waste, and the city not having, essentially the private owners just being able to continue to get away with it to the public detriment. you know, it is a really important issue. But I do have a question from Councilor Callahan, if you don't mind. Yes, ma'am.

[SPEAKER_19]: Thanks so much for coming. It's great to have you here. I just wanted to see if you had any opinion on the topic that one of the previous speakers mentioned about poison versus population control.

[SPEAKER_15]: about the what?

[SPEAKER_19]: Poison versus population control.

[SPEAKER_15]: Poison versus population control. I'm not sure I'm going to say the question. The question is birth control?

[SPEAKER_19]: Yes, exactly.

[SPEAKER_15]: Poison versus birth control. Okay, it depends upon the type of poison that you're talking about. And birth control Hasn't proven itself yet. We had it years ago. We tried it and it blew up in our face. And then we had concerns about that getting into the water supply, infecting most mammals with birth control that we didn't want to affect. So that was taken off the market by the EPA. Okay. So I mean, other poisons that we use, some things we use have no secondary poisonings. Some do. I don't think that we're actually hurting animals like we've been told that we've been hurting animals. For instance, MK in Arlington died of the bird flu, not of rodent poisoning, rodenticide poisoning, and things like that. So I mean, can we cut back and if things can change in the industry, absolutely. And this training program we're doing is gonna really hit on that, on the alternatives and the best way to control the problem.

[SPEAKER_11]: And the carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, that's not, I mean, it's obviously deadly, but it's not a poison.

[SPEAKER_15]: Well, there's no secondary.

[SPEAKER_11]: Okay. Any other questions? All right. Thank you for your time. Thank you for coming down. Yes. Name and address for the record, please.

[SPEAKER_20]: I just want to thank them for bringing this up again. I have a property on Forest Street where I live and have been seeing rodent activities the first time I've seen it in five years. And I also own a property that I lived in for 25 years at 2931 Stoughton Street and have never had rat issues over by the hillside, but that is becoming an issue. The Method Health Department was very responsive and coming out after my calls and people have come out and looked. I do just want to say two things. One, there's a huge health concern with rats. A friend of mine's actual dog got liver disease from being in touch with rat urine. So rat urine actually causes liver disease in animals. So that's an issue. It can also cause a lot of issues with human contact as well. And two, you mentioned something about the trash. Is trash being done, because I walked through Medford Square on Monday night, And it is disgusting. I don't even like walking through this square at all. It's deplorable, the amount of trash that's not in any receptacles whatsoever. They're just sitting in cardboard boxes and trash bags. And I want to be supportive of the businesses. I think it's really important to have the businesses there, but I also think it doesn't put our city in good light and it also attracts all types of rodents.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, I can give more context on that. And again, Kit, if I get it wrong, please correct me. My understanding is that under prior trash contracts, there was kind of selective, some businesses were getting city pickup, some businesses were paying for private pickup. It was not really clear what the rhyme or reason was, but there was an equal treatment. some condo buildings were getting city pickup, some were having to pay for private. This contract straightens that out, A, from a pure fairness perspective, but it also, part of the ordinance that we passed establishes a private hauler program where there's essentially a preferred private hauler, which is the person that the city has, the group that the city has a contract with, and businesses or large residential buildings can for a contract at a preferred rate with that hauler because they're already in the community doing the public contract. And the idea is, and this contract just went into effect three, six, five weeks ago, six weeks ago. And I'm not sure when these provisions exactly start to kick in yet. I think there's some grace period in there. But the idea is that in the major squares, instead of having street pickup with city stuff overnight, that there would be potentially areas of public parking lots or areas on private property where you might have all of the businesses for that building using a single dumpster or multiple dumpsters, and then being part of this preferred hauler program to then be able to have the trash in a contained space that is subject to an integrated pest management plan and is rodent proof. I worked at roses for when I was a kid here and yeah putting out the trash. I mean I put it out because that's what my boss told me to do but I wasn't happy seeing the street lined and obviously one windstorm that night and we've seen that before in Medford Square and the trash is all over the square. So that is the intent. Councilor Collins seems to have more information than me so I will let her answer.

[SPEAKER_22]: Not more, but just I think in terms of what, and I agree, I think that this was a lot of what was kind of negotiated while this new contract was being formed between the city side and waste management. I think that a lot of the provisions and goals, since it just went into effect July 1, are probably still being formulated. But I think in terms of what residents can expect to see, especially in the square specifically, is consolidation, because absolutely when you have one business that has overflow trash cans on the sidewalk, and another that has a dumpster, and then the other one doesn't use that dumpster, they just have a receptacle, and the next one just has a bag. It looks messy, and the more we can just keep everything in one container that really is solid and reinforced, hopefully that'll be, you know, one piece of the puzzle in getting trash off the streets, rats off the streets.

[SPEAKER_20]: And just one other thing, I think the other big thing comes down to enforcement. enforcing ordinances, and we've talked, this has been a subject matter for many city councils, but enforcing the ordinances is necessary. And if we're not enforcing, it's also a good way to raise money, but if we're not enforcing the ordinances, then as the gentleman previously said, we won't be able to get any control of the rat population at all.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yeah, one thing we're looking at is the fee and fine schedule. We've heard from our building commissioner right now that it actually costs more to add a new code enforcement officer because we're only charging certain rates than they're gonna actually bring back in, so it's cost negative. Is there a way to make that more cost neutral, cost positive? And you've heard a million times in this room, we don't have enough code enforcement, so I don't need to get into that. Thank you very much.

[SPEAKER_26]: I just want to emphasize what was mentioned here by the pest control expert and the previous speaker that I think you keep complaining that you don't have financial resources. So a great way to address this is actually through fines. And the advantage of that is it's also like a dynamic stream of revenue. So if you have a lot of road and issues, And then you find, find, find, find, you get a lot of money and then that helps you to address the problem. Because, you know, later on, then you have less rodent pressure, then you don't need as many staff in the health department. So with the fine, it will allow you to just have a lot of resources when you actually need it. And then the second thing that I wanted to emphasize that the pest control experts mentioned is that individual responsibility. I think everyone in the community should understand that they have a responsibility and in fact they are the primary responsible party here to address this problem and a lot comes to up to education and I think you know the the city can play a role in that but At the end of the day, it's each of us that can go online or get a book from the library and learn about this. And then if we just don't have an individual sense of responsibility, then you know, probably as a pest control expert emphasized, then we're just going to live with rats for the city as we do with squirrels. So those two things, first, like, you know, individual responsibility, addressing the issue, being nice to your community. And then the second one is that actually enforcing fines and getting a lot of money from that from businesses has been said, like, you know, why aren't they dealing with the trash in the proper way, right? That's just not acceptable. So the city should go and get revenue from there. Thank you very much.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Yeah. And I appreciate the comment. Um, one thing I think when we pass the road and control ordinance, we are limited. There's a state law around non-criminal disposition that limits the maximum amount of fines and how often you can do them. And I think that was one of the barriers for us in terms of using fines as a revenue source. I think we wanted to see, um, it's, I think it's a maximum of $300 per incident, and then there have to have certain time period between incidents. And it's a barrier that we face because of the state law around, around that. I don't know, when the legislature will change it, but that would be helpful. Yes.

[SPEAKER_18]: I'll let Rada beat in part two. Um, if you assert sign, uh, fines to repeat offenders, such as one of them said that every time they go by this house, the dumpsters overloaded, overloaded. So you find this landlord or owner and they don't correct it and you find them again and find them again, whatever the allotted period is. Is it legal? Like if I get a lot of speeding tickets, I'm not allowed to renew my license because I have these outstanding speeding tickets. Is there anything that you can do to, this is going to be extreme, but put a ween on the house or something like that to make these people clean up their problem? Because the only thing that really makes humans do something is it when it hurts them in the pocket. And again, the only thing that's going to correct this problem is humans by cleaning up their mess. All these other loading controls are not going to work if the food source is still there. So my question is, how far can a fine go to make this workable? Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yeah, so I can answer partially. So there is this state law that over overarches what cities and towns are able to do through a non-criminal disposition. One thing we are trying, my first term, like I think basically the only thing I really was able to get done was we worked on a the snow removal ordinance and one of the things we were trying to get done was looking into this and when we passed that snow removal ordinance update, there is now a provision where if you have a repeat offender, you can put a lien on the property. not just for the fine, which is still stuck at that 300 non-criminal disposition, but also we put in the ordinance, the cost of removal of the snow. So if the city has to send out city employees or contractors to clear the sidewalks, then there could be a lien placed. I don't think we've actually gotten to that point with any property yet since that ordinance was passed. So I don't know. And then I think there is an open question as to when that comes down the road, and we actually try to do it, and then someone sues and says, no, you can't do this, where are the courts gonna land on it? We passed it in the solicitor, it went through legal counsel, but we haven't tested it yet. So we'll see, it's a litigious society out there these days.

[SPEAKER_04]: I just wanted to quickly thank everyone for coming up and speaking about this. I think everyone had something super productive to add to the conversation. I think in the future, with this resolution passed, with more meetings about this, the more voices we can get, the more advice that we can get. will be able to make some positive progress on this. I think Mr. Benedetto's statements actually reminded me of something I wanted to say, which is that I think we have to think in terms of our messaging and our strategy, we need to go in two new directions with this. One is to go more local. I know my own neighborhood held a road in control meeting, basically neighbors educating each other about the best ways to get rid of road in control now. That's something that should be less neighbors doing it and city coming in and City leaders coming in and helping organize those meetings. So the local aspect is very, very important. And as much as we can harness that organic momentum, the better. I think we also need to think bigger too and recognize that the road control problem is also a regional problem. And so the more that we can do to set up institutions where Councilors like us, city employees from Medford are working with city employees and Councilors in neighboring municipalities to deal with projects that are on the border, I think the better we can serve our residents too. So building those channels of communication I think will be really important.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to join and approve Papers 24449 and 24451. Seconded by. Seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins. Yes. Councilor Lazzaro. Yes.

[SPEAKER_19]: Councilor Lovett.

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Paris.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, 74 and then negative motion passes. Whereas good government is based on the fund, I'm sorry, 24450 offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Whereas good government is based on a foundation of openness, clarity, transparency, and accountability. And whereas the city council, taxpayers, and residents of the city of Medford are intended to be made aware whenever the city resolves claims against the city, the school department, any employee, any department, department head, or employee of the city, by payment regardless of whether those claims are resolved prior to litigation, after litigation, but before trial, by way of judgment or decision by a court or administrative or quasi-judicial body. Now, therefore, be it resolved that the mayor provide the council with a list of all such matters resolved during fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, or 2025, and further, for each matter so resolved by payment, the mayor report to the council the name of each person, persons, or entity who made such claim and the amount paid to each such person, persons, or entity, if there is a legal reason that any such name should not be disclosed. such as in the case of a minor, a general description of the claim without identifying the person will suffice. And further, for each matter so resolved by payment, the mayor reports to the city council the source of the money or funding that was used to pay the claim by specifying which city or school account that money was from, whether it was paid by an insurer of the city or meant for public schools. Further, that the mayor reports to the council the names and addresses of any insurers with whom the city or school department maintained a policy of insurance whose coverage was the source of payments used to pay any such claim during fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, or 2025, and further, for each policy of insurance listed by the mayor in answering the request set forth in the previous paragraph that the mayor state the annual premiums paid for each insurance policy listed in the applicable deductibles for each year during fiscal years 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, or 2025. And finally, that the mayor provide the city council with a breakdown of all amounts paid to outside council for representing the city of Medford or the Metro Public Schools or any department, department head or employee of the city of Medford for any claims made against the city as a municipality or the Metro Public Schools or any department, department head or employee of the city of Medford during fiscal years 2021 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, or 2025. This request includes payments made for any work performed on such claims to the compliment and page law firm, PB&R law firm, or to any other attorneys. Councilor Scarpelli.

[SPEAKER_14]: Thank you, Council President. If you'll allow me, over the past few years, I've heard many people talk about the legal claims or settlements or court judgments that have been paid by the city or school department for claims made against the city. the school department or employees of the city or the schools. Yet many of these claims and settlements that have been mentioned have never come before this council, either for an appropriation of money for payment or just to inform us about the claims. Going back to a time even before I was on the council, I know that the council had to approve the expenditures of any amount that was over $2,500. The purpose of this resolution is for the council to be made aware of the expenditures to settle or pay for various claims made against the city, the school, or any of our employees of the city or our schools. My motivation to bring this resolution forward is based on a very simple principle that I'm sure my colleagues can agree with. That is, expenditures of the city revenue is always a matter of accountability, transparency, and good government. People deserve to know where municipal dollars are being spent. With this in mind, I ask for the support of my colleagues on this resolution. Now, as we said tonight, I know that we mentioned just tonight, right? We said we need more funding, right? We need more funding. And we've seen over the last couple of months, we've seen a blatant financial mismanagement of our city's finances, as witnessed with the $9 million of free cash that was recently certified. The lack of new growth in our community over the past four years. Payments to outside councils that we still have yet to find what the true numbers are. And lastly, the settlements that mostly are unfunded by the city leadership. So this is very important because it's another aspect that week after week we're coming forward and that we're seeing mismanagement of our city funds. Now, I get it, there are things that we can't talk about legally, and there are things that might go in an executive session to protect certain laws, and I get that. But there is a lot of money, from what I've heard, from different department heads. Like we mentioned the other day, that you just go and speak to the department heads. Well, the department heads aren't gonna tell you the truth, because they work for the mayor. So like I've said in the past, I've talked to rank and file members that have really shared with me some insight, and it's horrifying. It's frightening where we're looking at maybe five or $10,000 hit here or there with a legal issue, and we never hear anything about it. So, you know, I'm glad we have a representative here tonight because I have some questions that I was gonna leave as a resolution, but maybe you can help with, Mr. Salt. I know that as a representative of the teamsters and our employees here at the city, you know, even the most simple things, an arbitration. If an arbitration is heard, I'd like to know who pays for those arbitrations. I'd like to know how the attorneys are paid, both sides. not just the outcome, right? Because we still haven't heard the outcome of many things, which we know to avoid the rumor mill, just to get this information from the mayor would be so important, just so we can understand and we could share this with our public and saying, you know, hey, In the last couple of months, especially last month, we've seen some pretty disgusting processes in how we've run the finances in the city. Okay, we've seen that. It's public knowledge, but this is another aspect that I think needs to be opened so the community can see why we don't have the funding needed for extra help in the health department. So thank you, Mr. President. I appreciate the time. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Do any other councilors have any questions? Seeing none, I would just note that the council has not approved any appropriations beyond the city budget for settlements. So settlements are being done within the appropriate amount of the city budget. Members of the public would like to speak. Yeah, if you leave it with, do you want us to review it now or do you want us to review it after the meeting? Okay, thanks. name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_09]: Thank you.

[SPEAKER_23]: Thank you, uh, president bears and members of the council. Um, I appreciate the name and address. Oh, sorry. Steve South, uh, one Oh six Damon road, Medford mass. Okay. Again, I appreciate Councilor Scarpelli putting this item forward. For the last four and a half years, I've been educating the three different councils about all the open litigation. This all started a little over four years ago. So when I saw this resolution, I thought it would be a good time to give you my yearly update. So I did some research and found out some of the open litigations. These are just lawsuits. This doesn't include all the open labor charges with all the unions, arbitrations, mediations, fact finding, and other litigations. So I just want to take you through a couple of these briefly. This was filed, I believe this is 2002, Allison Convoy versus City of Medford. And I just want to take you through a couple of accounts. Failure to pay FLSA overtime. That's count one. Failure to pay overtime for off-the-clock work. That's count two. Failure to pay overtime wages required under GL-149. Violation of the Massachusetts Wage Act by failure to make timely payment of earned wages. So that's one lawsuit. Another lawsuit, Aleesha Nunley versus City of Medford. Also, Breonna Lungo-Koehn, as well as David Rodriguez. And I'll just read you the opening. This is an action arising out of the wrongful acts and omissions of the defendants who engaged in discrimination and harassment against Aleesha Nunley Benjamin in her employment as Chief Financial Officer slash Auditor Finance Director for the city of Medford, Massachusetts, based on race, color, and sex, and retaliated against her after she complained about the mistreatment. Next is going to be, and these are all open, by the way, these are pending lawsuits. Again, this is Superior Court, Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Michael Durham versus City of Medford, Breanna Lungo-Koehn and Neil Osborne. Sorry, give me one second. Okay, count one, discrimination based on disability. Count two, violation of MGL 151B, retaliation. Count three, violation of MGL, the Massachusetts Whistleblower Act. Count four, this is against, individually against Breonna Lungo-Koehn, aiding and abetting discrimination and violation of MGL.

[SPEAKER_02]: Claims against- Steve, you have about 30 seconds.

[SPEAKER_23]: Yep, Neil Osborne. Let me move on. Next, Sandra Gale versus City of Medford. Next, there's a bunch of inspectors versus City of Medford. Next, there's about 50 DPW employees versus the City of Medford. Next, I want to go to settlements. 2022, 30 school custodians, $495,000. 2023, school security, $28,500. June of 2024, a member of the DPW, $265,000. 2024, you just settled it out in the hall today, $47,500 for another member. 2024, Medford DPW pending settlement. It's gonna be signed sometime very soon. 2024, Samari Montes, you guys took it up outside. I also want to point out that while the city is paying hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in settlements and are actually there's much more liability and maybe in the millions that the city council is approving two raises for itself as well as all the other non-union. three raises for the Medford mayor, Breanna Lungo-Koehn, that goes into effect July 1. That's one for the school committee and two raises for the mayor. And all the while that the city still has many employees under collective bargaining agreements that haven't had a raise in years, including police patrolmen, police superiors, recreation department, DPW superintendents, inspectors, and others.

[SPEAKER_11]: Steve, you're a minute over.

[SPEAKER_23]: Yeah, I just I just I'm almost done. I got two more points. Okay. I also want to point out that the city is spending many hundreds of thousands on KP law again, while all these other things are pending when they could hire a city solicitor, but they choose not to by leaving the the wages so low. And lastly, I want to point out while the city is treating the taxpayer dollars as monopoly money, you're asking for multiple prop two and a half overrides in November over seven and a half million dollars. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. That was two minutes over.

[SPEAKER_09]: You're welcome.

[SPEAKER_11]: On that note, again, We have not appropriated a single dollar above the budgeted appropriated amount for any settlements. So there's not a monopoly money approach here. Steve, I'm sorry, but you know, you can't. They've been paid for by appropriated funds. There's no additional funding, magic money, wasted money that's going to these things beyond what is approved in the city budget. The city council, Steve, I'm not going to get into a back and forth with you. The city council has to, the city council has to approve all appropriations. It's the law. The city council has not been asked to appropriate a single dollar beyond the budget for legal settlements. Well, I would, uh, good luck. Um, any questions on the resolution? Councilor Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: I don't have a question on the resolution specifically. I thank the councilor for bringing it forward. I think that a lot of what we've heard in terms of premises for this conversation, I have an honest disagreement with at the same time. I think that there's a lot of ways for us to have really productive conversations about settlements and liabilities before the city. These sometimes occur in public session. These sometimes occur in executive session. Anytime we are getting more information from the administration as opposed to less when it comes to the city side of things, we have no jurisdiction over the schools. I think that is a good thing. I think that always leaves us better off. That often leaves the atmosphere more productive and collaborative than it was when we were feeling under-informed prior to, you know, whether it's a meeting or a memo or just a substantive update. I think for myself, I feel, I think, across many issues we've all had the experience of feeling under informed on various issues and then we get that bolus of information it's like wow, now we can really have a conversation about this, that leaves me feeling pretty open and flexible when it comes to what type of format or venue we receive information about settlements and liabilities in going forward. This, like a lot of our resolutions, when it comes to making resolutions to the administration, they are essentially requests. We cannot compel reports or requests to be filled by the administration just because of the nature of the way our government is set up. That being said, I hope that the administration takes this request for more information as a in the best faith possible to say, it is better for us when we put our issues out on the table and we're able to have these conversations when there's fewer surprises. And I think that, you know, there's a lot of cliche ways to put this, but I think that we're better when fewer things are in the dark. I think that it's better to shine a light on things that people are hearing about than to, to speculate until kind of a belated information. So that being said, more information is always better. I know that a lot of this is very sensitive, like we saw earlier today. A lot of this has to be discussed in executive session. Some of it, you know, there's some litigations, there's some settlements that always come to the council as a matter of course, we saw that earlier this evening. I always want to correct the record when it comes to what information, you know, the city council does get certain settlements do come before us, we do appropriate. You know, I wouldn't want to put forward a request and also forward the story that, you know, we're in this complete and total information desert in the same way that I, you know, wouldn't want it to go by that, you know, an unusual number for free cash is in some way evidence of financial mismanagement. It's not. We know from communities across the street that this was a banner year for free cash surpluses for many communities. But in the same way, I don't think that we should need to treat settlements and liabilities like something that we cannot talk about and we cannot ask about. I think to the extent that we are able to have a freer flow of information about this with the administration, leave us better off, leave us better able to communicate with the community when there are concerns, be able to say, this is what it really is. you know, and help us dial in on what our real problems are. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_13]: Thank you. Councilor Scott Riley and Councilor Sviggum.

[SPEAKER_14]: Thank you, Mr. President. So this, I agree with my councils. This is a simple request that, again, do transparency, accountability, have the mayor present to us what I've requested. And I think it's a simple, it eliminates that outside talk, but then again, it shows if it's something that the community, the taxpayers in this community need to identify that this could be an issue, then it's their right. So I welcome your support. I think that, I know Councilor Bears said whatever we budget is appropriate and whatever that is, but when you look at the numbers, just as Mr. Seltz just presented, there's some numbers in there that I don't remember going in that room and approving. So, again, this is why we asked, I put this motion forward to ask the mayor for detailed answers in, you know, redacting names or whatnot, but actually showing us that these are real stories. These are real lawsuits. what's already been settled are real. Those, a lot of those aren't private anymore, they're public record. So I would ask the mayor to present to us that fact. And when I say mismanagement, when you hear these stories and whether they're fact or not, let's see if they're fact. If they're fact, then we could discuss something else that's very important. And that's what we're paying for our our insurance, our premiums for our settlements, right? What does that increase? What have we paid? You know, when we say mismanaging $9 million, it's a matter of opinion. My opinion and the people that I've spoke with, when you are in crisis, fiscal crisis, and you're calling with a financial task force to come out to call for an override, but then just a week later ask, expressed that we just we just certified $9 million. That's $9 million of taxpayers money that wasn't used properly. So in definition to myself, whether you want to take it or not, it's fiscal mismanagement. You do not manage that money responsibly, and that's the taxpayers' money. So, yeah, there are a lot of things that have come up in the last couple of weeks that we need clarity as we move forward with the agenda presented by my colleagues in the mayor to see where we're going, what direction this community is going, how we got there, and how we don't get there ever again. There's a lot of questions. This is just a piece. That's all I'm asking, is to support the resolution, let the mayor present the information that's needed, and we can move forward. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Councilor Tseng and then Councilor Callahan.

[SPEAKER_04]: Thank you. You know, I like Vice President Collins. I disagree with a lot of the premises put out there and to the best effort of Councilors to get me to vote no on this, I do intend to vote yes on this. I, you know, I do believe that the text of the resolution that's in front of us is what we have to debate. And I agree with what's being said in the resolution. I agree with greater transparency. I think it's good when we as the city council have more oversight over these issues, when we are much more to know about these issues, when we can inform our residents about what's going on. any motion that I think, any motion or resolution that reasonably increases transparency in our community is something that I would support. And so I do plan on voting yes on this. Councilor Calderon.

[SPEAKER_19]: I plan to vote in favor.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thanks. Any further comments from members of the council? I'll just say for one Councilor, the text of the resolution, I don't have a problem with it. It's answers that already exist and could be compiled into a report, I would guess. We've seen them in the Warren articles and we've seen them in reports previously, and I'd like to see them all in one place. And I think we've said so many times here, it'd be nice to see it all. No problem with the text of the resolution. but the narrative and the arguments being put forth underlying the resolution to try to tie it into some larger accusation, it's just spurious, it's just not real. The facts of the matter are this council has never been asked to appropriate additional money for settlements and legal services since I've been on this council, which includes all these fiscal years. I haven't seen a million dollar end of year transfer to the legal budget because of all these settlements. That has to happen legally. There's about six different checks and balances on it from the finance director to the state division of local services and the department of revenue to the mayor to this body. That if that was happening, they'd have to go through all these, there'd have to be such a massive conspiracy going all the way up to the state level, to the commissioner of revenue for that to be true. that it's not true. So I'm perfectly fine asking the questions. I'm gonna vote yes on it. But the idea that this fits some sort of larger narrative or example of something that's going on about malfeasance is just false. The number of people who would have to be involved in it intentionally is not possible. And I think as everyone knows here, it would involve people who strongly disagree with each other, somehow colluding. I disagree strongly with Mayor Lungo-Koehn on a number of substantive issues. I disagree with her on some of the management style in this building. I am not, you know, it's just not possible. So I have no problem asking the questions, but when we try to tie it into this larger thing, it's just plainly political. Councilor Lazzaro.

[SPEAKER_00]: I would agree with what President Vares was saying, and I would like to additionally point out that I think that a report would be great to see. I think that the checks and balances that exist at the state level and at the that the city wouldn't have been able to access the funds to pay out, you know, legal fees and things like this. There are, you know, blocks in the way of that happening without our knowledge. So for example, some of the things that Mr. South mentioned, he just said them a couple of times and there was one, it was just one, like Mrs. Gayle's case, he said it two times. That was, you know, it's, we have the things that are here and we are, I would be happy to see them all listed out. I think that would be great. I also think that conflating what we're talking about here with other votes that we're taking about raises for people who work in City Hall or other, elements of the operations of the city that are unrelated, I think, is unfair and unreasonable and not what we're talking about. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you, Councilor Leming.

[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you, Council President Sell. Like my colleagues, I don't really like to hear a lot of the conspiratorial narratives, but I have a purely technical question about this that I hope that perhaps Councilor Scarpelli or somebody else could address. If this information is already out there, I'd just like to know, are there any particular papers or types of information that could be received with this resolution that could not be addressed with a simpler FOIA request. Sorry, can you repeat that, a what request? FOIA, Freedom of Information Act request. So my question is, could somebody simply submit a Freedom of Information Act request to the mayor to the city to get the information requested in this resolution? Or is the resolution asking for information that could not be gotten through a Freedom of Information Act request? It's just a technical question that... I don't know.

[SPEAKER_14]: I truly understand what he's saying. What I'm thinking, My take and the comment, the question is that, why wouldn't someone put a foyer in? If that's the case, they can do that.

[SPEAKER_11]: I think he was asking if there's anything that a public records request wouldn't provide that this would provide.

[SPEAKER_14]: maybe, but as the governing body, is a governing body that it's my responsibility that if I have a question, why would I have someone else put a FOIA request in? We would ask the city, we would ask the mayor for, as I've done with the resolution, with hopefully with the support of the council, that the mayor gets us the information that I requested just to, just to show the answer to the questions under transparency and accountability.

[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Any further comments, Councilor Levee?

[SPEAKER_05]: No, I just, I am just... I guess my point was first, I just wanted to know purely technically if there is any extra information that could be gotten from the council resolution that could not be obtained from a FOIA request. And also just submitting a simple FOIA request on your own and then publishing the results of that when it was received, which would effectively get a lot of information out there. It could be just as an effective means transparency. Obviously, that wouldn't be the case if the answer to the first question was yes, there are certain documents that can be received. But that was that was what I was asking.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. There would be a shot clock on a public records request. Technically, the mayor has no obligation to respond to our resolution. But that's the only difference I'm aware of. Any further comments by members of the council? Seeing none, we'll go to the public. Name and address for record at the podium. Raise your hand on Zoom. You have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_26]: Gaston Fiore, 61 Stigny Road.

[SPEAKER_11]: I just wanted- You have to press the, just once.

[SPEAKER_26]: Yeah, the green line is on.

[SPEAKER_11]: That should be good.

[SPEAKER_26]: Yep. Hello? Okay. So Gaston Fiore, 61 Stigny Road. I just wanted to make a general reminder to everyone. that one of the basic principles that we learn in a civics education class, which is what stops one branch of government from becoming too powerful? Checks and balances or separation of powers. There's absolutely no reason why one should vote no on this. I strongly support voting yes. And I hope every member of the council does so as well. This is just like, even if this information is spread out and publicly somewhere else, I think it would be very helpful for members of the, for residents of Medford to basically see this in a compiled report. And as I said, it's about just checks and balances as two councillors here mentioned. I don't see a reason to not do this. Thank you very much.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Name and address for record please. You have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_23]: Steve South, 106 Damon Road. I just wanted to clarify a couple of the questions that were asked and comments that were made. One is a FOIA request would not capture some lawsuits that are considered private until, or litigations, I should say, such as complaints with MCAD, Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, which those complaints are private until they are decided or adjudicated or settled. Then they become public. I just want to point that out. So there are things that would be captured by this item that would not be captured by a FOIA. I just want to clarify a couple other things that I I'm trying to understand if several of the Councilors, including you, President Bears, were saying that the settlements that I mentioned never happened because I have copies of them. So I didn't understand if that's what you guys were saying, that it's not possible due to checks and balances. Nobody said that. Oh, okay. I heard people saying that it would have to go through all checks and balances and money allocated. These are settlements that several of them happened that were never approved by the council and I came and spoke at that time and gave copies of the settlements. I just want to point that out. I also want to point out to one of the Councilors who said, you know, that Something about that I mentioned Sandra Gail twice and maybe it's exaggerated. I just want to point out that the litigation that you approved out there in executive session for $47,500 was a complaint made by Teamsters Local 25 at the Massachusetts Department of Labor Relations. That was settled a couple weeks ago during the middle of a trial. I believe you guys approved it today.

[SPEAKER_11]: The other lawsuit- I can't comment on that.

[SPEAKER_23]: Yeah, that's fine. I'm commenting. I know what it is. It's 47-5. You guys just approved it. And the lawsuit that I gave to you guys in your packet, and I just want to point out to Councilor Lazzaro, this is a United States District Court District of Massachusetts lawsuit for wage and hour violations. It's valued somewhere in the couple hundred thousand dollar range. So they're two separate litigations. I just wanted to point that out, you know, as people are talking about exaggeration. Thank you very much. Appreciate your time.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Yeah, my point being, I think the comment was made, the words monopoly money were used. And the point was made that An appropriation to pay for a settlement must be approved by the council. You may be well right that something was approved by the school department or something didn't come to the council. We had that discussion in the past. The money for that would have to be. So that's what I'm saying here. There's been no appropriation requested or made by this, requested by the mayor or made by this council to pay for any sort of settlement sum. And I'm just going to leave it there, sir. You know, there's not, there's not monopoly money activity going on. It's just false.

[SPEAKER_23]: Scarpelli was here when I came up on previous years and handed out the settlements and the lawsuits, they were never approved by the council.

[SPEAKER_11]: So you guys and I appreciate- That's not the point that's being made. No, of course it is. No, it's not. The point that I'm making is that these settlements were approved within the confines of the budget as approved by the council. No additional money was asked to be appropriated from the mayor to the council to pay for these settlements.

[SPEAKER_23]: We're not talking about additional money. What we're talking about is when a lawsuit is settled for $500,000, you guys should approve it. I'll leave it at that.

[SPEAKER_11]: And yes, the point being that this council has never been asked to make an appropriation for money beyond the scope of the city budget for settlements. That is a fact, and it is indisputable. I'm not talking in circles. You're saying there's all this extra money that we're being asked to spend on this.

[SPEAKER_24]: I'm saying that as soon as this is gone, we're going to tax payers money.

[SPEAKER_11]: You didn't get the law, because you own the house. Oh, Steve, you're a big man, aren't you? No, I'm giggling about your obvious political attempt to malign the city. Steve, please stop. Steve, please stop. Please stop. We are paying attention. You're the one who doesn't know. Councilor Collins, you clearly have no clue. Councilor Collins. I mean, I'm not the one making it a goof show here. I'm just commenting, he's the one who's trying to, if we're gonna throw conspiracy theories around in the public forum, they will be combated by this chair. Thank you, Harry. Council Vice President Collins. Clown show.

[SPEAKER_22]: I do wanna underline the point, which is reflected in city paperwork, most of which has already been reviewed by the council in public session. If one of the points that this conversation is about is, Is there secret money being spent on settlements that is not known to Councilors, that is not known to the public? I would offer an amendment or a B paper that this information, if it's provided by the administration, also include legal department, budget to actuals for this fiscal years that are being asked about so that we can, we don't have to, I mean, I was going to say we don't have to take it on faith, but it's on the city website already. We get to see it on paper in the packet that we will receive how much money was budgeted for the legal department and how much was spent.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, we do. Thank you, sir. Please stop this.

[SPEAKER_22]: And with that, President Perez, that was the question.

[SPEAKER_11]: Are you asking for a paper?

[SPEAKER_22]: I would put that forward as an amendment if the councilor is open to it.

[SPEAKER_11]: There's an amendment to include the budget to actuals for the law department, which of course has been in every city budget for all of those fiscal years. Is that amendment acceptable, councilor Scarpelli? We'd like to include as part of the report you're requesting that we get the budget to actuals, although we already have it. It's already in the Warren articles as well.

[SPEAKER_14]: We're seeing settlements, but we're not appropriating, we're not voting on it. Anything over $2,500, we should be voting on. When we're talking about the settlements, we're talking about insurance, we talk about attorney fees. These are the things that I want to show. I didn't say monopoly money. What I'm saying is real money. I didn't say you did, sir. Yeah, no, I'm saying it's real money. And it's taxpayers' money. So that's why this resolution's come about. Whether Council Beals was strayed off of what the bigger picture is, maybe I should have stayed focused on this issue. But I really think common sense, eyes wide open, we can see that there's, There's, and again, I'm not saying fraudulent, I'm not saying illegal, I'm saying mismanagement. We're seeing the way the city is spending our money, it's fraudulent, it's non-transparent, and there's no accountability. So thank you, sir.

[SPEAKER_11]: Anything to help? With the point of order?

[SPEAKER_04]: with my fellow Councilors' statement that this has maybe gone astray, I'd like to move the question. All right.

[SPEAKER_22]: If I may?

[SPEAKER_11]: Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: I just want to note, I obviously strongly disagree that there's anything fraudulent going on, but my point with the, including the budget to actuals as context in this information is to illustrate, if we talk about managing money, what does that literally mean? Where the money comes from, where it goes, the budget to actuals, we don't have to talk about how much money is being spent and where does it come from, we can literally see it. And I don't see why that shouldn't be a part of the conversation. And again, we do already have that information, but I think it makes sense to put all the context next to each other. I'm gonna split your paper, George.

[SPEAKER_14]: Glad you can see it. There's a huge gaps in what's going on in this community. So we could just see what spreadsheet, you know, the ones that our chief of staff council president mentioned, let's let's talk about it. Because we talked about KP law, and they came here during the budget season, and openly said we only spend $50,000 on KP law. But But using that example, when I counted up those months, it came up almost $500,000. And that's not totally what was in other departments. So there are questions that this isn't a conspiracy theory. These are questions that I brought up. These are concrete issues that we have that we want answers from the city. We've asked for an audit to do this for us. We've asked for transparency and accountability. This is the form that we're asking. move to the question. Let's get the answers from the mayor's office. Hopefully she does what she's supposed to. And like Councilor Leming said, that's a great idea. If she doesn't do it, I hope someone in the audience files a form. So that's it.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. Is there a motion on the floor? motion by councillor collins to approve as amended seconded by councillor saying and i just want to go you know we can talk about whatever losing the thread the thread is very clear i have no issue asking the administration as one councillor to compile information that already exists in this way so that it's easy to understand it This council has never appropriated a dollar beyond the city budget for settlements. And that narrative, I agree, not pushed by you, Councilor Scarpelli, but stated in this forum, is blatant misinformation and will be challenged. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_03]: Kyle Heath, 131 Fulton Street Road. I think we're getting a little lost here, too, about this just being about money. One of the big things is why are people being treated in such this way that this money is being spent? Why is there lawsuit after lawsuit that people are winning? That's because of the administration in this city. It's like George was saying, it's financial mismanagement. I can tell you a quick story about what happened just a few weeks in court. You know, we had arbitration a few weeks ago, we had a settlement done with the city, and after six or seven hours in court, the mayor decided, I changed my mind, I need to sleep on it more. Let's set up another court date. So after somebody goes and tells their family they just got the settlement and arbitration and they're getting this job, The mayor changed her mind after a few hours. And now after spending $2,400 that day, we're going back to court again for another $24 from the city. So it's almost five grand just to spend on court with one case. The financial mismanagement is just unbelievable. But why is this happening? Why is the city treating its workers in such a way that this is happening? I don't understand it. I just don't get why. No one's bringing that up with, it's not just money with these lawsuits. It's how are they getting away with the cost of all treating people like this, the workforce that work every single day out there for the city, no matter what understaffed and this lawsuit after lawsuit that we're winning and winning and winning. And I think that needs to be looked into. I don't know, you know, I don't want to say it, but I think one of the reasons is the way you just spoke to the public and how you're speaking up there, calling it a clown show and everything. You're making comments and not allowing anyone here to make any comments.

[SPEAKER_11]: I think that's part of it. Do you just know two minutes of comments, Kyle? I allow everyone to make their comments, but I'm just saying that what you just said, I agree with you a hundred percent. And my three terms on this council, we have been diligent about asking these questions when we have no formal authority to manage anyone. You're perfectly fine.

[SPEAKER_03]: You're supposed to be in control of this hall.

[SPEAKER_11]: Kyle, I am in control of this hall, and you're just interrupting me.

[SPEAKER_03]: You're in control of the hall, but you're calling at a clown show, comments under your breath. Everyone can hear you. I'm aware. But that's the reason why. It's not the reason why. They get away with it, is because you're doing it over here. No. That's all I got to say.

[SPEAKER_11]: Kyle, again, you interrupted me. I'd like to have a dialogue with you. But again, when people interrupt me and they don't allow me to have the dialogue, that's when it becomes out of control, and that's when we have these sessions. Now, could I make the point that I was going to make, and then I'll give the floor back to you? Go for it. The thing we all agree on behind this council and behind this rail is we'd like to see the figures presented in a certain way. And I think all of us have raised questions about the workplace culture and the management of the city in many different aspects, many different departments. That's something we all share. when that gets mixed into a political narrative about overrides and what happens in public meetings and not liking the outcomes of certain city council votes. And you just said it, we're understaffed, right? I support an override because we've been understaffed and I think we need more money to get out of understaffing. I don't think even if everything that was just said happened and every lawsuit that Mr. South just presented to us and everything else, if all that money happened and went out the door for settlements tomorrow, it still wouldn't be reliable recurring revenue to pay people in the long term to address the city's financial issues. So when that True thing that I'm saying, it's just statistical fact that the city budget gets lumped in with the settlements and gets politicized around revenue and overrides. That's when we have a disagreement. That's when people start yelling from the crowd and breaking the quorum. And that's when I lose patience with that narrative. So I agree with you. I have those questions. I share those concerns. I raised them. I raised them when I was sitting there. I try to raise them when I'm sitting here. I don't think anyone would say that I'm their best friend of this administration. I try to work with them collaboratively because that's what the job of government is. When the narratives start getting spun up in a certain way to politicize things and attack other things that aren't related to these fundamental factual questions, What are you gonna do?

[SPEAKER_03]: What are you gonna do? We can talk all we want up here, but what are we doing about it? As Mr. Seltz just mentioned, we're going back just four years of this going on, and nothing's been changed.

[SPEAKER_11]: We're looking at a city charter change right now.

[SPEAKER_03]: But this isn't just financial. It's been four years of lawsuits. What's being changed to look at this administration and say, why are you guys treating the employees this way? What's being done about it?

[SPEAKER_11]: We have been exercising our, how many resolutions have we passed on legal issues, George? 5, 6, 7, 8, 10. Steve was talking about all the meetings he's come and given the report.

[SPEAKER_03]: I haven't seen any changes. Well, I haven't seen anything. I haven't actually seen one of you guys come down with DPW. I haven't even talked to us. What's the limit of our authority, Kyle? I'm not sure. I'd like to know if you can come down to the DW and say hello once in a while, too. That'd be nice to see how we're actually doing. We'd love to. Come on down. Give us a call. It'd be nice to see you guys, to show that everyone actually cares about us, because we're not getting there right now. We do.

[SPEAKER_15]: We'd love to come down.

[SPEAKER_11]: We'd love to do that.

[SPEAKER_03]: I've been there five years. I haven't seen anyone but Mr. Scalvelli.

[SPEAKER_11]: I've been down there, but I'm sorry I missed you. I'm there all the time. I don't know. Well, maybe you miss me, but I've been down to the building.

[SPEAKER_05]: Oh.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you. But in any case, My point being, I don't disagree with what you're saying when it gets wrapped up in all this other stuff, that's the division. So I'm not wrapping it up in anything and I will continue not to. And I hope that we can have, I appreciate that. And I hope that we can continue to have meetings where we have a respectful dialogue like that. Thank you, instead of yelling from the crowd, thank you. On the motion of Councilor Tseng, seconded by Vice President Collins to approve the motion as amended, Any further discussion by members of the council or members of the public? Seeing none, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scripp-Kellyanne? Yes. Councilor Tseng?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: President Peters?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. The motion passes. 24-452 is mine, so Council Vice President Collins can take the chair. On the motion to take paper, 24-459, we have multiple appointments? Yeah. Can we take 2445, if we're gonna do that, 24447, 24448, and 24459? on the motion of Councilor Tseng to take those papers out of order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_09]: The second is Council Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_07]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_11]: Dear President Bears and members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend that your Honorable Body confirm the appointment of William O'Keefe, Republican of 18 Kilgore Avenue, to the Election Commission for the unexpired term of the existing vacancy to expire March 30, 2026, in accordance with Mass General Law, Chapter 51, Section 16A. William will be present in person or via Zoom for the meeting, and a copy of the appointment letter is enclosed. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Sincerely, Brandon Lugo, current mayor. And I just want to add, for folks who may not know about the law, the law requires partisan balance on our Elections Commission to ensure that all parties are represented. And Mr. O'Keefe here is filling the vacant term of the Republican seat that expires March 30th, 2026. Thank you for being here.

[SPEAKER_21]: Absolutely, yes. and welcome the opportunity to take any questions. Lifelong Method resident, father, husband, served on the school committee, attorney. And I also think that the mayor is doing a wonderful job as well as his council. So it can be as impossible as impossible can be, but just like anything else, everybody's gotta agree to disagree sometimes. Think about that, a Republican and a socialist.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Any questions for Mr. O'Keefe? Council Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you so much for stepping up and putting yourself forward to fill this position. I think we'd be very lucky to have you. I have a motion to approve.

[SPEAKER_11]: On the motion of Vice President Collins to approve, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. Mr. Clerk, please file the roll. Oh, we have a comment from Mr. Leona.

[SPEAKER_16]: fun going on 86 Chandler Road. I just want to say that I've known Bill O'Keefe as an attorney and somebody that has been so active with Medford Little League. Back when my three kids started, we had four little leagues in the city of Medford. Now we're down to one. Bill O'Keefe was the one responsible for negotiating and it wasn't easy to bring He brought the parties together so that we still have an active. But anyway.

[SPEAKER_11]: As long as it wasn't during election season.

[SPEAKER_16]: I think we're very fortunate to have Bill O'Keefe on the Elections Commission. I would hope you would approve it. Thank you. All right, great. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: On the motion of Councilor Collins, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins? Yes. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Skrpilian? Yes. Councilor Sanz?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: President Bears?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Assembly affirmative then negative, motion passes. 24-447, Medford Housing Authority Appointment, Michael Luongo. Dear President Bears and members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend the honorable body in accordance with Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 121B, Section 5, confirm the reappointment of the following individual, effective July 1, 2024, for a five-year term through June 30, 2029, as a member cited in the reference statute, Michael Longo, member of 145 4th Street, Medford, Massachusetts, 02155, to the Medford Housing Authority for a term of five years to expire on June 30, 2029, and a copy of the appointment letter is attached. Thank you for your kind attention to this matter. Breanna Lungo-Koehn mayor. Do we have Mr. Longo here on Zoom? Seeing none, and whereas this is a reappointment, I'll leave it up to my fellow councilors as to how they'd like to dispose of this paper. Councilor Lazzaro.

[SPEAKER_00]: Motion to approve.

[SPEAKER_11]: Motion to approve by Councilor Lazzaro, seconded by? Seconded by Council Vice President Collins. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins. Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Bears?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Affirmative, none negative. The motion passes. 24-448 Medford Housing Authority Appointment and Schiavone. President Bears and members of the Medford City Council, I hereby, I'm guessing it says, I hereby request and recommend that your honorable body in accordance with Mass General Law, Chapter 121B, Section 5, confirm the appointment of the following individual, effective August 13th, 2024, for a five-year term through March 1, 2029, as the representative of the Saltonstall Local Tenant Organization board members, as cited in the reference statute, and Chiavone, representative of the Saltonstall Local Tenant Association board members, 121 Riverside Avenue, number 206, Medford MA, 02155 to the Manford Housing Authority for a term of five years to expire, September 30th, 2029. A copy of the appointment letter is attached. Thank you for your kind attention in this matter. Sincerely, Brando Lugo, current mayor. We did receive an email from the administration that Ms. Schiavone was ill and unable to attend tonight, but there she was, the recommendation of the Tenants Association for the seat that goes to a public housing resident. Is there a motion? Council Vice President Collins. On the motion to approve of Vice President Collins, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Lemon?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Yes. Councilor San Buenaventura. Yes. President Ferris.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. And then I get the motion passes. 24452 resolution. This is mine. Can you take that chair?

[SPEAKER_09]: Oh, perfect.

[SPEAKER_22]: 24452, resolution to support question four, limited legalization and regulation of certain natural substances on the November 5, 2024 general election ballot offered by President Bears. Whereas one in three Massachusetts residents struggle with mental health challenges, and whereas pioneering research from Johns Hopkins and Harvard Medical School find that natural psychedelics can be effective in managing treatment-resistant depression and other forms of mental illness, and whereas the FDA recently granted psilocybin, one of the psychedelics, a, quote, breakthrough therapy, unquote, designation for treatment-resistant depression, And whereas the ballot question would create a regulated framework for psychedelic-assisted therapy for adults 21 and older, now therefore be it resolved by the Medford City Council that we support question four, limited legalization and regulation of certain natural psychedelic substances on the November 4, 2024 general election ballot.

[SPEAKER_11]: President Burris. Thank you, President Collins. The resolution is relatively self-explanatory. There are five statewide questions and three local ballot questions on the ballot for November 5th, 2024. This is question four, certified by the Secretary of the Commonwealth, which would legalize certain, decriminalize, I should say, certain psychedelic substances that have been shown in clinical studies to help address mental health issues. The decriminalization of these has occurred in other places and it has helped, gone a long way to helping a lot of folks. I personally have spoken to a number of advocates, including veterans who would like to see these options provided to them where current other pharmaceutical practices items in medicines have not been helpful to address their mental health challenges. And again, this is a limited decriminalization of certain substances that have been seen in clinical studies and by the FDA to be really helpful in addressing serious mental health challenges. So I'm hopeful that the voters will approve in November, but also I'm hopeful that the council will endorse this question as well.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you, President Bears. Any further comment from members of the council? I have a motion to approve from Councilor Tseng. Is there a second? Seconded by President Bears. Name and address for the record, please.

[SPEAKER_12]: Castagnetti Andrew Cushion Street, East Method Mass. Through the chair and over the table, I'd like to address to Councilor Bears. Totally, I'm 99.9 behind Councilor Bears on this. I think it's great, because this country has really neglected to study alternative medicines for the longest time. For example, cannabis, it took them 85 years to legalize it, only after they could figure out a way to tax it. Let's call the diamond a diamond and a club a club. They figure out a way to tax it. Now on this psilocybin, I'm hearing really good stories. It's helping people with the PTSD, depression, anxiety. This could be a natural God's sin. If you don't believe in God, a natural nature's sin that could help a lot of people. And this should have been done a long time ago. I believe Harvard Professor Timothy Leary, back in 1960, was experimented with lysergic acid, and this government should have been right on it, not to lock him up, but to look at the different parts of psilocybin, et cetera. I commend you, Councilor Pierce. Let's get it through, no matter what they say. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. I have a hand from Councilor Leming.

[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you, Council President Harris, for putting this forward. So I will be supporting the resolution, though one thing about it that I would like to point out is that there are sort of two... The advocacy for putting this particular one on this particular question on the ballot. There were two. There were two sort of groups of advocates that were trying to get it through one of them. One group was basically trying to make it so that anybody could grow these sorts of medicines for personal use and it would be less regulated. The other, which ended up being the question that we're seeing on the ballot with the sort of regulatory body is very similar to what is currently seen in Oregon, whereby you have a, body, an unelected commission that essentially does allow for people to use these medicines, but it generally puts a very high price on them. So it turns it into a for-profit, it turns it into a for-profit industry. So I will be supporting it. I think that any Any progress is good. Although I will be pointing out that it is slightly different from the same resolution that this body supported several months ago. So thank you once again for your efforts.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you, Councilor Leming, President Burris.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you, thank you, Councilor Leming. Yeah, and I completely agree. And I am hopeful that if this question passes, that the legislature may look to make some technical adjustments after passage as they did. I didn't agree with all of them on the cannabis law and some of the other ballot questions that have passed to address some of your concerns. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you, President Burris. Seeing no further comments on the motion by President Bears, seconded by Councilor Tseng to approve. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_24]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_13]: I'm sorry, I should have said something. I don't have enough information to support this tonight, so I'm going to vote no.

[SPEAKER_09]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_17]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_22]: Six in favor, one opposed. The motion passes.

[SPEAKER_11]: 24446 offered by Mayor Berena Longo-Curran, Brooks PTO Food Truck. Request for a food truck permit for the Brooks School Fall Festival Bondi Food Truck. Any discussion or motions?

[SPEAKER_09]: Motion to approve.

[SPEAKER_11]: Motion to approve by Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_09]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_11]: Social Services Coordinator. Dear President Bears and City Councilors, I respectfully request and recommend that the City Council approve of the following amendment to the revised ordinances, Chapter 66, entitled Personnel, Article 2, entitled Reserved, the City's Classification and Compensation Plan, formerly included as Article 2, Section 6631 to 6640, by adopting the following language, the language of Capital 11, which shall be amended to replace the title of Community Social Worker with the following title, quote, Social Services Coordinator. Upon review by the Health Department, Office of Outreach and Prevention, the term social worker is very specific, It may require the city to hire a licensed social worker, limiting the pool of applicants. Upon their assessing other municipalities in similar positions, several have social services or human service coordinators for this role and fit within the current cap range in Medford. The primary responsibility of this role is to connect residents to services. As the cap would remain the same, there is no change in compensation budget. Respectfully submitted, Breanna Lungo-Koehn, Mayor. Any questions, comments, or motions? Vice President Collins. On the motion to approve for first reading by Vice President Collins, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. Unless, well, technically there was a motion to approve. Is there any objection to taking all three readings tonight, or would we like to do a first reading?

[SPEAKER_22]: No objection.

[SPEAKER_11]: No objections to moving through all readings this evening. All right, on the motion to approve for all three readings by Vice President Collins, seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: for proof of third reading. Councilor Callahan?

[SPEAKER_19]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Vice President Collins?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? No. Councilor San Buenaventura?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: President Pears?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes. Public participation, to participate outside of Zoom, please email ahertovisa.menford-ma.gov. If you'd like to participate, please come to the podium or raise your hand on Zoom, and I'll recognize you. Name and address for the record, please, you have three minutes.

[SPEAKER_26]: Gaston Fury 61, Stigney Road. I just wanted to say that I'm appalled at the lack of definitive information that was given regarding the September 3rd state primary or state representative for the 35th Middlesex District. There's no Republican candidate. There's no libertarian candidate. There's only three candidates in the Democratic ballot. As such, the primary is the definitive election. And I would have hoped that this body would have stated that immediately and in a very definitive manner. Everyone should get out and vote. on the September 3rd primary, because that's going to determine the person that then goes into the general election. In the general election, there's only one person you can vote for. So the September 3rd state primary is the election that everyone should vote for. And then the other thing that I'm appalled that there wasn't more a definitive answer to is that I'm here at the Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, William and Frances Baldwin website. And I think it was Consuelo Escarpilla that brought up what happens if someone is registered as a Republican or a Libertarian and wants to go and vote in the September 3rd state primary.

[SPEAKER_25]: And I think they wouldn't be able to do so because you have to register it as a Democrat or an enrolled. And it says here, voting registration deadlines, the deadline to register to vote, update your registration, or change your party is 10 days before any election or town meeting.

[SPEAKER_26]: So if I go to my calendar, where is it? I think that puts it on the 24th, which is a Saturday. anyone that is registered as either a Republican or a Libertarian needs to change their party affiliation to either Democratic or unenrolled by Friday August 23rd according to what this website says because otherwise you're not going to be able to vote for any of these three candidates and I would hope that you know this body would definitively state that because it's extremely important right so And I'm not sure that everyone understands that if they are registered as either Republican or Libertarian, that they know that they are not going to be able to vote for any of these three candidates. So anyways, I just wanted to state that, you know, I'm appalled and disappointed to be honest, that I think, you know, I would have hoped that this information was clear and absolutely clear. And there's absolutely no doubt about that. Oh, would you like to say like two candidates go from September 13th? No, no, no, no. It's just one. That's it.

[SPEAKER_11]: That was corrected. Sorry? I did correct that.

[SPEAKER_26]: Yeah, I know, but it wasn't. And then about, again, what happens if someone is registered as a Republican or Libertarian? That wasn't clear. I think they need to change their party affiliation 10 days before any election. That's the registration deadline. Yes, that's right. That must be right. Otherwise they're not going to be able to vote.

[SPEAKER_11]: I appreciate you making the comment. As an elected body, we Once you start going down that road, you go into the road, not just of advising people how to access information, but suggesting a course of action. And I don't believe it is the, that any, you know, the city is, if you call the elections office and you say, how do I do this? They'll tell you how to do it, but they're not going to say everyone really should do this. And that's, that's gets to the point of influencing people toward the direction. It's different than providing information.

[SPEAKER_26]: No, but what direction?

[SPEAKER_25]: It's just that anyone that wants to vote, in order to vote in the primary, is going to have to be either registered... I agree.

[SPEAKER_11]: I'm talking about the other piece of it. Which one? A well-organized Republican write-in candidate could conceivably win the November general election. No. I'm just saying. I agree that on its face, it's not going to happen, right? But it's not the job.

[SPEAKER_25]: It's completely unbiased and not political. Like, anyone that their election to vote on is September 3, and in order to vote, you need to be able to do it as a democrat, you're on the road, which means that if you are a Democrat, you're on the road.

[SPEAKER_11]: But to say the election is this day, and what happens in November doesn't matter, that gets down the road of suggesting a course of action. OK.

[SPEAKER_05]: Thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Any further comment by members of the public in person at the podium or on Zoom? Just want to make sure, seeing no hands on Zoom, seeing no one at the podium, public participation is closed.

[SPEAKER_22]: Thank you. I would motion to take from the table and approve for third reading.

[SPEAKER_11]: 24421. On the motion by Vice President Collins to take paper 24421, the South Street Historic District Ordinance and approve for third reading, seconded by Councilor Sen. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_14]: Mr. President, if I can. I just wanted to thank Mr. Bader, this morning I talked to, we had some questions that residents had and the reason why In the past, I voted no. I think that the questions that were asked by those residents and were clear in those answers, and I shared those answers to those residents that reached out, and I'm in full support with the process as we speak, so thank you.

[SPEAKER_11]: Just to note, this is a motion to take from the table and approve, so we're technically not considering it. uh it yet um so there's no just there can be discussion about whether or not we want to take it off the table or not but we're not gonna happen would you like it to be taken off the table no no you don't yes would you like it to be voted on this evening yes all right that's that's what we can take for public participation that's the motion before us I'm guessing that having shepherded it to this point, you'd like us to vote on it. On the motion to take from the table and approve for third reading by Vice President Collins, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. The second from Councilor Sviggum.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Keohokalole. Yes. Vice President Collins. Yes. Councilor Lazzaro. Yes. Councilor Leming.

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng?

[SPEAKER_08]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_07]: President Bears?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, I have the affirmative, none in the negative. The motion passes. That is taken from the table and approved for a third reading. It is done.

[SPEAKER_10]: Done?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_10]: Done. Okay, I can go home now?

[SPEAKER_11]: You can go home now.

[SPEAKER_10]: Okay. No wait. Okay.

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, that is approved for a third reading. The ordinance is now ordained. It will go to the mayor to be signed, and then will go to the clerk to be added to the book of ordinances.

[SPEAKER_10]: If I may make a personal comment, President Bears. Sure.

[SPEAKER_11]: Could you just give name and address for the record?

[SPEAKER_10]: Yes, Christopher Bader, formerly of 298 High Street. I've been on the commission for 23 years. I'm going to be retiring in December, and I just want to thank the city of Medford for the opportunity to serve.

[SPEAKER_11]: Thank you for 23 years of service, Mr. Bader. I wish there were more of us here to clap for you. All right, any further motions? Council Vice President Collins.

[SPEAKER_22]: Motion to take from the table and approve for surgery day. You all right?

[SPEAKER_17]: Sabotage, they say, sabotage.

[SPEAKER_09]: George from Texas, all right. I'll say it into the mic. A new motion of Vice President Collins. Take from the table and approve for third reading 24-434. I have a motion to take 24-434 from the table and approve for third reading. Seconded by. Seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. Ms. Cook, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_11]: I did that.

[SPEAKER_06]: I will tell you.

[SPEAKER_11]: I unscrewed it.

[SPEAKER_06]: I promised people that if this resolution came up for third reading, I had to do anything possible to stop it. I tried. The old Fred G. Sanford.

[SPEAKER_09]: Is this for your race?

[SPEAKER_11]: Let's call the roll.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Kelly. No.

[SPEAKER_09]: I thought it was loud and clear.

[SPEAKER_11]: No, this is to take it off the table and approve. This is approved for third reading.

[SPEAKER_07]: This is to take it off the table and approve. Vice President Collins. Councilor Lazzaro. Yes. Councilor Leming.

[SPEAKER_13]: No.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli. No. Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Paris?

[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, for the affirmative through negative, the motion passes and the ordinance is approved for third reading. Any further motions on the floor?

[SPEAKER_22]: Motion to adjourn.

[SPEAKER_11]: On the motion adjourned by Vice President Collins, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Lazzaroo. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_06]: We can't have a bunch of friends after this. I think it's time. Okay, so you came up with a calming attitude.

[SPEAKER_19]: Can we vote on this motion? Can we vote on this motion?

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins. Councilor Lazzaro. Yes. Councilor Leming.

[SPEAKER_05]: Present.

[SPEAKER_07]: Councilor Scarpelli. Councilor Tseng.

[SPEAKER_11]: President Bears. Yes. Five in the affirmative, one absent, or one present, one no. The motion passes.

[SPEAKER_13]: Motion passes and the meeting is adjourned. Thank you.