[SPEAKER_14]: Test one, two.
[Bears]: Council, October 1st, 2024. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callahan. Present. Vice President Collins.
[SPEAKER_14]: Present.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro. Present. Councilor Leming.
[Bears]: Present.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli. Present. Councilor Tseng. Present.
[Bears]: Present. Seven present, none absent. The meeting is called to order. Please rise to salute the flag. Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. Records. The records of the meeting of September 17th, 2024 were passed to Councilor Leming. Councilor Leming, how did you find those records?
[Leming]: I find the records in order and motion to approve.
[Bears]: On the motion approved by Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins?
[SPEAKER_14]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming.
[Bears]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Bears.
[Bears]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none the negative. The motion passes. Reports of committees 24-036 and 24-461 offered by Councilor Lazzaro, Public Health and Community Safety Committee, September 17th, 2024. Report to follow. Councilor Lazzaro.
[Lazzaro]: Thank you. We held a discussion of two papers. resolution to discuss an overgrowth ordinance. This was a new ordinance 24-036. We discussed that in conjunction with resolution to meet and discuss updates to the rodent control ordinance. That's 24-461. We talked about these two ordinances together because it was like a way to have a kind of a comprehensive view of managing the rodent situation in Medford. Kind of goes hand in hand with what we've been discussing with a wildlife feeding ordinance in this committee. And both papers are staying in committee and Vice President Collins will be drafting. Um those ordinances and then bringing them to the committee again in the future. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Lazzaro. Are there any further comment or discussion? On the motion to approve Councilors are seconded by seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes.
[Bears]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, none in the negative. The motion passes. 24-354 and 24-370 offered by Councilor Leming. Resident Services and Public Engagement Committee, September 24th, 2024. Report to follow. Councilor Leming.
[Leming]: Thank you, Council President Bears. At the Resident Services and Public Engagement Committee meeting, we drafted and approved the summer newsletter. I'd like to thank Councilor Callahan for drafting that. And we then discussed and edited the Residence Guide to City Council, which is in this current agenda. I would like to thank Councilor Tseng for drafting that as well. That's all.
[Bears]: Thank you. Any further discussion? Is there a motion to approve?
[Leming]: Motion to approve.
[Bears]: On the motion to approve by Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins?
[SPEAKER_14]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming?
[Bears]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Farris?
[Bears]: Yes. I have any affirmative, none, and negative. The motion passes. 24-033 offered by Vice President Collins. Planning and Permitting Committee, September 25th, 2024. Report to follow. Vice President Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you president bears at this meeting of the planning and permitting committee as usual we are meeting with our zoning consultant this time it was to go over proposals for new zoning for the mystic Avenue quarter that are approaching a level of finalization those will be in the committee at least one more time before they are voted out and go to the community development board and then the city council for more discussion motion to approve.
[Bears]: On the motion of Vice President Collins approved, seconded by Councilor Callahan. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callahan? Yes. Vice President Collins?
[SPEAKER_14]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Leming? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes.
[Bears]: Yes. I have any affirmative, none negative motion passes. Hearings request for 24457 request for amendment to previously approved grant location National Grid. Councilor Tseng?
[Tseng]: I would motion to retable this to another meeting.
[Bears]: Motion to table Councilor Tseng, seconded by Councilor Leming. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Kelly. Yes. Vice President Collins.
[SPEAKER_14]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro. Yes. Councilor Lehman. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng.
[Bears]: Yes. Present Affairs. Yes. Having the affirmative, none the negative, that is tabled. Petitions, presentations, and similar papers. 24464, a petition for a common victualized license, Nazar Market. Do we have Nazar Market present in person or on Zoom? Councilor Lazzaro.
[Lazzaro]: I saw somebody in the building he was looking for. He showed me on his phone that he was looking for the space to talk about this, but I don't see him here, but I think he may be in the building.
[Bears]: Okay. Um, what do we want to do about that? Mr. Clerk, do we want to try to find him? Councilor Callahan.
[Callahan]: I move that we take this out of order, put it at the end of the agenda.
[Bears]: All right. On the motion to table by Councilor Callahan, we can
[Callahan]: I retract my motion.
[Bears]: Great. Right now we are taking you up. Sorry about that. You're good. Welcome before us. I will go to councilor Scarpelli of licensing and permitting and science subcommittee.
[Scarpelli]: what we're looking for, so you can explain, yes, Dance, what you were asking for tonight. Yeah, I'd like to help the gentleman, but if we can't ask, I think we should table this until we get further information. I know that we hate to move forward if we don't, he doesn't understand what we're asking as well. So sure. Is your partner coming tonight?
[Bears]: 30 or 40 minutes. Okay.
[Scarpelli]: Um, we can put it, can I step aside and maybe call him and does he, does he speak English? Maybe I step aside. Is that okay?
[Scarpelli]: If we can just move it aside so I can talk to him.
[Bears]: Great. Yeah. If you can get him on the phone, Councilor, he misses the meeting.
[Scarpelli]: Cause I know what we push this aside a few times and we want to get it forward if we can.
[Bears]: So great. Thank you. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Um,
[Bears]: So this is open if we just want a motion to, we could recess or we could table and then take it back up, whatever folks would prefer.
[Leming]: Motion to table for later in the meeting.
[Bears]: Motion to table, Councilor Leming, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Callahan. Yes. Vice President Collins.
[SPEAKER_14]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Luebman? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli is briefly absent. Councilor San Buenaventura? Yes. Councilor Bears?
[Bears]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one absent. We are temporarily tabling this. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 24474 offered by Councilor Lazzaro, resolution to discuss Tufts University's decision to disinvest from the Neighborhood Fellows Program, be it resolved, whereas Tufts University benefits from many services offered by the City of Medford, the City of Somerville, and other surrounding cities, while participating in the pilot Payment in Lieu of Taxes Program, with the understanding that the community benefits from educational programs offered by Tufts University, be it resolved that the City Council discuss the potential negative impact of the disinvestment in the Neighborhood Fellows Program at Tufts University. Council Lizara.
[Lazzaro]: Thank you. Our city participates in the pilot program with Tufts University, which is an agreement where Tufts pays a portion. Instead of taxes, it pays fees to the city. that do not equal the amount of money that they would pay were they to pay property taxes. But there is an exchange of services, significant services offered by Tufts and significant services offered by the city. I learned recently that Tufts decided to take a pause on their Neighborhood Fellows Program. One of the participants this year is Chelli Keshavan, who is a very active community member in Medford, who brought it to my attention and asked that we ask Tufts, or a representative from Tufts to come and speak to us and explain the situation. Nobody from Tufts was available tonight, but I do have a statement from Brock Roderico, who is the government and community relations executive director at Tufts University, which I'm going to read the email he sent me sort of explaining the agreement with Tufts that we enjoy. He said, as we discussed, Tufts University provides many payments programs and services to Medford residents. The neighborhood fellows program is not one of those programs. It is open to applicants, regardless of where they live. This program is not part of the pilot agreement or the community benefits report that we provide to the city. Most participants do not live in Medford. Tufts University pays $1,426,148 in property taxes each year. In addition, this is for buildings that are like housing. In addition to those property tax payments, we also make an annual payment in lieu of taxes pilot. in the amount of $450,000 to the city of Method, and we report all our community benefits to our Medford-Somerville Community Benefits Report. Those benefits come to more than $6 million each year. A copy of the report can be found on our website. We did share that link. For the Joyce Cummings Center on College Avenue, Tufts University pays an annual pilot payment of $250,000 each year. The Starbucks in the JCC also generates property tax revenue for Medford. So I did also want to invite some folks from the Neighborhood Fellows Program to speak on the program and what is happening. When I spoke with Rocco, he did say that the plan as of now, was for them to pause enrollment in the program temporarily, allow the folks that are enrolled right now to finish the program, and then reassess how acceptances would work going forward. I have had meetings with current and former participants in the program, which it's a very interesting program. It's how it works right now, is that people are accepted into the program as mid-career, like active community organizers, people who are change makers, who kind of come in and get a master's in public policy through Tufts University while they're actively leading in their communities. Most people are from the Boston area, Chelli is from Medford, But people are from Boston, Somerville, Cambridge, all around the region, Lawrence. But there are people who are actively leading in their communities. It's a very diverse program in many ways. So it's something that may be discontinued, maybe not. It's unclear right now. It's sort of in flux. But members of the program who are part of the program right now and former members of the program, but alumni of the program, were interested in, I think that by the nature of who they are, because they're community activists, are trying to talk about ways to continue the program, keep it alive. And I thought it was especially prudent that we discuss it because it's a program that cultivates stronger and better leadership in the community. And even if it is not officially listed as part of the community benefits that Medford gets from the pilot program, I do think it is a valuable program for our community and our surrounding communities. Um, but I would, I would, uh, offer that, uh, if there is somebody from the program, it would be nice to hear from them.
[Bears]: Thanks. We'll go to members of the council first. Anyone from the council have any comments on this paper? I do. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Uh, thank you for bringing this forward Councilor Lazzaro. I did talk to, uh, to, uh, Mr. DiRico and they are in full support of finding other mechanisms to make, to bring this program, uh, and make it whole again in the future. I think that being that it isn't part of our agreement, it is a Tufts University policy that they're trying to really move forward. I know that what he did mention that it is one person from Medford. And one thing that I was happy about that those people that are enrolled right now will still have the full scholarship, and we'll finish the program in whole. So that's a piece that I thought was very important. But again, some of the people that were enrolled are, I think New Bedford, he mentioned some people out of the country, out of state. So it's a very diverse group that Tufts offers this program, but you do come across, as he said, Tufts University would love to do everything, but with the process and understanding paid tuition, free tuition, and finding that balance. I think that's what Tufts is really trying to find to make sure that this moves forward. So, again, I don't, what I, the message I received from Morocco is that they are, they will look high and low to make sure that this will continue, but it definitely needs a pause right now. so they can come back on stronger footing. So, um, and like again, I said, I know that there is one person from Medford and my biggest fear was if we're cutting this program with that person, not be able to fill what they started. And he said, absolutely not there. Everybody that's in the program right now. I think he said it was five that are all going to move forward and all going to finish with the, uh, what they promised with Tufts promise. So thank you, Mr. President.
[Bears]: Thank you. I'm going to know vice president Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Bears appreciate the Councilor for bringing this forward and for the discussion so far. Very happy to see the council taking this issue up this evening. I think it is very important that we do publicly appreciate and acknowledge Tufts University when it does things that are positive for our community and, you know, show that partnership. And I think it's just as important for us to take note when it is missing opportunities to invest in our public sector. In the way that is in the spirit of the payment in lieu of tax relationship that we do have with the university I think that this is an important thing for us to advocate around specifically because it is not a part of our pilot agreement and we know that you know the kind of the point of the pilot agreement is that it is not equivalent to what Tufts would be investing in Medford if Tufts was a regular property taxpayer, like every other property taxpayer in the city of Method. I think it's significant that this is one of, through this Neighborhood Fellows program, I think this is a really important program to call out because what it does in an intangible way is it empowers people in communities, including Medford and like Medford around the greater Boston area, to become people who can be more and more effective at investing and managing and developing public sectors and being changemakers in the public sector. And so I think it's It's been meaningful in the past that Tufts has chosen to extend this into our communities, and especially because Tufts and other tax-exempt nonprofits like it do not have to invest in a public sector the way that everybody else does. I hope that we can take them at their word when they say that they are trying to bring this back expeditiously, but that's not something that we have to take them at their word. I think we need to advocate for it, and I hope that we can see this program returned to its full strength very quickly. And while we remain in discussion with them around that, just to add our voice to the chorus to say we can see how meaningful this has been for students that come from Medford and our neighboring communities. And it's an important piece of that puzzle when it comes to making the city whole for all of the benefits that Tufts and other tax exempt nonprofits receive from being in our community. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. Any further discussion by members of the council? I do have a question or two for Rocco that I wasn't going to bring up, but then he brought him up, so I'm going to ask him. Would anyone mind making an amendment to the paper to the effect of my questions? And Councilor Lazzaro, would you mind communicating them to him since he sent you an email?
[Lazzaro]: I would be happy to. I would make the amendment.
[Bears]: Thanks. I would just request that we ask for more details on how often the pilot agreement is negotiated. He mentioned a specific amount of property taxes that are paid to the city. I would like to know what entity is paying those. Is it Tufts University? Is it Walnut Hill Properties, their private development arm, or is it some other entity? And I would like to know how they estimate the value of their community benefits and whether the community that they say they're benefiting is involved in determining the value of those benefits or what those benefits actually are.
[Lazzaro]: I will say the, if I may. Sure. The link that was shared has some fairly robust estimates and it's available on the Tufts website. So I would encourage folks to take a look. It's a PDF called 2023 Tufts University Community Benefits Report for the cities of Medford and Somerville. It's a PDF that maybe we can share as part of the minutes or something. But it is, it's a yearly report that I believe Tufts puts out that is the sort of accounting of their estimation of like the exchange. I think it's fair to say it's like a guess of what that monetary value would be, but it's things like, well, one thing is undergraduate financial aid for students who are from Somerville and Medford, which I think I would argue they would probably give to those students In any way, I used to work in financial aid at universities and it was common practice. If you accepted a student, they had to earn that place at the university by being academically viable. And it was in the interest of the university to make it possible for the student to attend. So like, I'm not sure that's something that you would necessarily say, but all of these things like there is a monetary value. So it's laid out. But yes, I think those are valid questions and I would motion to include them as a amendment. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. I appreciate that Councilor Lazzaro, since I can't make amendments from the chair. All right. With that, I will go to public participation. If you would like to speak on this item in public participation and you're in the room, you can stand at the podium. If you would like to discuss this item and you're on Zoom, please raise your hand on Zoom, and we will alternate between Zoom and in-person comment. Each person who would like to comment will have three minutes, so please raise your hand on Zoom or come to the podium in person. All right, we'll go to the podium first. Please give your name and address for the record. You have three minutes.
[Perez]: Josue Perez, 132 Weston Road, Manchester, New Hampshire. I'm here today in my capacity as a reporter for the Tufts Daily. Did Rocco give any like reasoning for why the partnership was or the program was ended? Or is that not something he's like allowed to do this time?
[Lazzaro]: He, not no, in sort of. It's, I would speak more, I wouldn't feel comfortable speaking on that because it's not really my, it's not up to me.
[Perez]: Okay. I was wondering if you had shared like anything for? No, not with me. Okay. Okay, and I did have some other questions, but they were answered kind of along the way, so that's all I really have. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, and thank you for being here. I'm going to go to Chelli on Zoom. Name and address for the record, you have three minutes.
[Keshavan]: Chelli Keshavan 32 Pearl Street. Thank you so much. interesting that for the first time my address is relevant to the content of this discussion. I first want to thank Councilor Lazzaro for her energy and sort of partnership. I and a sort of team members and fellow MPPers, fellow neighborhood fellows and kind of allyship at Tufts have been working through a lot of the semantics of what's gone on with the fellows over the summer, and Emily has really partnered with the goal of listening and understanding, so gratitude for that. But we're sort of here wanting to kind of partner, I guess, with Medford, share what's going on for us at Tufts. I'd love to maybe give a little bit of a recap more on a personal level. I am one of the neighborhood fellows and have very recently kind of wrapped up my degree. I'm joined by some folks on the call today. So Zach, or Councilor Bears, if, I don't know if my colleague Joe might be able to give us a little bit of a background and then maybe I can follow up with some more personal comments after the fact, if that would be okay.
[Bears]: Um, yeah, if I tell you, if you could share the comments and then I can go to Joe, is that okay? That's, I just, that's what the rules say.
[Keshavan]: Absolutely. Sorry. Absolutely. Um, just, I mean, so just to share, um, for folks who don't know, my name is Shelley. I grew up in Medford. I have been here since 1991. I have grown up on the Tufts campus since 1991. And so, um, you know, in classes, I sometimes joke that I'm the original neighborhood fellow. And we have faculty leadership that I essentially feel was my conduit. He saw me, he understood that I was ready for a master's program. He also understood that without this fellowship, I had absolutely no financial capacity to make a master's degree happen at this time in my life, despite being academically ready. I think the Neighborhood Fellowship recognizes a potential partnership with the city and also recognizes expertise that local leadership can offer. I am very proud of UEP. I think we're fervently, fervent advocates in spaces around racial and economic justice. We are guardians of the people. And so to Councilor Lazzaro's points, I think there's nothing but positives that can come from sitting with where the program is, understanding who we want to be in two, five, ten years, and sort of identifying what the steps are to get there and just sort of bolstering what could become a really robust program. So yeah, I don't have, I have nothing negative, I have nothing but good things to say. And I, it is hard to sort of receive, it was difficult to receive the messaging around sort of putting the program on hold. I never wanted to be maybe the last neighborhood fellow. And so I'm thrilled to be able to have the opportunity to talk with the city about what we could do together. So thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Chelly. I'm going to go to Joe. Joe, I'm going to unmute you. Name and address for the record. You have three minutes.
[De Larauze]: Thank you. Can everybody hear me okay? Yes. Okay. Joe De Larauze, I live at 22 Dexter Street in Medford, and I'd like to thank the council for receiving us and opening this conversation this evening. I think that Councilor Lazzaro and Shelley gave kind of a good overview of what the Neighborhood Fellows Program represents, so I'll try to stick to giving a little bit of the recent history of the program. But earlier this year, the larger UEP community of which the neighborhood fellows are a part were informed by faculty that the neighborhood fellows program. And this without given without much reasoning or without much notice. And they the but the community sort of didn't didn't let that stand. They quickly formed a Jumbos for Neighborhood Fellows group to lead various efforts to advocate for the restoration of the program, which included a petition campaign, which gathered over 400 signatures, a letter writing campaign that saw over 50 letters and emails written to the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences Dean and Provost, and other events like potlucks and retreat to share information about the Neighborhood Fellows Program and about the larger UEP's community wish to see it continue. So just as we stand now, the Masters in Public Policy of which the Neighborhood Fellows Program is a cohort has been paused. And it's hard to not see the connection between the two. I think that now we're in continued discussion with the dean and provost office to make sure that the revisioning committee that was recently appointed to discuss the future of the Neighborhood Fellows Program best represent current and past fellows, the larger UEP community, which has housed the program, and to ensure that adequate steps are taken to further the program that we all feel has significantly contributed to Tufts and to the greater Boston urban leadership community, Um, and that, you know, without, without, you know, significant, uh, support, uh, will likely not continue to be funded. So, uh, yeah, we're here to, to, uh, to really thank the neighborhood fellows, uh, for, for their leadership and for, um, for, for continuing to be leaders both here in Medford, but across the state. Um, If you look at the folks who've been in our program, there are a lot of people who are having a very active role across Massachusetts. So yeah, I think with that, I'll thank you for your time and your attention.
[Bears]: Thank you, Joe. Any further comments by members of the council? Councilor Leming.
[Leming]: I would like to make a an additional motion to make an additional amendment to the request for information from Mr. DeRocco, which is, I'd just like to know what is the, just what is the estimated value of the taxable, the property that would be taxable on the on the Medford side of the Tufts campus, thereby getting an estimate of how much they would pay in taxes if they weren't exempted from that.
[Bears]: Thank you. Any further discussion? Any objections to the amendment? No, just as long as you accept it as the main sponsor. Great. I did have a chance very quickly to look at the community benefits document. Over half of the value claimed by Tufts is financial aid. It's not divided by Medford and Somerville. It's not clear how much of that 1.43 million is coming from Walnut Hill, which is a private development arm of the university and not Tufts University itself. So I'm hoping to get a little bit more clarity from Mr. DeRico in response to our questions. And what's the motion here on the paper at large? Would you like to refer it to a committee or? As amended.
[Lazzaro]: I'm not sure that we need to discuss it on committee further. I do think that we could have further conversations with Mr. Jurico. He's our government liaison at the university, and we often have really great discussions. He's a good person. He's very responsive. He's a good guy. So I think we could handle this without it going to committee. So just motion to receive and place on file.
[Bears]: All right. On the motion to receive and place on file as amended by Council Lazzaro, seconded by Councilor Leming. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Kelly. Yes. Vice President Collins.
[Vardabedian]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro. Yes. Councilor Leno. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Sands. Yes. President Ferris.
[Bears]: Yes. I move that the negative motion passes. Do we want to take back up Nazar Market?
[Scarpelli]: We can, yep.
[Bears]: Motion to take, so motion of Councilor Sands to take paper 24464 off the table, seconded by... Second. Councilor Scarpelli. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Bears]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. So the permanent motion passes 24464 petition for a common victor's license and is our market. Now we'll go to Councilor Scarpelli licensing permitting signs. Thank you. It's Councilor Scarpelli for meeting with our petitioner and getting the information.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, President Pierce. We talked with our partners from the market and answered all the questions we needed. There were some questions that needed to be completed today during one of the process that was brought forward with the health department. All the documents and everything was signed off today. So everything is in order. So I'll move forward for approval, Mr. President. Well, you know, sooner than later, right?
[Bears]: Can we just have your name and your address for our records, please?
[Avcii]: Yusuf Avcii, 72 Dawson Avenue, West 7, corner ticket 06516.
[Bears]: Great. Thank you. All right. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve the convictioner's license seconded by Councilor Callahan, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. The motion passes. Thank you for coming and good luck. Thank you. Thanks.
[Bears]: Be it resolved that the Medford City Council hold a question and answer session with Medford senior citizens to discuss the definitions and terminology regarding the proposed Proposition 2 1⁄2 overrides and the proposed debt exclusion measure. Councilor Scarpello.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. President. Now again, everybody has a platform. I'm sure that everybody knows that I am for voting no on the override. My fellow Councilors are supporting it. So, uh, that's not a secret. I think the, the biggest fear as we're going through, uh, respecting to disagree, to disagree for both of our, our, uh, our viewpoints, I think what's important is that we have to hear what senior citizens are bringing forth. I've heard everything from, I think I've talked to maybe 30 senior citizens in the last probably six days, because now the word's starting to get out. And there's so many views that are so confusing. One person said to me that, her and her friends that were together at the table said, Councilor Scarpelli, why would you oppose a $7.5 million new high school? That's a great fee. That's a great price, right? and the understanding that truly, the residents of the city don't know what is even on these ballots, these ballot questions, because we haven't informed anybody. The process stated on both the state site and if you visit other sites that have either passed or failed their overrides, you've seen a robust response process where there were informative sessions within their community so people were educated. So when they made that choice, they understood the impact in their lives, in their neighbors' lives. And I think that we've done a major disservice. We're actually two weeks away from the start of early voting. And the questions from the most vulnerable people in our community, And I can publicly have said it a thousand times, this group, the financial task force that was put together, came back, we haven't seen minutes, there was no public participation, there was no information session. So it's now regulated to people going to the elections office and they're giving them a form that just reads what the override questions are, six, seven, and eight, and that's it. So, and again, I reached out to the director at the Council of Aging, and I asked if there's a possibility. Now, it doesn't have to be my view. It could be Councilor Bears in the yes team and Councilor Scarpelli in the no team, but can we have an information center at the senior center so we can inform our seniors and we have the director that can reach out to all of our senior citizens in the city whether they own a rent because when you hear the stories of some of these seniors saying geez yeah we i did the calculator but it wasn't right because my house is appraised at 880 000 shame on you i can't believe that you did that but But when I did the calculations, it said 600,000. And so they had questions with the city assessor. And so they came to me about questions about the assessor, about their homes being assessed. And they're not wrong. The city assessor doesn't have the true numbers because he's not prepared for this and he wasn't involved in this process. So when you talk about the ramifications in taxes, we have, It goes both ways, because we had someone say, George, is it true I'm going to pay $5,000 more in taxes? And I said, unless you want a $10 million home in Medford, I don't see that happening. But that's the fear that's true. It's really happening. And we do have people that, whether we want to believe it or not, They have to make decisions whether $400 a year could impact what medications they're gonna purchase, or if they can travel to see a child, or if they can figure out if they can go out to dinner. That's how scared they are. And the question was, how do they get there? And I said, I don't know, because we don't know. Because like I said in the past, I've tried to put through a debt exclusion. But what I did when I worked with the financial team and the city assessor at the time, they showed us the breakdown with eliminating our most vulnerable residents. That's our seniors, our residents with special needs and our military. And they broke it down for us so you could see it. And that was a question I had with the city assessor. I said, when will you have that? And he said, unfortunately, you probably won't see that till the end of October, the true breakdown. And again, he, to, to, to, move forward with that, the fear that people don't understand that in 2025, these senior citizens homes are going to be assessed again, but not at the 2025 rate of housing, but at 2023, which was a very good year. So that means the homes are going to be a price higher than it really should be. So there are so many fear factors in there. And to go back to what I I talked to the director of the Council of Aging, and she said, unfortunately, I have to run it by the mayor's office. Anytime, as a city councilor, I wanted to go to the senior center, I would call and say, I'd like to come down and introduce myself and buy ice cream. We've probably all done it, and it was never an issue. When I called the next day and I said, can you please let me know if we can do this? And her words were, unfortunately, the mayor responded and said that we need to get legal representation, whether we can go and sit with our seniors to help them understand what this process is. Now, don't get me wrong, there's probably some that are for it, there'll be for it, there's some against it. The problem is, If I hear the word transparency come out of this office and this team, I might vomit because this is totally the opposite of what transparency is. It's the total opposite. It's like bizarro world. What's transparent? Whatever the opposite is, this is what we've done. And again, social media loves it. Councilor Scarpelli never, ever once has said, I don't want an override. What I'm saying is, first, let's see if we need the override. Let's publicly work together to figure it out and stakeholders throughout the whole community figure it out. Figure it out, because if you go on these different websites and you look at what override means, so let's say the MTA, they have a great blueprint. And they said, before you go out to do an override, you make sure you get the buy-in from stakeholders. And those stakeholders would be your superintendent, your senior citizens, your business community, your students. We did nothing of that. So what I'm begging this council to do join me in asking the mayor to hold a session, hopefully next week together in this chamber as a form of a motion that we hold an information session that seniors can come into this chamber and we can explain what the override is, how we got here. Like again, I'm gonna say it again, in every community that I've researched, and I've done a lot of research on this now, the three most important pieces when you talk about overrides, how did we get there? How are we going to correct it? And what are we going to do so we never have to go there again? We don't know how we got here. Although we want to say that, you know, the administration for years past, I don't disagree. I don't disagree. We've done a terrible job in former leaderships to really keep things up to par. That's not disagreeable at all. But where we are today, think about this now. And I tried to explain this to seniors. This is what's scary to them. If on November 5th it's voted in, the process that the mayor has called for, that their taxes will be, you'll see those taxes starting in January of 2025, right away. No time to plan, no time to understand, even that, and I'd love to hear it, it's only $37 a month, it's only $40 a month. That's farce. Because as homes are being assessed, they're getting taxes higher. As homes are being assessed, CPA taxes are rising. As homes are being assessed, you're adding these $40 a month. That, in their new tax bill, it's not $40 a month. To some people, they're looking at four, five, $600 a month. I know because I've seen it. And it's disingenuous to sit back as a council to say, we're all about affordable housing. We're all about making sure that we want to keep residents in their homes and we're going to fight for them. Remember all those buildings that developers are coming in and we had all those people that are wearing buttons and we're all rah-rah-ing? Well, we have thousands of those people. that we represent every day that are telling us, stop, because the only outcome for them is going to be selling their home and finding an alternative place to live. So again, in a form of emotion, Mr. President, I make the motion that the city council, as a team, ask for an open meeting for all of our senior citizens to have an opportunity before the start of early voting, because as they said, the voting starts, I believe, Tuesday the 16th. So it's important that they come and they hear, they get the answers that we need. Now, again, it might be yes. And I'll have to respect that. And it might be no, and you'll have to respect that, but at least give the seniors an opportunity to understand the impact, to understand the process, because that's the other piece that really bothers a lot of people. I can keep going, but I don't want to make it more of a platform than it sounds. But I beg my colleagues to vote yes to ask the mayor to open the city council chambers maybe next Wednesday night for the senior citizens to come in and inform them of what's happening. Thank you so much.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Just a couple of things. I am happy to schedule, without the permission of the mayor, a meeting October 15th. It's a little bit so next week is the week after because that's we have available but before next regular meeting. October 15th. We go as long as we need to go we'll do it as a committee of the whole it will be televised publicized and we can have the topic the questions and answers from the public regarding the proposition 2 and a half.
[Scarpelli]: That's great. And if we can, uh, council bears, if you can ask the mayor to, to allow the director of a council of aging to reach out, to give the opportunity to reach out to all the senior citizens. So they're informed, um, because a lot of people don't have this platform and don't follow social media and without a newspaper, it's very difficult that they don't know what's going on. So if we could do that, I appreciate it.
[Bears]: If we could incorporate that as an amendment to the paper, um, There are a lot of laws around what cities can and can't do in terms of advocacy. And I know that I think the city is trying to protect all of its employees from being accused of violating those laws. There is also on the city website, medfordma.org, something more than just the text of the override questions. There's an explainer from the city that has been reviewed by council so as to not sway into the legal questions around this, but if folks look at that, there's a button right on the front page of the city website that includes a municipal explanation. I got you, Anna, and I have you, has an explanation of the overrides from municipal perspective. I do just want to clarify a couple of things regarding the city assessor. The data that is being used regarding calculators, both from the DLS and online is the fiscal 24, the current year tax data, current year tax assessments. I personally have been in multiple meetings with the assessor for over a year regarding the process of this, so take that for what you will. I've been in those rooms, I've had those conversations. And in terms of assessments, The tax year is always based, the assessments for the tax year are always based on the prior year. So when we're talking about 2025, they only have complete sales data from 2023. That's what's used to adjust the assessment. That's the same every year. That's always the process. And it always is. As we all know, the tax rate setting process happens in December after those valuations are calculated. I have been in communication with the assessor. All of the data is data from the assessor's database or from the Division of Local Services of the State Department of Revenue. So that is what is out there. The tax rate process will essentially follow its normal course where we will have meetings in November and December regarding the tax rate. and we will either be setting the tax rate based on a yes vote or a no vote. And that's how that will happen. So I just wanted to say that I have met with the assessor multiple times in groups and one-on-one about this process, and he is informed and was informed and was a part of that.
[Scarpelli]: If I can, then that's great. So what I'll do is I think the Freedom of Information Act that was presented for information that was gathered through that task force and the emails from the assessor, we could bring it that night so everybody can see it. So thank you.
[Bears]: Sure. Yeah. I mean, I, I met with him in person, so there wouldn't be anything on paper, but yeah, meetings, meetings tend to happen by talking to people. So I will go first to vice president Collins, and then we'll go to councilor Zara and councilor Callahan, vice president Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Bears. I'd like to thank the Councilor for putting this forward. I'd be happy to second the motion. I think that when it comes to being an informed voter, you know, that's just the most important thing. And of course, as has been discussed, we have to be, you know, when we're talking about all these forums, we have to make, we have to remember that we have to treat this the same way that we would If a candidate was running their own campaign, we have to be really careful about not using city resources to be for one side or the other. That's why I do my campaigning on this issue outside of City Hall, even though everybody knows my position on it. But I think that it is extremely valuable to use our platform to hold a Q&A session, because when it comes to this issue, there are no bad questions. I've had some great conversations with people over the past few months. I remember one person said to me, let me get this straight. If this were to pass, my property taxes would go up by 2.5%. And I was like, I'm so glad you asked, because that's not the case. And I think it's really important that We work within the parameters that we have to have those conversations to make a space for those conversations, whether it's with our senior citizens to talk about this process, the potential impacts to talk about the many exemption programs that were maxed out on. and to invite all other parts of our constituencies, people who are hungry for that information so that everybody can go into the polling booths, feeling as informed as they want to be and really confident to cast their vote one way or the other. So I'll second the motion. Thank you very much.
[Bears]: Thank you. I will go to Councilor Lazzaro, Councilor Callahan.
[Lazzaro]: I'm also in favor of this. I think it's a great idea. I have been to the Senior Center for a Listening Session with Councilor Leming before, and we had a great experience there, though it was a small turnout, but small and mighty. We had a great conversation, but my hesitation with the wording of the resolution is that if we are to if we're going to do a committee of the whole, I think it would probably just be open to the public, right? So anybody who has any questions, it could be any group of people that is curious or has, you know, a particular interest in these issues. So, um, and as such, I would encourage anybody who isn't sure about what these questions mean, to attend or come on zoom. listen and ask the questions that they would like answers to. I would also be curious about if the school committee members who would be able to speak to the specifics of some of the school related questions might be able to participate or if they would do maybe hold their own. I'm not sure how that would, we wouldn't be able to do it at the same time.
[Bears]: I would suggest that you reach out to them and have them go through their own process. They would have to do their own process.
[Callahan]: Thank you.
[Bears]: Councilor Callahan.
[Callahan]: Thank you so much. Glad this is on the agenda. I think hearing from constituents and also informing constituents is crucially important. Among the many vulnerable populations we have here I think our children are definitely on that list. I would hope that parents would be explicitly reached out to. I don't know if we can go through the PTOs of the various schools, but I think that those people also will be highly, highly impacted by the override vote. And I would hope that we can not only reach out to seniors who are a vulnerable population, but also reach out to parents and make sure that they are also included.
[Leming]: I will go to Councilor Leming. I was actually going to make a motion to invite the members of the school committee to come.
[Bears]: I would contact them yourself and see if they can set something up through their own process.
[Hurtubise]: All right.
[Bears]: Councilor Tseng. I just don't want to add another meeting for them without asking.
[Tseng]: Councilor Callahan didn't steal it. Talked about one of the ideas I had. I think the other requests I'd have to amend this paper, I am in support of it. I think it's great to get as much information out there as possible to have people answer as many questions as possible as well. One, a few groups of people that are particularly vulnerable and you know, are we'll also find this process new will be would be immigrant voters as well. And so if we can ask the commute this administration to ask the communities on to translate the override the budget override information on the city website to the best of their abilities and help distribute that information. That'd be great. Thank you. And We could invite them to the meeting, although they might want separate meetings with different languages, so that might be more of a community-zone thing.
[Bears]: All right, any further comments from members of the council? So what I have here is amending the paper to include residents and parents, to request that the council on aging be able to do outreach to senior citizens, to invite them to the meeting, to request community liaisons be able to translate the information that the city has made available, the questions and the information, the city municipal information sheet reviewed by legal, and that this is all to refer to committee of the whole, and I will schedule that for October 15th. Does that sound right? Anything I missed? Councilor Callahan.
[Callahan]: Reaching out through, say, if we're going through the senior center, then also being able to go through the PTOs.
[Bears]: Okay, council and aging, community liaisons, and PTOs, got it. Okay. All right, and that was by Councilor Scarpelli, as amended by everyone, and seconded by Vice President Collins. We'll go to public participation, please raise your hand on Zoom or come to the podium in person. Please form a line behind Gaston, and we'll start with Gaston. Gaston, you'll have three minutes, or we'll go to Paulette, right? Yes, we'll go to Paulette. You'll have three minutes, then we'll go to Zoom, then we'll come back to the room.
[Vardabedian]: Hi, my name is Paulette Vardabedian, 27 Central Ave. in Medford, and I wore my vintage 54 shirt today to prove that I am a senior. And that this proposition two and a half is very important to me. And I am very, very happy to see all the Councilors agreeing on this, rather than, you know, butting heads all the time. But is this Wednesday meeting going to be on Zoom or only in person?
[Bears]: This will be a Tuesday meeting, 6 p.m. in this room and on Zoom and on YouTube.
[Vardabedian]: On Tuesday or Wednesday? I thought you said Wednesday.
[Bears]: Tuesday, October 15th.
[Vardabedian]: Okay. It will be on Zoom as well.
[Bears]: Yes.
[Vardabedian]: Excellent. Also, I just want to point out that despite my many degrees, I don't have a computer. So there are many seniors that aren't able to access these things via computer or Zoom. So it's unfortunate that it took this long to get this forum started, you know, to the 15th and it wasn't before when this issue came up. But that being said, I'm really happy that it is coming up because I think I know what I'm going to vote. But it is I have questions as well. So it's very, I'm very happy to see this coming forth. So thank you all and I'll We have my shirt again next week.
[Bears]: Thank you. Go to zoom. We'll go to Jennifer on zoom, name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Yanko]: Hello. My name is Jennifer Yakko. I live at 16 monument street, and I am also a senior. And I wanted to thank Councilor Scarpelli for his interest in seniors. And at the same time, I agree with what some of the other councilors have raised, and I'm really glad you raised it, that it's not just seniors who are interested in knowing about the issues that we'll be voting on. So I'm glad to hear that there'll be outreach to other communities. I've been asked about these overrides by people who are not seniors. So I know that seniors are not the only ones who are interested. And I hope that a very visible notice of the meeting will be put on the city website so that people can be apprised of it. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. And I will note there are also a number of quite a few private events that have happened or will be happening as well to talk to members of the public. So I won't get into that any more than I am here, but I do suggest people be on the lookout for those. We'll go to the podium. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Fiore]: Gaston Fiore, 61 Stickney Road. Senior citizens are one of the most vulnerable groups in our community, and also one of our most valuable. Some of our seniors might rent, possibly dedicating a large proportion of their income, likely fixed, to their rent. Other seniors might be homeowners, possibly having bought their houses decades ago, likely being wealthy in terms of their house, but much poorer in terms of their income. Government officials should not pursue policies that could place our seniors under financial distress. Raising property taxes will negatively impact our senior citizens, particularly those on fixed incomes. Seniors often living on savings and social security are less able to absorb sudden increases in expenses. Property taxes are regressive. They take a larger percentage of income from those with lower income compared to higher earners. Increasing property taxes could force many seniors to make tough choices between essentials, such as medication and food, or maintaining their homes. Higher property taxes could lead to the displacement of our seniors. For those that rent, the rents will go up. Landlords will pass on the increase in real estate taxes to tenants. For those that own their homes, they might not be able to afford the increase in real estate taxes. Having to move at an old age might lead to undesirable levels of both mental and physical strain. If there is one group in our community that we should try to prevent from being displaced, it is our senior citizens. Moreover, higher property taxes will also reduce the disposable income available to seniors, limiting their ability to spend on local goods and services. This decrease in purchasing power not only affects seniors, but also local businesses that rely on their patronage. Lower spending could lead to contraction of the local economy. Higher taxes stifle economic growth, which is exactly the opposite of what the government should be striving for. In essence, higher property taxes would place a substantial financial strain on senior citizens, undermining their economic stability and wellbeing. It's crucial for our government officials to consider these adverse effects and explore alternative avenues for raising revenue that do not disproportionately burden our seniors. Thank you very much.
[Bears]: Thank you. We'll go to no one on Zoom. So we'll go to the podium, name and address of the record. You have three minutes.
[Giurleo]: Good evening, Nick Giurleo, G-I-U-R-L-E-O 40 Robinson Road. I'm speaking in favor of this resolution. I'm very happy to see it. Seniors really are important in Medford, so it's good to reach out to them in any way we can on issues that really will impact them. The way I see this resolution, it's just calling for a fairly innocuous community meeting to give our seniors some information on what these ballot questions are really all about. Given my personal opinion that approval of them will have a disastrous impact on seniors. I think it's very important to educate them on the issues so they can come to those conclusions themselves. My opinion is based on this just terrible cost of living crisis the country is facing. That crisis is due to fiscal irresponsibility. And it seems like these ballot measures, if approved, are really gonna be promoting that, which has led to this cost-of-living crisis. There really is, I think, some misinformation out there about what these ballot questions really are all about. We hear words being used, like investment, when we're not really saying what this really is, which is just taxation. People really are struggling. It's important to educate them on the issues so they can understand why they're struggling. And I would just highlight what the previous speaker said about the severe economic challenges that seniors throughout the country really are facing that I think we can all agree on. They're on fixed incomes. And data shows that when seniors on fixed incomes face unexpected increased costs, they're forced to forego necessities, necessities like food, necessities like prescription medications. really do have to be aware that recklessly raising taxes will have real consequences. You know, it's more than just harming the economic diversity of the city. In some cases, this could be life or death for people who are vulnerable. So I would encourage everyone to approve of this resolution. Thank you for listening.
[Bears]: Thank you. And I would just to that point, encourage anyone listening to look at the exemptions available for property taxes, the deferral program, et cetera. This council has made it a very important point to maximize to the utmost what the state will allow us to do for those programs. We have done that. And we have also tied our programs to go up whenever the state increases the amount. So in the past, they didn't go up for a long time. There were huge gaps between us and other communities. We have corrected that and they will go up automatically as the state increases. the conditions for those programs. Go to Zoom. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes. Mr. Castagnetti, I believe. Mr. Castagnetti, I'm asking you to unmute.
[Castagnetti]: Can you hear me, please?
[Bears]: Yep. I'll restart your time.
[Castagnetti]: Thank you, Councilor Bears. Andrew Cassinetti on Cushman Street, East Ford Mass. I want to thank George Scarpelli, the Councilor, for putting this forward and for you to accept it for the next Tuesday's meeting, is it?
[Bears]: Tuesday, October 15th.
[Castagnetti]: On the 15th, thank you. I am a senior citizen myself and my wife and We want to fix incomes. Can you, in my pre-minute span, can you help the people out? Can you tell me, question number six, how many million is that for?
[Bears]: That is for a $30 million bond for a new fire headquarters.
[Castagnetti]: No, no, no, question six.
[Bears]: Yes, question six, it's a $2 per year cost to finance the payment of bonds for a new fire headquarters. The bond, the total.
[Castagnetti]: Okay, that's a debt exclusion. I'm sorry, question six, is it a debt exclusion or an override?
[Bears]: That is a debt exclusion.
[Castagnetti]: Okay, and how much is the total amount?
[Bears]: Well, the way that a debt exclusion works is that you have it for the amount of the bond for the construction of the project, and that is paid over many years. The bond amount is estimated to be about $30 million, and the estimate of the annual impact is about $2 million.
[Castagnetti]: Okay, question number seven. That's an override, yes?
[Bears]: Yes, that is an override.
[Castagnetti]: And what is the total amount for that override, sir?
[Bears]: That would be $3.5 million per year.
[Castagnetti]: Thank you. And question number eight, is that exclusion also?
[Bears]: Question number eight is also an override, and that amount is $4 million per year.
[Castagnetti]: It's $4 million. It's an override. OK. Are the seniors exempt from this if any of these pass?
[Bears]: There's no provision in proposition two and a half law to exempt seniors beyond the exemptions generally allowed for the property tax, which the city already.
[Castagnetti]: I'm gonna I'm gonna repeat myself. Most seniors are on fixed income and they have in trouble with this Biden inflation. It's really tough out there. That's all I have to say, sir.
[Bears]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. We'll go to the podium, name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Giglio]: Hi, Bill Giglio, Winthrop Street. Thanks, George, for putting this on. My question is, or my only fear or concern is, I think the way George, when I read this, was based for the seniors to get the information. If we open this up to everybody and this place floods, then you have a bunch of seniors. Then we have another meeting that could go on until, however long people start fighting, you hit the gavel call for a 15 minute recess. And then they're not getting the answers that they want. Is there a way to separate? Like I was very much in favor of just having the seniors. I would, you know, if they come up here and it's six, seven o'clock at night and they're not getting their questions answered and then the lines out the door and then the height of that, I mean, we've all seen what can happen in these chambers. with people bickering and fighting, and then that goes on for long, and now they don't get their answers that they're looking for.
[Bears]: Given the format of the event and what's been discussed by Councilor Scarpelli, I think what we can do is we can prioritize A, and I'm sure everyone in the room would be happy to do so, get seniors seated in the front of the room, take their questions first. And when it comes to the bickering and yelling, I can only do so much, but I will encourage everyone at the beginning of the meeting to keep it civil. I think given the format of the event, we're gonna have to have slightly different rules. I think keep questions a little bit shorter. I would request also the answers from my fellow Councilors be kept as brief as possible. and we can try to get through everybody in a timely manner. But I will now that I'm aware of the request and the format, we'll take all of those factors into consideration and make sure that we hear from our seniors in a respectful and prompt manner. Um, given the format that we're talking about with a committee of the whole, we can't, uh, do we can't, the council can't host a public meeting and say only certain people can come. Um, I do think it is also a way around some of these questions that Councilor Scarpelli noted around the legal questions. He's asked if we could have a private forum at the senior center. It seems like that'll take some time. I think this is a way to expedite the process and I think not a private Not necessarily private, but it's an open forum. Would it be a, not a private, but not a council meeting?
[Scarpelli]: No, no, it's just an open forum. It could be any member that has a background that can sit and meet with them. It could be a override professional from the city or the state that would go in and talk with them. But unfortunately, the mayor mentioned that we need legal representation.
[Bears]: Right, so I think this is the way within our authority we're able to accelerate this. I'm gonna take all those factors into account. I will plan for as best as I can to incorporate those factors. Thank you. Just one second, I'm gonna go to Zoom. We'll go to Paul on Zoom. Name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes. Paul, I've asked you to unmute. All right. I will go back to the podium. We'll see if we can get back to Paul in a minute.
[Vardabedian]: I'm sorry. I did. I came up here again. I'm just two things. If we had that at the senior center, would that be a lot that be accessible via zoom?
[Bears]: I don't know what the hybrid space is.
[Vardabedian]: I do think it's important to have that on zoom for people that for whatever reason cannot get here, whether it's disability or whatever. Also, um, I did speak to some of my, um, neighbors that are also senior citizens and one specifically who was struggling and she works, she lives in the family home by herself. She works three jobs and she's, she's having a really hard time. So something like this is it's going to make her she even said, I'm not going to be able to live in Medford anymore. Myself, I live alone, I have all the income that I have going towards the house. So I just think it's what you're seeing here is not necessarily the people that aren't involved that just some of them are working and they just can't attend these things. So I do think that having it on Zoom is very important. And again, I thank you for bringing this up and everyone working like this. One other thing, the taxes that are the help that you had said, it's already established. Is that something that can be brought up at this meeting for people like even me that aren't aware of what's available to us?
[Bears]: Yes, yes. I mean, I personally try to mention it every time we talk about taxes. We mentioned it during the tax rate meeting. We can keep mentioning it. It is also, and I know you said you didn't have the computer, but it is available on the assessor's office website. And I will, not necessarily for you, but for anyone watching, The library is a great resource. If you don't have a computer to access that information, it's open until 9 p.m. most weekdays. And there's a ton of computers thanks to that great project that for folks who may not otherwise be able to get that information. So I just want to note that for anyone maybe watching on.
[Vardabedian]: Okay, thank you very much.
[Bears]: Thanks. Any further comments by members of the public? I'm going to try Mr. Garrity one more time. Paul? I'm going to request to unmute you, and if you could click the button and give us your name and address for the record. Paul, a pop-up should have just come on your computer asking you to unmute. All right, do we have any other comments from members of the public or from members of the council?
[Scarpelli]: If I can, Mr. President.
[Bears]: Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Just so I'm clear, so what you brought up earlier, just to be clear, because I want to make sure that I'm not speaking out of turn. So you met with the assessor, but the calculation wasn't part of the assessor's team, correct? Just so I'm clear with that.
[Bears]: Which calculation?
[Scarpelli]: The calculation that's being put out by the group that's, the four method group, the four yes group.
[Bears]: the calculation being that is both on the city website and that that is referenced by private group that is from the division of local services.
[Scarpelli]: It's not the assessor.
[Bears]: Well in the assessor. So the way it works is if you take the the 7.5 million, and then you put the 2 million at that exclusion, that takes you to 9.5. You go to the DLS website, which has the override calculator, and that will give you the override amount. And then that is taken, the information for the address calculator is taken directly from the assessor's database, multiplied by the DLS calculator, and that's how you calculate the amount.
[Scarpelli]: That's wonderful, Matt. But the question I had was, because I want to make sure, because the emails that we have, when I speak with the assessors, I don't wanna talk out of turn, because I hate to be called a liar, because that happens a lot lately, that what the assessor's words were, and an email, we'll get it for us, that they had no part of any calculations, and they do not have any of the calculations that normal communities, when they go through an override, they show a breakdown, and the breakdown says, override ramifications or impact. It would be single family homes, two family homes, three family homes. Cause I have the email that states that it will not be ready. Those type of calculations that we're seeing didn't come from his office. So I just want to make sure when we meet, I don't want anybody to go around saying that this is contentious because I know the calculations and you're correct. It's from the state and we understand that, but there's a lot of, right. So there's a lot of variables that aren't factored because I know firsthand because I sat with a resident. that the calculations that are out there that state that his house is appraised at X, but is truly Y, it's not true. It's not apples to apples. So when I talked to the assessor, they said, of course not, because that's not tied in yet. So I just want you to know that we wanna make sure when we come to the 15th that we're not spending too much time looking at or talking about, oh yeah, I'll tell him the truth, I'm not telling the truth. I just wanna make sure. The assessor was not part of any calculations with any financial group of task force here in the city. That's their exact words. So thank you.
[Bears]: Yeah, I mean, I think we're getting a bit into the specifics or minutiae of the issue.
[Scarpelli]: I mean, that's not minutiae.
[Bears]: That's the data is from the assessor. I've spoken with the assessor multiple times about the data. They did not do the multiplication, but the data is from them. So it's their tax rate. their assessed values. If there's an individual case where there's an error in the assessed value in the assessor's database, I could work with you and the assessor to correct that error. But all of the data is from our tax rates from the State Division of Local Services and from the assessor's database. But not the update assessments, correct? Right. Well, they're based on the assessments we have now, current year. Right.
[Scarpelli]: So not the newest ones.
[Bears]: Right. I did speak with the assessor a couple of weeks ago, and he actually expects that next year's bills will increase. The normal increase will happen no matter what in assessments, not to be as bad as prior years. looking forward to those meetings on the tax rate and the assessed values. Any further questions or comments? Go to the podium one more time.
[Fiore]: Name and address. I just want to correct you, Mr. President, because you mentioned that the assessed value is $9.5 million. It cannot be $9.5 million because you're adding the $2 million for the bond. Where's the interest for the bond? The bond, we need to pay an interest on the bond.
[Bears]: No, that includes the interest, the estimated annual. No, it's a $30 million bond.
[Fiore]: over a 15 year period that gives you $2 million a year, where's the interest?
[Bears]: I didn't say over a 15 year period.
[Fiore]: What do you mean?
[Bears]: I didn't say it was over a 15 year period. It's until the bonds paid off. The $2 million includes debt service costs, yes.
[Fiore]: OK, so there's going to be banks involved in issuing this bond?
[Bears]: Yes.
[Fiore]: So that includes also the fees for the banks?
[Bears]: It is the estimated debt service for a $30 million bond.
[Fiore]: OK. And then what Consuelo Scarpelli was saying, so the assessed values are going to be used for once the overrides and debt exclusions, they pass. when they become active, it's going to be based on 2023 values. So we have to make sure that residents understand that. So for example, the statutory 2.5% limit, Levi limit, forget about the overrides that we have, doesn't mean that your tax will not go up by more than 2.5%. Because that's just concluded on the overall property values for the whole city. So in my house, for example, like, you know, gets reassessed at a much higher value than what it was last year. My personal, even though the whole city is capped at 2.5, my personal property taxes could go up by more than 2.5. So the calculator that is being used It's not really, it could definitely be possible.
[Bears]: It's probably actually going to be slightly lower because the tax rate's going to go down because the values are going to go up.
[Fiore]: We can agree that that value that I'm getting in the calculator is not exactly what I'm going to see.
[Bears]: It will most likely actually be a little lower, you're correct.
[Fiore]: Okay, well that's your take, but I just want to make it clear.
[Bears]: No, that's what's happening. So you're correct, what happens with how Proposition 2.5 works is The total levy is increased by the limit amount. That's the numerator of our equation. Yep. The denominator of our equation is the total assessable assess taxable value. Sorry, total assessed value of taxable property. Right. The total that denominator total that's in fiscal 25, if no override were to pass. So the override impact is actually likely to be less than it is on the calculator because of that impact, because the values are going up so much faster, but you're also correct. That's just the calculation for the whole city. Then you get the tax rate. The tax rate is then multiplied by your assessed value. And so yes, there's disparate impact. on different properties. The single family class, for example, has been going up in value much faster than other classes of property. Proposition two and a half is an incredibly complicated, convoluted law that is not a good way to set tax policy. It's very difficult for people to understand it. And it places these artificial limits that make it really are not grounded in any sort of economic science. They were just a fun number that people decided to pick in 1980 to get a law passed. So I completely agree with you. It's a convoluted, complicated law.
[Fiore]: No, I didn't say it was a convoluted, complicated law. I actually love Proposition 2.5. It actually keeps the government limited, and it makes sure that they use our money Properly and efficiently and they're very clear for you.
[Bears]: So that's one opinion on well, that's my personal opinion.
[Fiore]: But you said like I said that I was a convoluted law.
[Bears]: I don't know what Well, I think we can both agree that there's complications in the calculation.
[Fiore]: Um, not really. There are complications in the calculator that is being shown to resin. So that's that.
[Bears]: Yes. Yes. But in your to answer your question specifically the tax rate in fiscal 25 is likely to be lower than the fiscal 24 rate.
[Fiore]: That's right, but you don't know what my assessed value is going to be in 2025, because it's a 2023 value and it's not the one being used in the calculator.
[Bears]: Right. And that's how it is every year. Right. Right. So, yep, it's pretty good estimate. Thank you. Any further questions on Zoom? I'm going to go to Marie Izzo.
[Izzo]: I'm trying to unmute. Hi. Yeah. I just want to remind everyone, and thank you for being as civil as you are being in this conversation. And I appreciate that because really hard to listen to these, you know, sort of argumentative things going on regarding this, but I just want to remind everyone this is about You know, I'm a senior, I'm on a fixed income. It is going to make a dent. However, you know, I think the other population we are simply not talking about is the students and the teachers and honestly about the civility of this city and the needs that we have that we have ignored. And I know how difficult it is, you know, to be running for office and having to raise tax. Nobody likes taxes. I don't want to pay them. I pay them all the time and I hate every moment of it. However, I do understand that we have needs that we have ignored and are budgeting and that everything is increasing for everyone. And yes, there's more vulnerable as opposed to non-vulnerable. And if I can't afford my taxes, I will leave. And that doesn't mean anything other than I have choices because I have a million dollar home in Medford, like many of my other senior friends living and being overhoused in their homes. What's unfortunate is there's nowhere in Medford to go to, and that's a bigger deal for me than anything else. But in this two and a half override conversation, and that I have sat through many, many, many hours of this, and this is on public television. You know, it's on the public, the cable channels and people are listening to this and we're all gonna go and we're all gonna vote. And I think that is sufficient. And many times, you know, in this council in the past, it has said, you know, we have to educate ourselves. We can't handhold everyone into like, you know, trying to figure everything out. It's going to impact us. It is, but we're going to have some positive outcomes. And that's really all I have to say. Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you. We'll go to the podium, name and address for the record, please. You have three minutes.
[Orlando]: Richard Orlando, Winford Way. Just a point for clarification. There was a reference to the school committee. I just want to understand, will the motion include a formal invitation to the mayor and school committee to that upcoming informational meeting?
[Bears]: We can invite them. I don't want to schedule a meeting for them.
[Orlando]: No, no, I'm just asking, will they be formally invited to participate? I will invite them, yes. Both the mayor and the school board.
[Bears]: I will invite them to attend.
[Bears]: We'll try, oh, hands down. Any further comment by members in the room? Seeing none, I'll go back to Mr. Castagnetti. Name and address for the record, please.
[Castagnetti]: Castagnetti, Cushing Street, East Medford. Thank you for the extra 30 seconds. Councilor Bears, I beg to differ with you on your comment, the negative comment about when Prop 215 started in 1980. As far as I'm concerned, Barbara Anderson, rest her soul, did a great thing by limiting the state that the city from increasing our real estate tax levy more than 2.5 percent annually or else the city would go who knows to what percent 10 20 30 um and i think she she was great the law is flawed guarantee you because everyone should uh every owner occupy should get a savings and not have some have to pay. Um, so I think she did a, she, she did a great thing. And, uh, again, rest his soul. Thank you. Thank you.
[Bears]: Any further comment seeing none on the motion of councilor Scarpelli second by vice president Collins to refer This paper as amended to committee of the whole to amend the paper to include inviting residents and parents and to request that the Council on Aging, PTOs and community liaisons conduct outreach and that community liaisons are able to translate the city produced materials regarding the override and debt exclusion questions. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Callahan]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Lazzaro? Yes. Councilor Lemi?
[Leming]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: President Ferris. Yes.
[Bears]: Vice President Cohen. She said she votes yes. I think we gotta have a verbal.
[Collins]: Yes. Sorry, my audio cut out and I couldn't hear the clerk.
[Bears]: So the affirmative, none the negative, the motion passes as amended. I actually need Councilor Scrupley for you to take the chair for this one too. Sorry. It's for my paper on the MCAS.
[SPEAKER_14]: It's right there. All right.
[Scarpelli]: Okay, thank you. Next we have item 24-476, resolution to support question two, replacing the high stakes MCAS test graduation requirements for high school students. Council President Baez.
[Bears]: Thank you. I'll just, uh, would you like me to, I can do it if you, unless you want to do it.
[Scarpelli]: Well, I think this is, it's very powerful when you read it.
[Bears]: So thank you. Um, just, uh, the text is, uh, whereas access to high quality publicly funded education is a guaranteed right. written into the Massachusetts Constitution, and whereas the goal of public education is to teach students essential foundational skills such as reading, writing, and arithmetic, and to develop critical thinkers, engaged citizens, and lifelong learners. And whereas the bedrock of the Commonwealth's world-class public education system is strong, statewide standards that are uniform throughout our public schools, and whereas the MCAS is significantly limited in its ability to accurately and effectively measure whether students are meeting the Commonwealth standards and developing the skills they need to thrive after high school, and whereas the most effective measures of whether students are meeting our strong statewide standards in developing the skills they need to succeed in college, the workforce, and beyond, Our educator-led assessments such as projects, papers, tests, and group activities that are conducted throughout the school year. And whereas the punitive use of MCAS as a high school graduation requirement has restricted curriculum and shifted the focus of education in our public schools towards meeting a test score instead of fostering an environment of creativity, critical thinking, and real teaching and learning that helps students realize their full potential. And whereas pediatricians, researchers, and school Councilors have warned of the severe impact of high-stakes testing like the MCAS graduation requirement on students' mental health and well-being. and whereas standardized test requirements notoriously stack the deck against students of color, ESL students, and students with learning disabilities, and whereas using MCAS testing as a high school graduation requirement has prevented or delayed thousands of students from earning a diploma, thereby interrupting or derailing education or career plans with especially harmful impacts on students of color, low-income students, students with disabilities, and students for whom English is their second language. Now, therefore, be it resolved by the Medford City Council that we support question two, replacing the MCAS graduation requirement on the November 5th general election ballot.
[Scarpelli]: See, I'm already voting with you. So powerful. So thanks.
[Bears]: Yeah. And I'm sure you being in the schools, being a teacher, you've seen the impact. I was one of the early classes that had to pass the MCAS to graduate high school. A lot of these requirements, you know, ours came into place from the Education Reform Act in the early 90s, but this was really blasted nationwide by the education reform movement under No Child Left Behind. At its peak, 35 states required a high-stakes standardized test to pass and graduate high school. You had to pass it. That's down to eight states. So it used to be 35, we're down to eight. We're one of the only eight who are left. And the reason is it doesn't work. It doesn't actually measure what we're trying to measure. It doesn't actually help anyone get anywhere. And it harms, particularly targeted harms at groups of students who maybe they passed all their classes, maybe they did all their projects, maybe they passed all their tests, maybe they have all their grades that they need to have, but they struggle with the test. They don't get a high school diploma, even though they passed all their classes and their teachers think they should get one. And I think You know, at the core, that's who we're trying to protect here. That's the most focused group that's gonna benefit from this, but I think it benefits everyone in the schools too. Not to have their classmates worried about anxiety about passing the test, not to have teachers feeling like they have to teach to the test, not to have students worried that even if they do everything right, there might be this one little thing that doesn't go the way they want it to go and they can't get their degree or their diploma. So, you know, for a lot of people, the MCAS is just some boring days. For some kids, it's the worst five days of their lives. I don't think for any teacher, any student, it's a good activity that they feel at the end of it benefited their education. And that's why I think you shouldn't have the high stakes requirement on it. If it was up to me, maybe you'd go a different direction altogether. This question doesn't get rid of the test. You can, the assessment is still there so that we can punish teachers and districts if kids don't do great on it. So it doesn't go as far as I'd like it to go, being someone who's been in our schools and been an advocate for our schools and worked with our teachers, not just in Medford, but around the Commonwealth. So it doesn't go as far as I'd like to go, but it does hit that most difficult part of the MCAS, which is the high stakes requirement that really hurts specific groups of students and creates that anxiety and teach the test mentality. So I think it's great that it's on the ballot and I really hope it passes and I hope tonight we can endorse it. And our school committee endorsed it last week. Yes. Councilor Callahan.
[Callahan]: Thank you so much. Thanks for putting this on. You just said what I was going to say, which is it is important for people to understand this does not eliminate MCAS. Some people are confused about that. It simply removes it as a graduation requirement. I completely agree that it is really damaging as a graduation requirement. So just as long as people understand that. Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: Um, anyone else I just, as I think accounts of as they can scale and hope people sitting down out there is that but I'll be. I'm behind you 1000% with this initiative, I think as a former teacher, until you're sitting in a classroom, and you're working with a dedicated teacher who's bawling her eyes out. because you have a new ESL student that just moved to the city, to this country weeks ago, and that you have to try to explain to them what snow is. And knowing that impact, that it'll never succeed, and watching the pain, and realize that these are the questions that are leading decisions to what we're looking at as educators. I love the fact that I was a strong advocate for the portfolio format, where you really saw the growth of a student from beginning to end. And it made teachers, what we saw, it happened right in front of us, you took away the creativity away from teachers. And you took away so much talent because instead of them being creative to this individual student, individual classes, they had to focus on what this test forced you to do. It's been a long time coming, like you said, the graduation. My daughter Gianna, she is a Dean's List student, 4.0 student in college, 3.5 in high school, had the most difficult time passing the MCAS. So I saw it firsthand. A young lady that had to fight a speech impediment and understanding what the limitations that you have as a teacher to help a student with a disability is another most painful process to watch. So I agree with you. I hope we can go a step further and moving forward this initiative further to look at maybe using testing as one mechanism. but also followed up with some sort of portfolio process where you can really see our kids shine and our teachers shine. So I would, I appreciate that. So do we have any questions on Zoom? It looks like Julie, oops, Julie Roberto.
[Roberto]: Hi, I guess I don't have a question I was gonna give my little testimony. Is it time for that?
[Scarpelli]: Yep. Name and address for the record
[Roberto]: uh Julia Roberto, central Ave. I feel like maybe I don't really need to give my testimony based off of everything you guys are saying. But regardless, I support yes on two and would be wicked grateful for this to pass here tonight. I'm an educator at a public school and also a former public school student in Massachusetts. And I support yes on two because I believe it's important to hold our students to high standards throughout each and every day of their academic career, not just solely on a few days of testing. I'm supporting us on to means that we're supporting the asks that every student shows mastery of our standards in English, math, science, etc. I'm also ensures that we have an inclusive education system here. Um, you know, with the last resolution, we talked a lot about vulnerable populations and this MCAS test really affects our vulnerable student populations. Um, standardized tests are proven to be biased or inaccessible, uh, against low-income students, students of color, students who are English language learners, um, and students who have learning differences. So I guess overall, I just really ask that, you know, we all show our students that we know they can demonstrate their intelligence every day. Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: Next we have at the podium name and address of the record. You have 33 minutes and three days.
[Fiore]: see what happens. So I went to high school in Latin America, so I didn't take the MCAS, obviously. So I'm just going to talk in general about some of the points that I saw in President Bayer's resolution. So the first one is that I think if there is a particular problem with the MCAS, for example, some students might need a little bit of extra help or maybe an exam that has some modifications, then let's address those definitely, but let's not eliminate the MCAS as a graduation requirement. So the second one is that I'm going to use Councilor Tseng's term. So I'm an immigrant voter. I was born in Latin America. I came here when I was 18 years old. I went to public high school in Argentina. I actually went to vocational school. I didn't have a formal English instruction. We only had technical English. And so I became a US citizen about two years ago. So I'm definitely an immigrant voter. And obviously, as you can tell by my accent, I'm an English as a single language person. And I think some of this writing definitely sets, and I'm Latino, so it sets like underrepresented minorities like me back. I definitely feel that when I was in high school, again, public high school in Argentina, And I had the ambition to come to school here in the US. If I had read things like this, for example, about how much of a disadvantage I was by not having been taught in English, having to have learned English mostly by myself, et cetera, I would have said, you know what? It's not even worth it. Why am I going to go through all this pain? Let's just give up. It's too hard. And I just think we need to be, again, talking through my own experience, we have to be a little bit careful. You know, Latinos, we can do it, we can put the work, we can put the effort, we can achieve it, and everyone out there can achieve their own ambitions and their own dreams if they work hard enough. So I want to make that clear. Let's not set ourselves back. The third point I wanna make is that, so I think that these high stakes exams, definitely we all went through them, SAT, things like this. So there... they, you know, we go through a lot of stress, but at the same time, it's part of the learning process, right? So we're gonna go through a lot of very stressful situations later on in life, particular situation might even be much more stressful than just like a graduation test. So I take this as like kind of a requirement that I had to go through as a student to, you know, make me capable of leading with life later on. And I'm almost done. So the fourth one actually is that I think like having a uniform standard graduation requirement is actually useful to be used as a benchmark to see whether the tax dollars are actually being spent efficiently in the public school system. There might be other better assessments. I just think that this is one of them. And I would like to, if we get rid of this one, to see how we can have a uniform because some of the money that I pay to the state goes into public education as well, to make sure that our taxes are being used efficiently. And the last one that I want to say is that I want to mention a little bit the hypocrisy of the city council, because for this, they're very concerned about people for whom English is their second language. And when the participation time limit was reduced from five to three minutes, I didn't see this point being discussed even once. okay and then for people like me that have a very strong accent I've gotten feedback that you know you speak too fast we cannot understand you and I just wish again I don't I think I don't absolutely don't want any preferential treatment we should all be treated exactly the same but I wish that this English as a second language issue had been discussed back then and maybe you know the impact that this could have on some of the immigrants that come and speak at city council who have been considered thank you so much. Thank you, Gaston. Council Bias.
[Bears]: Thank you. And I think to at least one of Gaston's points, I just wanted to add in the, I think that the passage of this, a yes vote on this, which I'm hoping we'll see on November 5th, will really encourage the state legislature to take more seriously the MCEIA or IEA, I can't remember, it's the mass commission on alternative, it's basically the alternative educational assessment, innovative educational assessment, I think it is MCEIA. Yeah, they're looking at that portfolio requirement, bringing that back so that we can have a statewide requirement that's not a high stakes standardized test. And I really hope that that innovation will go in there. And I also just want to direct some folks, similar to Councilor Scarpelli's experience, there's a Boston Globe article yesterday, I think, about Deb McCarthy. Deb is someone I count as a close friend. We organized together for many years. She was a teacher in Hall forever, and she started off early on in MCAS, and you can read this in the story. She was the MCAS data czar for her school. She thought it was going to be doing these great things, helping get that data out, helping to provide more knowledge to to teachers to help them teach better. She did that for a few years, then she started to see the impacts to the point where a few years ago she became what she called, and some other teachers in the district, conscientious objectors. They refused to proctor the MCAS exam. And they were sitting with the kids who had been opted out of the MCAS exam as well and working with them on those days. She's now vice president of the MTA statewide, a huge leader on this issue. But that profile, I think, is really a great example of a teacher who was teaching before MCAS started, knows what it was like, thought MCAS was going to be this good thing, really gave it a chance, saw the negative impacts, and then has been organizing to try to bring us to a different standard for a really long time. And I think that is just exactly the story people need to hear to get behind this question, the experience of this in our schools, what our teachers have seen. what the students have been impacted. So I refer people to take a look at that Deb McCarthy profile in the Boston Globe sometime in the last couple of days.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you. We do have Mr. Cassinetti. You have name and address. We have your... Go ahead. You have to unmute, Mr. Cassinetti.
[Castagnetti]: Unmuted, I think. Yes.
[Scarpelli]: Yep, you're good.
[Castagnetti]: Okay, thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. I wanna say I'm always against testing, to be honest with you, pretty much all my life. And the only thing is I'm just hoping this doesn't go further to the top and down of America. Good luck, people.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you.
[Tseng]: Councilor Tseng. Thank you. Um, I think it's very natural have nuanced takes on standardized tests, um, you know, there there's so many, there are different levels, there are different occasions where these questions apply to. I think it's really important when we're looking at a ballot referendum question to look at the text right there and the text right there is about MCAS's graduation requirement. the MCAS will still exist. And in fact, something that a lot of residents, not just the Medford, but a lot of residents across the state don't know is that there are other ways that teachers are using now that, you know, some of them are state run, some of them are from schools, but there are ways that teachers are tracking student growth and student progress. There's a test, an alternative test. It's pretty different from MCAS, but it is still a standardized way to measure growth. being offered in our schools, offered, I believe, three times a year, at least in middle schools. This is from my conversation with middle school teachers. So that, you know, that rigor is still very much there. When we look at who exactly is being denied graduation from MCAS, I think it's important to note that 75% of those who failed MCAS are people who are also not meeting standards already set by their school district. And so, you know, rigor is the worry, then that's a major data point to consider. But then the question leads to what is that other 25%? And we see very clearly in the data that that other 25% actually tends to be English as second language students who actually, when they sit down with a translator, work through the exams, actually pass the exams very well, but aren't accustomed to how we do high stakes testing here in Massachusetts or in this country. And so there's a cultural barrier there, a language barrier. What's great is that our teachers, and I know you know this, won't let anyone fall behind. It's a dedication to them, it's a duty, it's a vocation. It's also part of their job description. And so this is a measure I feel comfortable supporting, and I would urge our residents to vote for it as well.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you. And again, to follow up with that council president bears, I think that when MCAS started the biggest issue with the teachers, where the teachers weren't really involved, it was politicians and bureaucrats was it, and there was a huge gap. Um, so I think now you're seeing, um, hopefully waking up and, you know, look at different options when we're assessing our children. So on the motion council bears second by council Callahan, uh, Mr. Clerk, call the roll. Thank you. How's that?
[Leming]: I'm ready. You didn't say please. It's please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: I allow that. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Scarpelli]: Yes, seven, the affirmative zero and the negative motion passes. Can I take this home for my wife? I can Dina, please. It's so powerful.
[Bears]: Now I know I don't want to let it go though. It's just you give that to Dina. You're done for Georgia. You get that to Dina. All right, public participation. Is there anyone who'd like to speak about anything we haven't talked about yet? All right, seeing no hands on Zoom, no one in the chamber. Any unfinished business? Seeing none, is there a motion on the floor?
[Leming]: Motion to adjourn.
[Bears]: On the motion to adjourn by Councilor Loehrig, seconded by? Seconded by Councilor Lazzaro. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
|
total time: 30.61 minutes total words: 5423  |
total time: 1.41 minutes total words: 197  |
total time: 9.91 minutes total words: 1398  |
total time: 4.7 minutes total words: 834  |
|
total time: 3.39 minutes total words: 541  |
total time: 1.29 minutes total words: 224  |
total time: 21.18 minutes total words: 3391  |
|