AI-generated transcript of City Council Committee Of The Whole 12-06-23

[Morell]: 22-533 committee the whole meeting wednesday december 6 2023 at 6 00 p.m is called to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears?

[Bears]: Present.

[Hurtubise]: Councilor Caraviello?

[Caraviello]: Present.

[Hurtubise]: Councilor Collins?

[Collins]: Present.

[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight? Knight is absent. Councilor Scarpelli? Scarpelli is absent. Councilor Tseng?

[Tseng]: Present.

[Hurtubise]: President Morell?

[Morell]: Present. Five present, two absent. The meeting is called to order there will be a meeting of the Medford City Council committee of the whole on Wednesday, December 6 2023 at 6pm in the Medford City Council chamber on the second for City Hall and via zoom. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss an RFP for updating the Medford zoning ordinance paper 22-533. The committee has invited Alicia hunt director of the office of planning development sustainability to attend this meeting. For further information, aids and accommodations, contact the City Clerk at 781-393-2425, Sincerely yours, Nicole Morell, Council President. So what brings us here tonight is after completing... the recodification work that we had engaged with Attorney Bobrowski over two years to do that work that was completed actually last March. We requested more funding from the mayor's office to get to the next phase of zoning, which we had worded as reflecting the adopted comprehensive plan to work through the zoning changes that would be needed to reflect the comprehensive plan, as well as some minor adjustments to the recodification that have passed now that they're actually in force. I think maybe a few just small changes. So this request for proposals actually went out in June. We did not receive any proposals back. The thought was purely timing. We believe it was time to be back right around the 4th of July holiday, close of the fiscal year. So we actually put it out again. Again, this is with the help of procurement with Fiona and also with Director Hunt. This was put out again in October. We did get two proposals that were delivered to the council, shared with the council on November 21st. We've had ample time to review. And based on discussion tonight, what the next steps are are to score the two proposals we have. We have a little, all the Councilors have a little scoring sheet, and then that way we're able to pick out of the two who our first is, and then once we choose our first priority selection, then we can actually get the costs data released and then there might be additional steps as far as negotiating costs, any additional questions like that. So really we have Director Hunt here to provide any kind of background she can as far as either process or her insight into the proposals that we've received and really just opening it up for any feedback from Councilors or any additional questions that we might be able to relay to the two applicants that have provided proposals that are before us tonight. So I will Open it up, if Councilors have any thoughts as far as the two proposals before us, or any questions. Vice-President Bears.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Director Hunt, for helping get this refined and out, and now we have, I think, a couple of good submissions back. As one Councilor, I mean, I think there's some significant difference between the two in the sense that one obviously has a significant amount of experience in our area and specifically within the city of Medford. And I think there's a lot of value there because we won't be, if we were to go with that proposal, we would not have to be kind of educating so much the proponent on or the applicant on our community and the comprehensive plan and the various plans that we're using to inform this process. as well as the priorities of the City Council when it comes to zoning. I do think both proposals are really strong. I don't want to discount that. Uh, for me, um, I do think that working with, you know, attorneys from Bob Prokowski, Haverty and Silverstein working with Emily Ennis, you know, those are folks we've worked with on. Not just the plans, but also the zoning reconification also on a number of specific project base issues. I mean, I think they have a really good understanding of Medford. what our priorities are for development, and I think that that is invaluable because I think it means we can hit the ground running really well with that team. That being said, I did appreciate the other proposal. One thing from the other proposal that I really think I would like to see maybe from the other team, if we go with the other team, I liked this project schedule page. I don't know, that might be too far away to zoom in on it. On page 12 of the Fisher proposal, that was just a really helpful schedule to kind of see when we would be working on each. Each section of what they had proposed for us for this process. So, you know, but other than that, I thought the proposals were relatively comparable, except for the fact that 1 really is steeped in the knowledge of what we're looking to do. And I think that it would move us to. essentially use the funds we've already put in and the time we've already put in with these folks to our advantage, I think we'll be able to do a lot more with that team, not having to reiterate work that that team essentially has already completed. So that's my read on this, and I'm excited to hear what Director Hunt and my fellow Councilors think about the two proposals.

[Morell]: I was a big fan of that Gantt chart calendar, too. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. I'm in agreement with Councilor Bears on this. I think we should stay with the group that we started with rather than have to go back and integrate with them what was already done before. The other group knows that they've worked here, they know they've already done part of the project. Let's not go into a whole new set of thinking and mindset that we probably don't need to go into. So, I would agree to go with the Innis group also.

[Morell]: Thank you. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Merlin. Thank you, Director Hunt for helping prepare these RFP responses for us. Having looked at both proposals, I echo comments from my fellow Councilors, it's great. It would have been great to get back 15 excellent responses, but I'm glad that we got back two excellent responses to compare and look at. I, you know, I think it's hard to say no to working with a really experienced, really qualified consultant that knows both our community really well from working here recently, especially on the kind of well, comprehensive projects that we've hired them for. It's hard to say no to that kind of springboard. They've already put their arms around the community as a whole through the comprehensive plan and other projects with your department. And I'm also very encouraged by the work that they've done with other communities around Massachusetts and communities that share various characteristics with us. I think that That strikes me as very encouraging. I see that they've worked comprehensively with the communities, I see that they've worked with the communities on kind of more targeted specific projects, whether it's kind of a gateway cities approach, a creative district, the MBTA Communities Act, and they also have the comprehensive experience with the communities as well. And that seems like a really good fit to me, because I think that our voting overhaul will require both that bird's eye view approach and also the, you know, I think we have areas of the city where we want to take a really specific lens and say we're trying to do this here in accordance with part of what's, some of the goals that's been laid out through our various plans. You know, looking through Fisher's portfolio projects, it's really compelling as well. I know that they have deep experience in their region that they've done a lot of work in. The Innis proposal shows a real depth of experience in communities that share some characteristics to ours around Massachusetts, and I find that especially compelling. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you. Councilor Tseng.

[Tseng]: Thank you. I think we're lucky that we have two very solid proposals in front of us today. I think like all of what my colleagues have said, the NSRFP speaks to me, especially in that, what Councilor Baer said, we have experience working with this group of people, with the staff that they're offering us. There's, you know, when we look to all these plans that we have right now, the comprehensive plan, the climate plan, everything, you know, we on when we and when we look at the RFP, we can see that there's overlap there, which I think is really invaluable. It means that we're bringing that expertise on all the public engagement in that process on to and carrying it over to ours rezoning project. I think, as Councilor Collins acknowledged, there are a lot of Massachusetts-specific projects in this RFP, which I think is very notable. And there are projects like the Helping a Bunch of Municipalities Come in Compliance with the MBTA Communities Act, which I think shows a familiarity with our state's regulations and laws when it comes to when it comes to zoning and what we can do. I think something, a small note that I found pretty helpful here is there in this RFP they mention proposed like The possibility of giving city councilors like us recommended training for best practices to engage with the community, giving us a lot of tools to engage residents. It's just something that I think would be really interesting in the zoning process, which is pretty unique in the NSRFP as well. And just, I could be wrong, but when we just count out the number of meetings, there seems to be just slightly more opportunities for our city council to engage with NSS group as well, which I think is invaluable time. I'd be interested to hear what Alicia, what Director Hunt has to say, but I feel pretty good about this proposal.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Director Hunt?

[Hunt]: Thank you, Council Members, Madam President. I think that you all have encapsulated this quite well. One of the firms, Fisher Associates, has reviewed our comprehensive plan and some of our plans, and Fisher Associates' lead project manager did in fact work for MAPC and worked here on one project with us, and that's greatly appreciated. It was a good project. But they are based in New York, and he did relocate to New York, And I do have if I have a local option, Massachusetts zoning is different from New York zoning, how it's done, what the regulations are. I believe that their project manager knows it. But on the other hand, their firm doesn't. It's always interesting to get ideas from other places. That's wonderful. But the reality is that the Innis associates, Emily Innis was the project manager on the comprehensive plan and helped write the comprehensive plan. She participated in the public meetings that we've had. So she has been talking with Medford residents. She has reviewed all of our previous documents. And we found it a very good working relationship in my office as well with her and her partner, Jonathan Silberstein. We have engaged him on several projects this past year, and we have a great working relationship with him as well. He already knows a lot of Medford zoning because of the projects we've already hired him on. And in fact, his partner is the one who did our recodification. So I would very much be happy to work with the two of them. The next step process in this is that under the RFP process, as we've been discussing with our procurement officer, We have the option to have presentations if we want them. We did say in the RFP that it was an optional. If we wanted it, we could ask for presentations. I'm not clear that that's a good use of our time. We're all very busy right now. We do need to fill out the score sheets, which involves checking references. So we need somebody to check the references on them. And then we would score them on per this was in the RFP. quality and depth of project experience and qualifications of the proposer and references. And that once we have those scores and provide our procurement officer with the written recommendation and preference, then she would go ahead and open the price proposal and then we would just, we would then do a price negotiation, a negotiation on the details of costs. with our preferred choice. I will say that for your edification, in the event that one was not able to come to a price negotiation with one proposal, you could then go to your second choice and negotiate with them. One of the questions that we got during the RFP process was, was there a set amount of money available for this? And so we chose to answer that question with the money that we knew we had available in this year's budget, that it was fiscal year money. So there should be no surprises in a price proposal. They know what we're working with here. So I think the next steps, check the references, give them a score, and then send a note to Fiona asking her to please open the price proposal. I think that a goal of having a consultant on board by the first week of January is a very reasonable goal.

[Morell]: Thank you, Director Hunt. Vice President Bears.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Director Hunt. My one question, as it's almost certain that this project will go, you know, 18 months, it'll at least be six months in this fiscal year and 12 months in the next, maybe even a little longer. Did we answer that question with just the amount appropriated in this fiscal year, or we expect also the potentially unexpected appropriation in the upcoming fiscal year? And also, I know there maybe was some money on your side of things that we were maybe going to use.

[Hunt]: Right. So if I can paraphrase, I've actually been expecting that it would be the 50,000 set aside in the city council budget, and we were expecting to take 50,000 from my budget as well. if I'm paraphrasing, we responded that there was $100,000 for this fiscal year. It was our anticipation that another $100,000 would be available in the coming, in the next fiscal year to continue the work. And obviously nobody can promise money that will be in a budget that has not yet been voted on, but we have anticipations.

[Bears]: Right. And we're already halfway through this fiscal year. So yeah. Yeah. Got it. Great. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you. Are there questions or comments from Councilors? I think to the point about the scoring sheet and having to follow up with references, I'm happy to take that on or Vice President Bears, if you want to split that, we'll each take one and we can call for references.

[Hunt]: I would love to have you guys do it because we're juggling a little right now.

[Morell]: I mean, I think, yeah, and I think we've heard from Councilors. I think we could definitely fill in, you know, 1A and, yeah, I think it's just 1A and B based on our conversation tonight, and then C would just be based on the references. I think we're happy to, I would have to, I'm like, I don't know if that counts as deliberation if we sent the reference sheets around.

[Hunt]: So theoretically, the reference sheets are each done separately? I was going to say, do you have an answer to that?

[Hurtubise]: I believe that if you take your reference sheets and compile them and send them to me, I can then send them to the council. It's a public record at that point. I don't believe that any of you can send them to each other, but if you send them to me and I send them out, I believe we are covered that way.

[Hunt]: And theoretically, each individual would fill out their scores, and they would all go to our procurement officer for a herd of them. I think the thing is that we then need a final recommendation, and that can just come from me, that I've reviewed the individual Councilors' preferences. And if we thought there was going to be and we were going to be disagreeing on these, then I think that we might look at a different process. But I think we're pretty aligned on where we feel on this.

[Morell]: Thank you. Yeah, I haven't spoken, but I agree with everything that's been said. And I appreciate you, Director Hunt, for really kind of naming the players and the different roles that they play with the city. And I do appreciate that Fisher Associates has had some work in the city. So I think if for whatever reason we couldn't get what seems to be our first choice, that's very helpful to know. But I think knowing that we had, you know, Attorney Bobrowski, who's a partner in this, for recodification. We had Emily Innes, as far as the comprehensive plan. We had her on a meeting just last week to help us understand the MBTA Communities Act. And then Attorney Silverstein, who I know we've worked with a number of projects recently. And then I think he also just, I can't remember what we worked with him on the council, but I know in his previous role at KB Law, we worked with him a bunch. I want to say it was over 5G or something. We've had many, You know, I think we've all had great working relationships with him as well in the past. So I think seeing that combination of folks as well as a number of folks who we haven't worked with yet, but also seem to have great qualifications, I think it's very exciting for me.

[Bears]: So just to understand the process, next step, and I'll make a motion once we've kind of agreed to it. is the idea that you want all of us to fill this out and send to you, and then you can say, OK, everybody rank this one more than this one. Do you think the president and I should submit one and you should submit one? We could come back next week. We could, conceivably, we could report this out to the regular meeting and have it on the agenda. If we wanted to make a formal recommendation to you, I think whatever you think is the most procedurally.

[Caraviello]: I think everyone seems to be in agreement with the same group. Why waste another meeting? Agreed. Yeah, I do. I mean, let's say that. I mean, I haven't heard any disagreement from anybody. Right. So I would just make the motion that we

[Hunt]: So there's that piece and then there is the legal need for the procurement process. So we had said a selection committee that would be comprised of city councillors and city staff, and we left it very vague. So if two of the Councilors, if it wants to be you, if anybody wants to fill this out, send them to me, and then I'll fill one out, and then we'll have at least three. And if everybody does it, then we'll have more. But if it doesn't have to be, you're welcome to. Then we'll take that as for a paper for the official record. Fiona needs this for her file.

[Bears]: OK, we need this for the file.

[Hunt]: And she needs a written email from, it could be me, it could be Madam President. What? Yes, please, yes. And then we. We formally request her to then open the sealed thing for one of them and that can come from me so it doesn't need to come back to another meeting. I mean, if you wanted to report it out and discuss it or vote on next week's meeting, once you have the reference checks, but I'm not sure if it's even. necessary and actually this seems odd but I might encourage not to do it at next week's meeting procedurally simply because next week you have the opening of the hearing of the MBTA communities and Emily Ennis is our consultant on that and in fact will be here on Tuesday night to do any information and advising on that that you want.

[Bears]: It sounds to me like the will of the council is clear. I think the motion would be, I think just for procedural sake, and Fiona did mention this to me as well, just we need to have documents in the record if there are questions, you know, that I would make the motion that the president and the vice president work with the director to complete any procedural steps necessary to to open up the price bids, and then we can make.

[Morell]: And maybe reflecting the will of the council. Yes.

[Bears]: Yeah.

[Hunt]: I feel that it would be useful to say that the council would then authorize us to do price negotiation up to the amount of money that has been budgeted for this project. OK. Right? And then we could literally do that. Because honestly, you voted for that in the budget back last spring. But I feel like that gives us the authority to, in fact, to that final negotiation and do a contract and purchase order.

[Bears]: So motion for the president, vice president, and PDS director to serve as the selection committee and authorization to negotiate based on the price proposals.

[Morell]: And yeah, well, and somewhere they're reflecting the will of the council.

[Bears]: Yeah, yeah, sure. Based on the discussion of the council at the December 6. 6, 2023, Committee of the Whole meeting.

[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears, it's your motion, so feel free to make edits. Vice President Bears, move that the President and Vice President work with Director Hunt to serve as the selection committee, handle all procedural matters, enter negotiations, and come to an agreement that reflects the will of the Council on this matter as expressed during tonight's meeting.

[Bears]: Sure. Yeah, I think I'd enter negotiations based on the price proposals. I think on the edit, that would make. Hang on. Let me do that.

[Hurtubise]: I have a second from Councilor Caraviello.

[Morell]: The motion of Vice President Bears is seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor?

[Hurtubise]: Aye.

[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, Director Hunt. Any further discussion or motion? Second. The motion of Councilor Caraviello to adjourn is seconded by Vice President Bears. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes, meeting is adjourned.

Morell total time: 4.91 minutes total words: 953	Bears total time: 4.64 minutes total words: 824	Caraviello total time: 0.7 minutes total words: 132	Collins total time: 2.12 minutes total words: 345
Tseng total time: 2.36 minutes total words: 330