AI-generated transcript of City Council 12-12-23

[Morell]: 24th regular meeting, December 12, 2023 of the Medford City Council is called to order. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_41]: Vice President Bears.

[Bears]: Present.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Caraviello. Present. Councilor Collins. Councilor Sanders. Present. Councilor Morell.

[Morell]: Present. Seven present, zero absent. Please rise to the plat. Records, the records of the meeting of November 28th, 2023 were passed to Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Caraviello, how'd you find them?

[Caraviello]: Madam President, I found the records in order, motion for approval. Second.

[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Vice-President Bears. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Reports of committees, 22-494, November 28th, 2023, Subcommittee on Ordinances, Rules, Budget Ordinance, report to follow. Chair of the Budget Ordinances, sorry, Ordinances Rules Subcommittee, Vice President Bears.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. We reviewed an amended version of the draft budget ordinance presented by the administration. There'll be a follow-up meeting. It was initially scheduled for tomorrow, but will likely be rescheduled to next week, and I move approval.

[Morell]: On the motion of Vice President Bears, seconded by... Second. Councilor Collins, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. 23-448, November 29th, 2023 can be the whole on the MBTA community zoning ordinance or to follow. So this was really a Q&A with Councilors and any members of the public who wish to take part about the proposed zoning changes before us that are actually on the agenda tonight. Do I have a motion?

[Knight]: Madam President, point of personal privilege.

[Morell]: On this specific favor?

[Knight]: No, Madam President.

[Morell]: Can we just pass this and then we'll go to you?

[Knight]: So do.

[Morell]: Thank you. So on motion to approve by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Councilor Knight, point of personal privilege.

[Knight]: We can dispose of the paper first.

[Morell]: You want to go through the rest? Okay. 23-314, December 5th, 2023, Committee of the Whole on Private Ways report to follow. This was with our DPW commissioner, as well as two land use attorneys from KP Law to answer resident questions and frequently asked questions about the private ways in Medford. I have a motion.

[SPEAKER_39]: Move approval.

[Morell]: On motion of Councilor Tseng to approve, seconded by Councilor Collins. All those in favor?

[SPEAKER_39]: Aye.

[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-533, December 6, 2023, the whole zoning RFP report to follow. This was to discuss the long-awaited proposals on our next step in the zoning process, building on our recodification work. We had two proposals and we left it that Vice of Affairs and I were gonna follow up on those references. We had a pre, I think we all agreed on where we wanted to go to next, and hopefully we'll have a decision on that soon. Do I have a motion?

[Bears]: Motion. Second.

[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Collins to approve, seconded by Vice Chair Bears. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Councilor Knight.

[Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Shortly after the budget debates in late June, following 16 weeks of pregnancy, my brother and his wife gave birth to their second child, Amira. And after several months of hospitalization, She was unable to withstand the college medical procedures and was laid to rest in mid-October. I've served on this council for a decade now. I think my record will reflect that my first eight years of service, I missed one regular city council meeting, and that was for the birth of my second child, Brandon. I don't think anybody in this room can say that I haven't come to these meetings prepared, ready, or able to do the work. When I first decided to run for elected office, it was with the support of my family and the understanding that they were always going to come first. That's what needed to happen during this time. So I do regret my absence from the council during this period of time. It's a very private and personal matter to both me and my family. But quite frankly, it was something I felt like I needed to share this evening, albeit reluctantly. I offer this not specifically of a justification for my absences, but for an explanation to the voters here in this community. You know, I've heard the conspiracy theories and underfunded criticisms and comments made by many people in this community, and I find it necessary that I address the situation. So I thank you, Madam President, for entertaining me at this time.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. I'm deeply sorry for your loss. Vice President Bears.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. My thoughts are with you, Councilor Knight. Motion to suspend the rules to take papers. 23-412. Yeah. 23-464. 23-468. 23-469. 23-463. And 23-467.

[Morell]: All right, on the motion, vices and bears suspend the rules to take those papers in that order, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, I'm sorry, Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Okay, so 23-412 is a paper that has come before us a number of times before. 23-412, Adam Dash, Associates, Attorneys at Law. regarding 12 Dell Avenue, a petition to amend deed restriction petitioners and owners, Gerald L. Alves and Janet R. Alves. I think we've read this paper a number of times, unless council would want me to read it again. I think we're happy to hear from the petitioner as to where we are and what's before us tonight.

[Dash]: Madam President, I'm Adam Dash 48 Grove Street. Some of those with me are Gerald and Janet Alves, the petitioners. I'll give you a brief update as to where we are, and then I'll ask you to bump it to the next time. Since we last saw you, we've been working on the terms for an agreement with the Office of Planning, Development and Sustainability so the Council can amend the existing development restriction on the 12 Dell Avenue property. We have the framework of an agreement whereby the Alvarez's will make a payment in lieu of providing affordable housing on site, and this will avoid all the complications we've been encountering in having an affordable unit and having the disabled son and the other family members in there. and whether they qualify, and having to go through a lottery system. And it's sort of complicated this entire situation. And working with staff, it seems everyone's in agreement that a payment in lieu of providing the unit on site so that an affordable unit could be built somewhere else solves the Alva's problem and the city's problem all at the same time. So what we're working on now is two formulas which one to use to come up with the number. And then secondly, when would the payments be made? Because obviously, Alvarez's aren't wealthy people. They would have to get these out of the sale of the units. So those are the two bits that are still outstanding. I think staff and I have been working on that. We fully expect we'll have an actual written agreement to come with you on the 19th. So in staff's preference was rather than have you vote at contention on coming up with an agreement tonight to go forward and just come with the agreement next time. I just wanted to make sure that all of you got to vote on this because you've all spent time on it. And I know not all of you will be here after the 19th. So nice to have met you, although not for very long. Thank you for your service. I spent two terms on the select board at the helm. I understand. So with that, we would like to continue this to the 19th so we can complete the agreement with staff and then wrap this entire thing up.

[Morell]: Thank you, Attorney Dash, and thank you, Mr. and Mrs. Helms, for coming up to so many meetings at this point. Do I have a motion?

[Bears]: Motion to continue to the 19th.

[Morell]: Thank you. Seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Did you have something to add, Councilor?

[SPEAKER_39]: No, no, no.

[Morell]: So on the motion by Supervisor Bears to continue to the 19th, our next regular meeting, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_43]: Thank you.

[Morell]: Good evening by some bears. What? So it's 464 next. What?

[Bears]: Yeah, that's right above. It's the raising canes page.

[Morell]: That's a little all over. Yep. Wait. Oh, thank you. Petitions, presentations, and similar papers. 23464 petition to reverse sign denial for Raising Cane's LLC at premises formerly known as 760 Felsway, Medford, Mass, 02155, and now known as 519 Riverside Ave, Medford, Mass, 02155, signed permit S23000036. I will turn it over to Councilor Scarpelli, the chair of the signed subcommittee.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. I talked to the petitioner. I think that what we'll do to speed things along is we'll call for a subcommittee on a state-specific. We're looking at January 19th at 6 o'clock prior to our 7 o'clock meeting, and we'll ask for legal representation to be present. the building department that could assist us in making sure we make the right decisions for both the neighborhood and the business. So I motion to move this to subcommittee.

[SPEAKER_52]: Thank you. Yes, Kathleen Desmond for raising canes. I just wanted to point out if it's a Tuesday meeting, it's the 16th of the month.

[Bears]: It will be the 23rd next week. We can make that work.

[SPEAKER_41]: Yeah.

[Bears]: January 16th.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: January 16th. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you. So on a motion of Councilor Scarpelli to refer this to subcommittee seconded by Councilor Collins. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. All right, 23468. Page 15. 23468, under communications from the mayor, request for expenditure from law department claims over $1,000, account 01-151-5762, date December 5th, 2023, to present Nicole Morel and honorable members of the Metro City Council from Breanna Lungo-Koehn mayor. Claimant name, Vigilant Insurance Company, ASO Scarlett Bartlett, date of accident, October 28th, 2020, date of settlement, September 13th, 2023, Date of trial, not applicable. Amount of result, $4,000. Claimant's attorney is John DeRiver, PA. DeRiver, Stevens, Black, and Kozad. Description of alleged claim. The claimant, Vigilant Insurance Co., also ASO, Scarlett Bartlett, seeks compensation for a claim paid for their insured for property damages suffered from effort DPW pressure jetted sewage pipes that resulted in sewage backflow entering the basement of a home located at 58 Hastings Lane The case is a subrogation matter filed by the homeowner's insurer. The city has already settled the homeowner's claim at $5,000, but at the homeowner's request, the release form executed by the homeowner excluded claims from subrogation. The insurer's claim was for $9,437. The necessary release has been obtained from the claimant. Breakdown to amount requested. Medical cost, zero. Lost wages, zero. Property damage, $4,000. Others, zero. Total settlement, $4,000. on a motion to have any discussion from Councilors, members of the administration on the motion of Councilor Caraviello to approve, seconded by- Second. President Bears, Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_41]: Yes. Councilor Caraviello?

[Bears]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Collins? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Morell?

[Morell]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. Oh, it's right here, great. 23469, to December 7th, 2023, to Honorable President and members of the Medford City Council, regarding donation acceptance, dear Madam President and councilors, I respect the request and recommend that your honorable body approves under Massachusetts General Law, Chapter 44, Section 53A, a donation by Patricia Murphy of $500.00 to be used by the Park Division. Respectfully submitted, Brian Lungo-Koehn mayor.

[Scarpelli]: Motion approved. Second.

[Morell]: Motion from Vice President Bears, do we have any discussion? On the motion of Vice President Bears, seconded by Councilor Caraviello.

[SPEAKER_27]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_39]: Yes.

[Bears]: Yes.

[Scarpelli]: Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Yes. Yes.

[SPEAKER_27]: Submitting the affirmative, zeroing the negative, the motion passes.

[Bears]: Madam President. I'm just realizing that I left out of that list 23-462, which is just accepting a grant agreement. Could we just add that? It should take a second.

[Morell]: Do I do that now?

[Bears]: Yeah, I think that would be good.

[Morell]: I'm going to 23-462. Tell me where it is.

[Bears]: It's on page 19. 19.

[Morell]: 23462, to Honorable President and members of the Medford City Council regarding grant agreement with The Trees Medford. Dear Madam President and councillors, I respectfully request and recommend that your Honorable body approve the following order. Order is sponsored by Burano-Window-Current Mayor. In order authorizing a grant agreement between the city and Trees Medford. Summary, the order will authorize the mayor to enter into a grant agreement with Trees Medford in accordance with the provisions of General Law Chapter 44, Section 53A, pursuant to which Trees Medford will provide a grant of funds towards continuing efforts to create and maintain a public tree inventory for the city in consultation with the tree warden. be ordered by the City Council of the City of Medford Assembled and by the authority of the same as follows, whereas the City of Trees Medford wish to continue urban forestry efforts throughout the City and whereas Trees Medford has expressed interest in providing a grant in the amount of $12,500 to the City in support of the services necessary to continue the public tree inventory throughout the City, and whereas, pursuant to the provisions of General Law, Chapter 44, Section 53A, the City may accept and expend such grant monies with the approval of the Mayor and the City Council. Now, therefore, the City Council hereby approves the grant of funds by Trees Medford to the City in support of the services necessary to continue the City's efforts with respect to a public tree inventory for the city and authorizes the mayor to execute the grant agreement as attached to and incorporated in this order. Respectfully submitted, Brianna Lungocard, Mayor. Do we have a member of the trees, Medford or the commissioner, the DPW commissioners on the call? Sorry. Sorry. Oh, he's in traffic.

[Bears]: We were told that meeting was over.

[Morell]: Yeah. Oh, he's in the traffic meeting, not in traffic. Got it. Commissioner McGibbon, are you here? Oh, I think he's on. Do you see him, Mr. Clerk? He's on the phone. some of the participants, and then he disappeared.

[Knight]: Madam President, it appears to be rather self-explanatory. I'm comfortable moving forward, absent the presentation from the administration.

[Morell]: I think we do have Commissioner McGovern. Commissioner McGovern, is there anything you'd like to add with regards to this paper as far as the grant agreement?

[SPEAKER_30]: I missed that. I apologize. I just was able to get on. Can you hear me?

[Morell]: The sound's not coming through the speakers.

[SPEAKER_30]: So is that a yes? You can hear me?

[Morell]: Yeah, we can hear you.

[SPEAKER_30]: Yeah. OK, good. Yep. So this is a joint effort between the city, who won some grant money, $12,500, and Trees Medford, a nonprofit organization. And they are donating $12,500 to the effort. It's a tree inventory program. It's one of the pieces of the puzzle that we need for a lot of the planning work that we're doing for our canopy. So this is a piece of that. bigger picture, tree inventory. Hopefully that provides a little bit more background, yeah.

[Morell]: Thank you. Any questions or discussion from the council? On the motion of Councilor Caraviello to approve a secondary by Crisis Affairs. It's a roll call because it's financial.

[SPEAKER_27]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_41]: Mr. Affairs?

[Bears]: Yes. Councilor Caraviello? Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Collins? Yes.

[SPEAKER_27]: Councilor Nielsen? Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Tseng? President Bears?? Yes. Motion passes.

[SPEAKER_43]: Thank you, Commissioner McIver. All right. 23-463.

[Morell]: to Honorable President and members of the Medford City Council regarding loan order a city with water systems bond. Dear President Morell and members of the City Council, I respectfully request and recommend that your honorable body approve the following loan order. City of Medford loan order water bonds be ordered that the 3,422,000 is appropriated for the purpose of making improvements to the city's water system, including constructing and reconstructing water mains and other costs incidental and related thereto. that to meet this appropriation, the treasurer, with the approval of the mayor, is authorized to borrow said amount pursuant to Chapter 44, Section 8.5 of the General Laws, or pursuant to any other enabling authority, and to issue bonds or notes of the city thereafter, that the treasurer, with the approval of the mayor, is authorized to borrow all or a portion of such amount from the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority, pursuant to the MWRA's local water systems assistant program, and in connection therewith, to enter into a loan agreement and or financial assistant agreement with the MWRA and to accept any grants or the project from the MWRA, provided that the amount of the authorized borrowing shall be reduced by the amount of any such grant received from the MWRA.

[Bears]: And- Madam President, motion to waive the remainder of the reading for a summary.

[Morell]: On the motion, Vice President Bears to waive the remainder of the reading in favor of summary, seconded by Councilor Carballo. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. City Engineer Bortella, are you speaking on this or? I am. Okay, if you wanna come up if you wanna Tell us about this.

[Wartella]: City Engineer Cortello, thank you for having me. This is an interest-free loan from the MWRA. We're trying to do some work this spring. And I apologize, we should have gotten this to you a little bit sooner. So if approved, we would request that you waive the three readings so that we could get onto a January bond agreement with the MWRA so that we could start this work first thing come spring.

[Morell]: Thank you. Can't waive the three readings because it's a financial paper, but tonight, ideally. So unfortunately, we can't waive the three readings. I think we could talk to the clerk about if there's funds to get it posted and advertised faster. Thank you. Any questions or discussion from the council? And do I have a motion?

[Bears]: Motion to approve for first reading. Second.

[Morell]: I have a motion from Vice President Bears to approve for first reading, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[SPEAKER_27]: Thank you, see you.

[SPEAKER_41]: Vice President Bears?

[Bears]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Caraviello?

[Bears]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Collins? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng?

[Morell]: Yes, I'm in the affirmative, you're in the negative, the motion passes for first reading. 23-467, I believe that's my paper, so I will go in first to the chair, so vice president Bears.

[Bears]: to 3-467 offered by President Morell, whereas Mass General Lodge, excuse me, Chapter 71, Section 52, places the authority for school committee compensation with the City Council and whereas the Medford School Committee is a duly elected body of at-large members elected every two years with members being paid a yearly salary of $12,000 and whereas the majority of elected members of the Medford School Committee have historically been and continue to be women and whereas the Medford City Council is a duly elected body of at-large members elected every two years with members being paid a yearly salary of $29,359.80, and whereas the majority of elected members of the City Council have historically been and continue to be men, and whereas the ideal of equal pay for equal work is a long-established and accepted principle in our nation, and, whereas, this ordinance would establish pay parity for all members of duly elected legislative bodies in the city, now therefore, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Medford In Chapter 66, entitled Personnel, Article 2, entitled Reserved, the City's Classification and Compensation Plan, formerly included as Article 2, Section 66-31 to 66-40, be updated with the following titles and wages, effective January 1, 2024. School committee member, $29,359.80. School committee chair, $32,550. School committee vice chair, $30,640. School committee secretary, $31,760. Further, in keeping with past practice, these wages will be paid from the Medford Schools budget and paid by the Medford Schools payroll department. All right, so we're going to not do that. Thank you. Hold on a minute. All right. Are we? Are we? OK, thank you. Well, all right, if we're going to disrupt, we're going to have to call a recess. So I'm going to read some stuff, and then I'm going to turn it over, and we're going to have a respectful conversation. This is an initial proposal placed on the agenda by a single member for the first time. How this is going to go is we're going to hear from the proponent, then I will recognize the other councillors, and then we will hear from members of the public. For the public, each person is going to have two minutes. We have a lot of interest in this, and we need to hear from everybody. And I want to make sure everybody can be heard in a reasonable amount of time. Each person will address their comments towards me as the chair, per the rules. As I said, there's a lot of interest, and we need to make sure everyone can be heard in a timely way. I will do my best to give a 30-second warning to the two-minute time limit. And your comments, again, should be directed at me. This is not a back and forth. This is not a debate with individual people. We want to hear everyone's comments. We want to hear them in a timely way. I want to state I'm, as the chair, not going to issue my opinion on this. I'm sure everyone here knows that they can find it somewhere else. I do want to say, before we start, that the purview of the chair is to state facts and to address motions of order. I want to put a number of three facts out there. School committee in Medford has not received a compensation adjustment since fiscal year 2000. In fiscal year 2000, school committee pay was $12,000 and city council pay was $13,500. 24 years later, school committee pay is still $12,000 and council pay is $29,359. Those are the facts I'm going to put out. The rest of this meeting, I'm just going to organize and make sure we have a respectful discussion. I ask that we all keep the facts in mind, that we be respectful, that we don't interrupt each other, and that people please only speak when recognized by the chair.

[Knight]: And with that, I will go- Mr. President, I just want to reiterate the fact that- Councilor Knight, I haven't recognized you.

[Bears]: Do you have a motion?

[Knight]: I do. I'd like to fact check.

[Bears]: I would like to go to- I would like to go to the proponent, and then I will recognize Councilors in order that they raise their hands and indicate to me that they would like to speak. President Morell.

[Morell]: Thank you, Vice President Bears. So first, I'd like to amend my letter if I could, Mr. Clerk, for the record. My language was not clear. Though the school committee has largely been women for the better part of a decade, it was more evenly split before that. However, my statement stands about the makeup of the city council and how hard it is for women to break in there. Only a small number of women have ever served on the city council in Medford's history, with two more joining in January. I would have meant to strike both references from the whereas if I could, thank you. Historically, the school committee has been the only elected body where women could serve while city council remains majority men to this day. Going back more than a hundred years ago, there've been multiple women on school committee in Medford, whereas the city council has been almost exclusively men until more recent history. Historically, school committees have been paid less and valued less than that of city council statewide, countrywide as an accepted fact. One reason I brought forth this resolution is to interrogate that fact. School committee has many statutory powers outlined at the state level. They play an essential role in the city, a role that's getting more involved and more complicated in the current political climate. And like many city Councilors, they're on call essentially 24 seven. But yet this body has always been seen and continues to be seen as less than. One reason to me comes from a conversation I've had many times with my mother, a 35 year public school teacher. is that the school committee is an extension of the schools. Schools and teaching are seen as women's work, largely because it's one of the few ways women could gain employment. In a country where we undervalue or often do not value women's work, be it caregiving roles, aides, paras, teachers, social workers, nurses, and the like, regardless of who is serving in these roles, men or women, we do not value them in the way that we should. This is not to equate any of these positions as they are very different. I absolutely understand that and believe that. But it is to note that when we undervalue work for a long time, changing the financials and the mindset around it becomes hard. Simply reaching for equity of pay seems like an overreach. Equity of opportunity is another important reason I brought this forward. This resolution is about who's not in the room. I've been to many trainings and brainstorms where folks struggle with how to bring diversity of experiences and voices to the table in many, many spaces. Diversity, which has been proven to make boards and organizations more successful. It's something we struggle with here, but it's not unique to Medford. The one answer that always comes back in these brainstorms and these thought projects is paying folks for their time. I've spoken with many folks in Medford who want to be more involved, but it doesn't make financial sense for them to get a babysitter to attend a school committee meeting, let alone commit to multiple years of pay that barely covers the cost of childcare or loss of learnings they would need to cover regular meetings, negotiating meetings, grievances, executive sessions, and the day-to-day essential role of responding to residents. By saying we don't value this position, we say we don't value the insight, experiences, and representation of folks who do not have the financial support and caregiver support that is needed to give to these roles. This excludes folks doing shift work, folks who need two jobs to get by, people without free or low cost childcare. No one does these jobs, these elected jobs for the pay, but the lack of it certainly keeps many folks from seeking them and having a representative body. I've been having these conversations long before I even ran for council, so I wanted to bring this forward before the end of my term. This equity discussion is important to me, and equity delayed is equity denied. However, I absolutely do hear you, and I really want to thank the folks who have reached out to me on email over the past few days. I appreciate those just willing to hear what I have to say. I understand your feelings, absolutely. And I know there are many folks eager to talk tonight, and I'm eager to hear from you. So reflecting on this, I would further amend this paper that I would hope for a phase-in over time to either these amounts or amounts that reflect similar cost of living increases to the council or other city employees over the past 24 years. nearly two and a half decades where there were no such adjustments for the school committee. Also understanding it's the end of my term, as I did not seek reelection to spend more time with my almost two year old, a testament to the trade offs of these types of jobs. My motion is to send this to the committee the whole so that the incoming council may consider it if they so choose and explore what they would like based on the conversations we have here tonight and ongoing conversations. So I thank you for your time. I thank you for your respect as I share this tonight. I know it's a topic that people feel very, very strongly about, and I absolutely understand. And I thank you, Mr. President.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I'm gonna go just address the motion, and then I'll call Councilor Knight, Councilor Collins, and then if I see another hand, they'll go next. But just before we get there, on the motion of President Morell- Second. To amend the The motion, I think there were three amendments, two strikings to whereas, and then- Yeah, that has to be an amendment, yeah. Okay, amendments to strike whereas, two of the whereas clauses referencing majority membership based on gender, and also an amendment to consider phasing this in at a different pay amount, and to refer to Committee of the Whole. Is there a second on that motion? I think Councilor Collins. Councilor Collins, is there a debate on that motion? I heard Councilor Knight, and I recognize Councilor Knight at this time.

[Knight]: Mr. President, just on the facts, I believe you stated the school committee's salary has not increased from a figure of $12,000 per annual. Mr. President, you did mention that the school committee's Monetary figure may not have changed since the year 2000, but I do believe that their compensation structure has changed, which is something that's important to point out. Previously, their compensation structure was that of a stipend, which made the position a line item budget item. And now it's turned into a pension eligible health insurance eligible benefited position, which therefore can become what would be called an unfunded pension liability. So that's something that we also have to take a look at as we move forward. But the pay structure did change from the way that the committee was compensated to the way they are currently compensated previously, where stipends were added and included into their salaries to raise that pay and reflect pensionable monetary gain.

[Bears]: I'm not aware of health insurance's eligibility. I know that we were not eligible, and I don't believe that's true for the school committee either.

[Knight]: Point of information on that, I do believe if the mayor's in the room, she can tell us when she was on the council how she collected health insurance.

[Bears]: I'm aware that the council used to be health insurance eligible, but that changed.

[Knight]: When she became mayor and didn't need it anymore?

[Bears]: Well, I won't speak to that. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, Councilor Bears. Thank you, President Morell, sorry, to the chair you're sitting in, for introducing this paper. I thank you to everybody who's reached out over the past several days and took the time to be here tonight. I want to acknowledge, I know that there's a lot of engagement around this issue. I know there's a lot of strong feelings about this proposal. And I just, before I state my own thoughts, I just want to acknowledge that and thank you for being here. Thank you for engaging in this process. As Councilor Bears said, this is a process. This is the initial introduction. This is what this process looks like coming up and sharing opinions and working through things together. Thank you for being here. Want to use my time to explain my support for looking into this proposal, my support for achieving pay equity between the city council and school committee, my view on what this proposal is and what it isn't. I do not believe that this is in any way incompatible with what I think has been a core and shared goal of the City Council, at least in the one term that I've been a part of it, which is supporting all of our public school employees, supporting Medford Public Schools, and trying to ever improve the conditions of everybody that touches our public school systems. The students, their families, the teachers, the paras. all of the workers in our schools that help students and students' families thrive. I do not believe that this proposal is incompatible with that shared goal whatsoever. I think that this the equity between the school committee and the city council is something that I've wanted to, that I've hoped to have the opportunity to vote on ever since I first took office. These are two elected bodies. I know how hard we work. I have some glimmer of perspective of how hard the school committee works. They have responsibilities that we don't. I think it is outdated that our bodies are paid differently. That is the core reason for my support for this proposal. And even if it were to stop right there, that would be enough for me. But I see that this draws in a larger conversation about what we can and can't do in Medford, what we have and haven't done in Medford so far, especially every June during budget cycle and really all year round. If you watch the city council meetings, if you watch the school committee meetings, we are constantly talking about the resources that are afforded to Medford public schools, the people that work in them and everybody that experiences the work that is done in those buildings. And we are constantly in this conversation about why aren't we doing better and how can we continue to do better to better value and better resource what goes on in the schools, and better value and better resource the people that do the work of the schools. This proposal, I think, has brought up those values and those feelings and that imperative that we have to keep doing better. What I don't believe is that this is an either-or, and what I don't believe is that this is a zero-sum game. I know that if this proposal were to go forward even as written before amendments, This is not, this would not take from the same bucket of money that would otherwise go to the workers that contribute to MPS students experience. Hang on, please. Thank you, thank you for letting me speak. This year, we found out that we had a 25 million sum of certified free cash, $25 million. When we talk about what we can and can't do in Medford and what we have and haven't done, I think that we need to stay, I try to stay, laser focused on what our real opponent is. Our real opponent is austerity budgeting. I believe that we have the money to value the people who choose to nominate themselves for school committee and go through the process of running and seek election and serve in that role. that we have the resources, that we can marshal the resources to do better by everybody who contributes to the Medford public school system. We talk about it all year long. We talk about how little authority the school committee, sorry, we talk about where the city council's authority lies and doesn't lie when it comes to making direct appropriations to our budgets, including the school budgets. We talk about this. all the time, often in great frustration. We don't have the power to influence bargaining units here in the city council. We don't have the authority to make appropriations whatsoever that is out of our purview. I know, speaking for myself, there's been countless times when I wished it was in our purview, because I'm so frustrated by what I see in the line items in the budgets that we have to vote yes or no on, because that's all that we can do on those budgets. So when it comes back to this proposal, Due to the constraints of our jurisdiction here, this is something that we are legally allowed to vote on. And there are many things that we will never have the opportunity to vote on, because that is not within our purview. When something comes in front of me that is an opportunity to discuss and interrogate, is this an opportunity to do a good thing? I want to take that opportunity. And I do not think it is in any way incompatible with continuing to do better. in the many areas, the many school-related areas where we need to keep doing better. It's not a zero-sum, and it's not an either-or. I look forward to hearing the discussion tonight, and I look forward to continuing to hold ourselves accountable to do this right, and to do right by all of our public employees, and to do as many things right as we can, all at the same time. And I don't think that we have to choose between one or the other. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Councilor Scarpelli.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you. Council Vice President. I'm gonna speak as someone who no one else in this council had the opportunity to do. That's someone that both sat on the school committee seat and in the city council seat. And understanding, I'll give you my opinion, then I'm gonna share a lot of emails, phone calls, conversations I've had in the last few days. And I think they're very telling. When you decide to take the chance and the responsibility of becoming an elected official, it's being elected official. It's truly a position of service. You're doing it for a reason other than the paycheck. I've never looked at it. Now, as I grew up in this city, I took it upon myself to watch people that led the way for us. And they gave back in service, whether it's coaching little league teams, whether it's volunteering at the food bank, whether it's joining a school committee that didn't make any money, or whether it's taking the leap to the city council, because you think you could make more of a difference. So I generally, personally feel that understanding the process of a pay structure being a major issue, I think it's sad. I think it's sad to look at it that way. To think that I had one phone call that said that understanding that we can get better candidates if we pay, that's sad even to think of. Imagine, imagine voting in people that are there for the money. That's horrifically frightening to me. As we move forward, what I found very, very glaring in this situation, the issue of gender equity in pay. And we received a dialogue from three female school kid members that knew nothing about this, that didn't want anything to do with this vote and think that they're totally against it on the record. There were two members that didn't reach out to me. two members that didn't reach out. And there were two members that I find it, it's very frightening that these two members are the catalyst behind this motion. So let me share a few things. As a member of the council, we had an opportunity to stand up at budget time, didn't we? Didn't we? We did. And three of us stood up and said no. But some others didn't. I'll revert to most important thing that bothers me more than anything are the phone calls that I got from the people that work the hardest in our school district. By the way, majority of them are women. they're getting their butts kicked. And what's glaring to this, it's something that we need to turn to our school committee members that's more important than a pay structure. From what I've heard, and I'm sure we'll hear it tonight, that the possible legalities of lack of coverage in special needs classrooms, lack of coverage with teachers absences, lack of coverage in severely disabled classrooms, that's a problem. So I'm glad this came up in the sense that this brings something forward. I think the city council does more, and I think its responsibilities are far more succeeding. Doesn't mean I'm better than a school kid member at all. But our responsibilities, our charter, give us the responsibility far greater than our colleagues on the school committee. And to be honest with you, I'll make a motion later on, whether it's tonight or another night, that since we've cut our time, I'll make the motion if equity, financial equity is serious to the issue, then I would make the motion that we bring the city council pay down so we don't have to. because Mr. President, Mr. President, again, this city councilor didn't join or didn't ask their constituents to hire, to vote for me so I can make a paycheck. We're not rich, we're not gonna get rich. And when everybody ran for their office, when our school committee ran for their office, you're gonna have some candidates that are gonna be stepping in seats that are in the audience tonight. I'm sure if you ask them, if this was a big concern in their eyes, they would absolutely flat say, no way, that was not the intention at all. So I just think that this seems like there's fingerprints with only two spooky members that are pushing an agenda, and I think that this is a sad, sad day when we have unions that don't have contracts, when we have teachers that don't have coverage, and more importantly, please, more importantly, that I find frightening as a former teacher, that I've talked to a few paraprofessionals, I have two teachers that told me straight out that we have classes, high level, low leveling functioning classes, with special need classrooms, with lack of aids, with lack of certified teachers, and they're just covering them just to have a body in the room, and that's against the law, and that our kids, they don't deserve that. So that's the biggest issue. So I know this is going to be left on the next council in January. But I think it's important that this happens. These phone calls, these conversations, I think it's great, because I think that's the dialogue we need to move the needle where we need to move it to. And I'm not going to be critical, but I will to all of you. Get involved. Don't come out just when it involves your issue, because that's what we're seeing. And we can't do that anymore. So thank you, Mr. President.

[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. I do want to say in 2021, we had 85 meetings. That's when we had weekly meetings. This year we had 79 meetings, so we have not cut the meetings in half. I will go to Councilor Tseng, Councilor Caraviello. Okay.

[Tseng]: I know many of you all taught me just a few years ago. I'm sure you'll know that I'm a fan of nuance, but that not everyone's a fan of nuance. And so I just wanted to preface my remarks with that. I do actually agree with the principles of this resolution. I think in execution, we need to tailor it. We need to improve it. But I do appreciate that President Morell has put out a proposal to address a problem that we have in our city, a can that's been kicked down the road since the year I was born. And I understand how politically difficult it is for the president to introduce this motion and to take so much flack on it. It's never easy to discuss the salaries of elected officials. And whether you agree or disagree with it, we were always bound to have this conversation at some point, and so I do have to give President Morell props for having the courage to bring this out. I also need to note that procedurally, I've heard a lot about, you know, why haven't you talked to other members of the council or other members of the school committee about it? We do have laws that govern how we introduce ideas, and the most transparent way to introduce an idea is to put it on the City Council agenda. It doesn't mean it's going to be passed tonight and it's an ordinance, so it would require three readings anyways. But usually it's the most transparent approach because we can hear from you, we can hear whether you agree or disagree, we can send it to subcommittee and work on it even more. And so that's procedurally how it usually works. I did say I support the principles of this, especially given the fact that school committees being paid a wage or a salary that few in the private sector would ever pay for any job, really. I'm sympathetic to the argument that school committees and schools in general are seen as female institutions and treated accordingly. And in other words, there's societal expectations to lower pay outcomes. And this is really what the crux of the gender pay gap is. I will say my first reaction to this resolution was, why is the school committee being paid the same as city council? But I had to reconsider why I even asked that question in the first place, especially given what we know as people who engage with the law, that school committee exercises, you know, city council exercises purview over city hall, which is about two-thirds of the budget, and the school committee exercises authority over one-third of the city budget. And in addition, state law does give the school committees many more powers and authorities that we don't have as a city council. I do know from personal experience, whether you like the job that they're doing or you dislike the job that they're doing, they do spend a lot of hours on their job. I think in addition to that, as a young person, as a person of color, and as a recent student of social sciences, I know from both my personal experience and from the numerous studies from top researchers that better pay for public officials does increase the quality, diversity, and experience of candidates who run for public office. Too often, low pay doesn't justify the time that we spend being public officials, and the negativity and hostility of politics in recent years only exacerbates that problem. Those, you know, we can, I do agree in principle that people running for office should run out of service. And I, you know, everyone who runs does run out of service, but we can't ignore the economic reality that for people who aren't as economically well off, like students or people of color, we can't just take time out of our days to do political stuff like this instead of working another part-time job. It's just, it's just economic reality. We, you know, there are experienced folks who can't justify taking on higher paying projects and research after research shows that government that pays better moves more efficiently. I hear a lot, and I totally agree with teachers generally, about wanting more young people to run for office, because we have more, especially for school community, because we have more recent experience at the schools. And it's a reason why I ran for this office in the first place, because the schools, I believe, should be the number one budget issue. And in the last few budgets, I've sat down with the mayor to negotiate millions more for our schools, successfully. It's been the number one conversation when I walked into the office.

[Knight]: I just want to know when these discussions happen. I'll recognize you after Councilor Caraviello. Thank you.

[Tseng]: Now, okay, that being said, I am sympathetic to all the ideas in opposition to this. I've spent a good amount of time these last few days talking to teachers, and I agree in principle that the school committee should pay, should reflect pay increases that teachers get. Now, we should also keep in mind that the committee hasn't had an increase since 2000, and using a salary calculator, if we compare the percentage increases, this proposal is somewhere in the ballpark of where that pay has grown in the last 25 years. But, you know, that's all details. And I think we need to have, again, nuance matters. I think we need to have a conversation about what that looks like. We should also keep in mind that we do face large structural challenges when it comes to problems in the city and in our schools. I think that's obvious to everyone who goes into the schools, and I have been into the schools. But we have to consider amounts, and we have to consider percentages. This proposal takes up 0.05% of the city budget, and we have $25 million in free cash that we keep pressuring the mayor to use and spend, and she has. She has spent that. We've talked to the CFO about this, and the money does exist for it without pulling out of the budget for schools. I think the logical trap here isn't that this isn't an either or situation, it's a yes and. I think this brings me to maybe the most pressing point for me, why I would be amenable to an idea like this. And it's not really any of the reasons listed in the whereas section of this resolution. It's because I'm a strong believer that government should push ourselves to make better decisions in the future. make decisions now that put us in tougher positions in the future, that force our hand and make us, that force us to make better decisions. I think when we send this to committee, I think we can craft a good deal that's better in execution, but also pushes us in a political direction where we have to accept demands for better for our teachers in Paris. It's a little bit different thinking. It's not a reason I've heard online or from anyone in the last few days. But that's how I see the political picture of this, is this forces the city government to be more accountable to our teachers and paraprofessionals. I think, again, considering all these principles makes me sympathetic to this resolution, but I do think that there can be tinkering done in committee, and that's why I'm particularly grateful. that President Morell amended her paper before introducing it to us. I think it would be especially reasonable to discuss changes in timing or phasing in, even though, again, the money that we need to solve large structural challenges citywide in our schools far exceeds the amount that's proposed. Do you think it would be prudent to phase this in as we get more information about the greater financial picture with the FY25 budget and with the new budget ordinance that we're intent on passing soon. That way, we can make sure that this is additive and not subtractive. Thank you.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. I, for one, never ran for this job for the money. I never considered it a part-time job. I think considering this, running for this as a job, is insulting to me. Because I ran for the last 12 years for community service and for the goodness of the community, not for the money. For those who don't know, when I first got elected to the council, former councilor Pintus here, the pay was $22,000. And we used to get a stipend for expenses. And somewhere along the line, They changed the stipend and they ran it into the pay. That's what brought the pay up to the $28,000. But the original salary when I ran was $22,000. So let people know, we didn't get a raise. No one voted us a raise of that money to get us up to that amount. So I think that was maybe eight, nine years ago when that happened. I'm here because I sat here for the last 12 years because I wanted to be here. I'm not here for the money. Most of the money that I make, I donate back to the community. I'm involved in the community. I'm involved in a small community, then everybody in this whole council together on different boards, commissions, and groups. So if anyone that ever sat here for the money, sadly mistaken. I'm gonna support Councilor Scarpelli's motion to drop our pay down to the pay of the school committee. If everybody wants to be fair and equitable, and I was one of the votes when we changed to the twice a month meetings, I supported cutting our pay in half also then, and I'm gonna support it again tonight. That's where this councilor stands and will always stand.

[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Must have some English teachers in the room today. Fiction, maybe a little fiction. There's some fiction going on here tonight. You know, it's a good story. But to me, being the cynic that I am, it does somewhat sound like a money grab for the faces that I share in campaign literature. You run as a slate, and then the first thing you do is move to give raises. I think that presents a questionable standard of ethics that the next council is going to have to deal with. And I don't think it's fair to them that they're going to be put in that position. When looking at the paper on face value, the paper is contrary to law. Um, you know, we look at MGL section 71 chapter 71 section 53 as the enabling language to give the city council the authority to issue raises. But if you look what that section of the general law says, um, in its first line, it says the school committee shall serve without compensation, but they may be compensated for this services by a majority vote of the city council. This has already been done. This has already been done. The language in the general laws that speaks to salary adjustments is governed under Chapter 44, Section 33A. And this section clearly reads that the annual budget shall include the sum sufficient to pay the salaries of all officers and employees, fixed by law or witness. Our budget's passed, and these figures are not included in that budget. The section also reads, no new position shall be created or an increase in any rate made by ordinance, vote, or appointment during the financial year subsequent to the submission of the annual budget, unless provision, therefore, has been made by means of a supplemental appropriation. Without a money paper, we can't change the ordinance based on state law in my reading, which is a question for the ever so invisible and elusive city solicitor. I thank the council president for entertaining me. Included in our packets this evening were a series of amendments that I have offered. In response to this paper, I would spare the chairman the long duration of having to read through it and motion that it be included as part of this paper going forward and hope that the new city council and their divine wisdom acts in the best interest of this community. We hear a lot of talk about a revenue crisis, the need for the city of Medford to raise more revenue the need for a Proposition 2.5 override. And when this issue came up previously, there was some discussion about whether or not it was really a revenue crisis or a spending problem. And I think that when we look at a paper like this, I think that it shows that we do have a little bit of a spending problem. And a solution to hard decisions a lot of the time is to throw money at it. And that does not fix systemic problems and issues. So with that being said, I do thank my council colleague for the time and do ask that the paper be included by way of a motion to waive the reading and include.

[Bears]: Is the proponent of the paper amenable to including those questions as an amendment? Sure. Great. So Councilor Knight's papers will be referred under the motion to Committee of the Whole. If it passes, to the Committee of the Whole for further discussion along with the paper. Any further discussion by members of the Council? Seeing none, we will go to members of the public. I will alternate between in person, in public, and Zoom. If you are on Zoom, please raise your hand. If you are a member of the public, please stand in line. If you do not want to stand in line, try to grab a seat. I think we all will respect not cutting or cutting. Again, we're going to do two minutes per person. I would like everyone to please provide their name and address for the record. And we will start with the person at the chair. Please provide your name and address for the record. And I will give you a 30-second warning.

[nSaVwvkinrs_SPEAKER_00]: My name is Maureen Lavin. I live in Stoneham. I was born and raised in Medford. I am a Medford public school teacher. And I had no intention of speaking this evening. I'm going to just give you a few bullet points of things to consider. One, our paraprofessionals make $17,000 a year. They work full time. with our most at need students full time. Some of their pay is beyond that, but there are some people that are trying to make a living off of making $17,000 a year. That is ridiculous to me, okay? The teachers have been without a contract How long did we go, a year and a half or so without a contract? So if the school committee would like a raise, maybe they should hold signs out front during city council meetings. And beg for a 3% raise. It's ridiculous to me that we're having this conversation. We have been threatened by our current central administration of job cuts, upward of 30 teaching positions are at risk of being cut.

[Bears]: 30 seconds left.

[nSaVwvkinrs_SPEAKER_00]: Well, you guys had more than two minutes, so.

[Bears]: I just ask you to respect the rules. Thank you.

[nSaVwvkinrs_SPEAKER_00]: And my position at the high school got cut. I am the only female physical education teacher at Medford High School. So you want to talk about gender issues. There's not a co-ed public high school in the universe that doesn't have a male and a female physical education teacher. I got moved down to the middle school, which is great. I love the Andrews Middle School. But we have left our high school without a female physical education teacher, which means There's no one to oversee the locker room, the safety of the locker room. We know bathrooms have violence in them. We have it documented in the high school. If you've been into the women's locker room in Bedford High School, it's bigger than I don't know. It's probably three times the size of this room. So gender equity. Yeah, I have an issue with that. This is, I believe, is a Title nine violation. So I don't know how to register that, but that needs to be brought up. boys and girls should both have equal access to locker rooms, right? It's just no brainer. But if the school committee would like a raise, then maybe three, let's start with 3%. 140% seems mind blowing to me. Thank you for your time, I appreciate it.

[Bears]: I'm going to Anne-Marie Cugno on Zoom.

[Buckley]: Say it again?

[Bears]: I'm going to Zoom, Anne-Marie Cugno. You can unmute. I'm going to ask you to unmute again. just waiting on unmute. All I can do is ask you to unmute. I can't unmute you myself. Okay. Name and address for the record, please. Thank you. So we can hear from everyone. There's a long line.

[Cugno]: Okay. So I just want to say, well, first of all, my name is Anne Marie Cunha. I'm a former Methodist School Committee member, and I'm also a former president of the Massachusetts Association of School Committees. I'm going to just say, I'm not going to try to repeat what Councilor Scapelli and what Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Knight have said. But let's call this what it is. I am going to be respectful, but I'm also going to be very honest. And that is, this is not a gender issue. This is a power issue. And the reason I say that is because with what morality, after knowing that our teachers have not had a contract in such a long period of time, with what You know, with what audacity are we sitting here listening to city councilors and school committee members that are constantly trying to push a two and a half increase and surpass that and constantly saying that we don't have enough money in our budget? No, I did hear councilors say that you have found $25 million. $25 million could be used and utilized in so many more things. than just the school committee increase or a school committee increase. And again, I want to reiterate, I was on there for 12 years and the people that are now taking these positions, or I shouldn't say that, the people that have these positions were the same people that stood behind the chair rail stating that our positions were supposed to be a volunteer position with no stipend and no salary. They're also the same people that said. They are also the same people that said that we needed to be available 24-7 whether or not we had jobs. We had to be courteous in letting them speak in public when they came to City Hall. This is the same. Board committee that now has changed their rules that they only work up until nine o'clock at night They table whatever they want to table because they have jobs of their own and some have made them their own jobs I don't know who is videotaping, but I can't tell you That it's a coincidence that every single person who is against this has been muted And the clapping has been muted also and everybody else has their opportunity to speak what they want.

[Morell]: Point of information, it's the way Zoom works, there's like a lot of sound, it cuts out.

[Bears]: Zoom prevents loud disruptions so that people's speakers don't get blown out on their computers or their phones.

[Scarpelli]: So when you clap, it stops it. Silence is the whole thing. That's not a Zach against George thing.

[Cugno]: Okay, I'm not I'm not accusing anybody I'm just letting you aware so that way other people know the same thing I Apologize that I cannot be there in person. I would definitely want to be there but I have not been able to leave my home in a year and a half. So with that being said, let's look at what is important before we give a raise. And if the school committee wants to give a raise, go ahead, give them a 1%. Give them something that everyone else has been waiting for and has been fighting for. If we want to be fair to the people that we're representing, let's be fair.

[Bears]: Thank you, Anne-Marie. I'm going to go to the podium. Mr. Penta, name and address for the record, please. You have two minutes.

[Penta]: I have a two-page statement.

[Bears]: Okay.

[Penta]: My name is Robert Penta, Zero Summit Road, Medford, Mass., a former member of this August party on the City Council. Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 71, Section 52, does grant to the City Council, by a majority vote and by the city charter, the responsibility of how much members of the school committee get paid. But historically, the city council has paid more than the city school committee because the council's responsibilities exceed those of the school committee. The city council responsibilities include, but are not limited to enacting ordinances, zoning, fire and police, public safety requirements, setting the city's tax rate, and has the final authority over the city and school department budget. As examples of major differences between one challenging equal pay for equal work between the city council and the school committee. Further, just as in any business, job responsibilities and pay are what one is applying for. Under this proposal, it is a gender attack being disguised as pay parity, for equal pay for equal work, for which it is not. The proposed school department 100% plus pay increase will be paid from the Medford Public Schools. Let's take a look at what that means. Annually, we are barely able to meet the resources we have now at our school's disposal. If we cut further any of our school resources by not funding them, and instead giving them 100% plus salary increase for school committee members, we should be concerned as to where we are heading. If we are to cut some $90,000, because that's what it'll come to, plus each year from going forward from the school department budget, the results can possibly affect the following. Fewer instructional hours for students. Elimination of AP classes. Increased class sizes. Elimination of some athletic programming. Elimination of support for some school activities. Elimination of school librarians.

[Bears]: Mr. Penty, you have 30 seconds.

[Penta]: I think the rules say five minutes if you check the council rules. Reductions in council services, school security being at risk, reduced custodial cleaning and maintenance, after school programming, migrant student education support, and unbeing prepared for migrant student educational support. I meant the public schools short and long range term should not be subject to this. And if the school committee pay increase does go through, what do you say about the salary for the everyday school paraprofessionals? As example, every class assistant under five years would finally earn $30,000. And everyday kindergarten teachers after five years would only earn $25,980. This after five years, while the school committee would receive $29,000 annually for a part time job with no everyday reporting requirements and responsibilities is at best. If the city council is to accept this ridiculous proposal, maybe the council should then set a pay scale standard for both the city council and the school committee for years of service as compared to pay scales a standard for just every other municipal employee. Using the presently proposed gender issue of females being more in number who are elected to serve is not only discriminatory, but a sexist allegation that has no merit. And what about a person who claims to be other? And what about when trends tend to go back to when men become more elected than women? Being elected is a gender neutral opportunity, not to be disguised as pay parity for equal pay for equal work. As I said in the beginning, job responsibilities and pay are the guidelines for which one is applying for. As of this meeting, there has been no input from community members on the Medford School Committee regarding this 100 plus salary increase. As a thought, and this flows right into what you said Councilor Scarpelli, if the council is so inclined to accept this measure of allowing this red herring issue of more females than males being elected officials, then maybe in the spirit of physical conservatism and the council being magnanimous, the council should entertain being paid the same $12,000, as we said before, annual salary that the school committee is currently paid. Therefore, on the city side, if the city can save $90,000 annually from their city council salary, which can be used for municipal needs, the school department, one sentence, the school department will not lose the $90,000 annually that can go to public school education.

[Bears]: Thank you.

[Penta]: One sentence.

[SPEAKER_37]: Mr. Penta, I just gave you an incredible deference, thank you for your time.

[Penta]: I wanna close by saying my following sentence. Mr. Penta, Mr. Penta. What?

[SPEAKER_37]: Please.

[Penta]: Why, hey, wait a minute.

[SPEAKER_37]: I'm asking you to respect everybody's time here. Okay, so if you have to- We have rules. Why are you exempt from the rules, Mr. Penta?

[Penta]: Let me ask you a serious question. I served on this board for 36 years, and we stayed here sometimes till 12 and one o'clock in the morning to let everybody speak, not to be shut off.

[SPEAKER_37]: I'm letting everybody speak, thank you. I'm going to go to Eileen Lerner on Zoom. Eileen, you're recognized. Mr. Penza, please, thank you. Thank you for your time.

[Penta]: I want to make my last sentence. Do you mind?

[SPEAKER_37]: Save the sentence.

[Penta]: No, I might. OK. I shall close by saying, why did the city council president put this controversial proposal on the agenda now? Was it because of the busy Christmas season and it being at the end of the year? With the hopes that nobody would observe it and find out. But they did. But they did.

[SPEAKER_37]: It was not, but thank you. Eileen, name and address for the record, please.

[Lerner]: Okay, so my name is Eileen Lerner, and I live at 9 Adams Circle in Medford, Mass., and I support the proposal. I think that $29,000 is a part-time salary. How could anyone survive on $29,000 in Medford? It just doesn't make sense to me. And I do recognize that we need to pay so many people in our school system more money. It's absolutely clear that we need more employees and we need to pay the ones that are there more. And it's an injustice that they're not getting what they deserve. But I don't think that creating more injustice makes for justice. Two injustices doesn't make justice. And I think that you know, to say that anybody is working for the money, just because they're going to get $29,000 is ridiculous. That's such a little sum of money. And we've just found out this lot of money that can pay for it and hopefully for more than that. And I'd like to see everybody. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you. Thank you for your time. Again, I would just ask everyone to respect everyone who's speaking. We're hearing from everyone. As I noted, there are a lot of people who want to speak, and that's the reason there's a time limit. I ask everyone to respect it, regardless of who they are. Ms. Brandly.

[j0qza4ZNB3E_SPEAKER_18]: Hello.

[Bears]: Please name and address for the record. Two minutes. I'll give you a warning, and I'm giving a little leeway here. Thank you.

[Branley]: All right. Got it. So you put me in a tricky position. I'm Nicole Brandly. I'm at 54 Norwich Circle. And as a newly elected school committee member, I questioned if I should speak tonight. I feel like I'm torn between everybody, right? So as always, I also know I couldn't stay quiet. So I look over the agendas for both our city council and our school committee as they become available. And when I read the city council agenda last week, I was shocked at the pay increase. There's been a lot of accusation on social media that newly elected members are somehow pushing for this. I had no idea. I actually had to read the proposal twice. And then I asked someone else to read it for me. I did not run for the school committee seat for the salary. Although I do appreciate the salary. But if you've seen me up at this podium over the last year, you know my motivation and surely where my heart is. I'm the only person in this city, and someone can correct me if I'm wrong, I'm sure they will somewhere. I'm the only person in this city who can say that I've been elected to a school committee seat, but have also worked at the city of Medford as a kindergarten aide. So I held that beloved position for six years, and according to my W-2s, because I'm a good record keeper, in 2020, for my 180-day full-time position, I earned $17,642.93. I left that position. because it is a not fair living wage, and it's still not. And like too many unions in this city, we also had no contract at the time. I've sat at most of these meetings, whether it's for good reason or bad, and George's, Mr. Scarpelli's right, we have to come all the time. I've sat here and watched all of these unions sit here in solidarity with each other, asking for contracts, asking for a fair living wage, for their rightfully earned COVID pay, There are still unions in this city negotiating their contracts, most namely the police. As a newly elected official, I believe the $17,359.80 pay increase for us on this school committee is fiscally irresponsible.

[SPEAKER_36]: our current 30 more seconds.

[Branley]: Okay, our start our current stipend is fair. And although not equivalent to you on the city council, I'm not sure it really should be. I don't think anyone would begrudge the school committee a fair living wage increase like other unions in the city have agreed on. But this proposed increase is exorbitant. It's not in line with the increases anybody else has gotten in the city. And I have sat right here in this room listening to the budget hearings and never once have I heard that we have any extra money, especially in our school budget. I also think this proposal itself causes even more animosity between elected officials, like all of us, and the same people that voted us in to do the right thing. So let's do the right thing.

[SPEAKER_37]: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Framley. And thank you for your respect for the rules. I'm going to go to Christina McGordy on Zoom, and then I'll come back to you, Mr. D'Antonio.

[McGordy]: Hi, I'm Christina McGordy, 24 North Street. I just wanted to say, and I'll try and keep it brief. Since I learned about this proposal, I've kind of had a lot of back and forth emotions. My first initial reaction was just sort of like, well, we don't have the money for that. But after hearing the thoughtful discussion behind where it came from, I definitely I definitely appreciate and agree with the spirit behind this. And for the people who say that being an elected official is, you do it, you don't do it for the money, you do it because you want to provide service, like, of course. But it also comes from a place of privilege because you are able to do it. And I say that as someone who is able to not work and pretty much volunteers 100% of my time. I do it because I want to do it, but I also know that I'm in a unique position from a lot of other people who can't do it. So I think it is important to think about increasing the pay because like as people have stated, it will help us to get more diversity and we need that on our representative bodies. But I also want to say that as a parent of two kids, as someone who started subbing because there were zero subs at our school, I just, I want to obviously make sure everyone is thinking about you know, equal, fair pay for everyone. We pay our subs $90 a day. That is much less than they pay in surrounding communities. I know there's shortages everywhere, but how can we get people to come work and cover when, you know, we don't pay as much. So it's just sort of like, I just want to say that. just to put out there. I like the idea where it was, you know, Nicole mentioned doing it in, or Ms. Morell said something about doing it in a phased approach. And if we have this like extra free money, I would love to hear that. Okay, they're able to increase the paraprofessional pay and the sub pay so that everyone feels like they're getting compensation for their work. But okay, thank you. That's all.

[Bears]: Thank you for your time. I'll go to the podium. Mr. D'Antonio. Thank you. Name and address for the record, please.

[D'Antonio]: My name is Anthony D'Antonio, 24 Hicks Avenue in Medford. I brought the wrong damn glasses today. Anyway, here's my take on this whole thing. Financial integrity in politics, especially within the role of a city councilor, stands as a cornerstone of ethical governance. The significance of maintaining an unwavering financial integrity cannot be overstated as it forms the bedrock of trust, transparency, and accountability within the realm of public service. At its core, financial integrity in politics embodies a commitment to honesty, responsibility, and ethical behavior in handling public funds and resources. As a city councilor, one assumes the crucial responsibility of managing taxpayer money and making decisions that directly impact the community's well-being. This trust bestowed upon the Council necessitates the highest level of ethical conduct, particularly in financial matters. The ramifications of financial impropriety can be severe and far-reaching. Misuse or mismanagement of public funds not only undermines the public's confidence in their elected official, but also erodes the foundations of democracy itself. It jeopardizes the credibility of the Council and the entire institution of governance, casting doubt on the motives and intentions behind policy decisions. Maintaining financial integrity as a city councilor goes beyond adhering to legal statutes. It embodies a commitment to ethical leadership. Transparency in financial dealings, proper allocation of resources, and rigorous accountability measures are imperative. Striving for transparency ensures that constituents are aware of how their tax dollars are utilized, fostering trust and credibility in the council's decisions. Integrity in financial matters also extends to ethical fundraising and campaign finance. Ultimately, financial integrity is the linchpin that upholds a councilor's ethical compass. It forms the basis for sound decision-making, fosters public trust, and strengthens the democratic process. As a city councilor, embracing and championing financial integrity isn't just a duty, it's a commitment to serve the public interest with honor, honesty, and unwavering ethical standards. Thank you.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Mr. D'Antonio. Mr. President. Mr. President, if I can. Just one second. Mr. Sharpell. Just a point of information. There's a comment that's out that there's $25 million we can spend. That's not true. It's not. There isn't $25 million. I'm not trying to debate. It was something that was in our free cash. It's not like it's still there and that we have to use it. It's not. That's not. Just a point of clarification.

[Bears]: The free cash reserves are currently at $25 million. Until they're certified, they can't even be appropriated. Just one moment, we have someone on Zoom, and then I'll come back to the podium. Kathy Kreatz, school committee member on Zoom, I just asked you to unmute, and I'll just ask for your name and address, and then you'll have two minutes.

[Kreatz]: Yes. Hi, my name is Kathy Kreatz. I live at 391 Fulton Street, Medford. Sorry, I can't be there tonight. I had something going on here at the house. Yep, so I just wanted to, you know, kind to set something clear is, you know, the first time as a school committee member that I heard about this raise was by reading it on the city council agenda. This was not something that the school committee discussed or even received any communications from the city council on. We were, you know, in my own personal opinion, We're not even thinking about a raise. This wasn't even something we were discussing. In eight years that I've been on school committee, at one point, there was a raise discussed years ago. This was before COVID. And we declined, voted it down, because we wanted to make sure that if there was any additional funds, it went to the school budget, to the teachers, to the students, and the needs of the schools. And if there's any additional money, which there isn't, it should go directly to the schools. It should go to the needs of the students and the teachers. You know, I've heard from, you know, a lot of the members that have spoken tonight and the community has come out. And, you know, I totally agree that if there's extra money, this extra money for salaries should go to the parents to raise their salaries, not the school committee members. Our job is a volunteer job, and I've been doing it for eight years, not expecting any pay. It requires dedication, love, commitment, just being there to hear and understand and listen to the needs of everybody in the community, the teachers, the students, the families, caregivers. It's not about the salary. I was confused about the resolution. Where did they come from? Who did they speak to? I was really confused. And I just want to set it clear that the school committee did not have any meetings. We were not talking about raising our salary. And I'm talking from my own personal opinion. Nobody's reached out to me. It was not a thought in my mind. I was surprised and confused and disheartened by the resolution. It was just something that we're not expecting. And I did hear, I got into the meeting late, but I did hear Rick Caraviello, Councilor Caraviello mentioned that a pay cut in their salaries to make the salaries equal. You know, I think that would be the best way to make the salaries equal across the two different, you know, boards between the school committee and the city council. If there's going to be any changes, then maybe a decrease in the salary to bring the councilor salary back down to the school committee salary. Okay, so I got my point across and I wasn't prepared and ready to speak, but I just hope that I made it clear that I object to this resolution and I hope and I pray that it does not pass tonight. And thank you for your time. Thank you, everybody.

[SPEAKER_37]: Thank you, Kathy.

[Bears]: Thank you for speaking. Just one second. Kathy brings up a good point. People may have come into the room or joined. since the motions were made. But the current motion on the floor is amendments from President Morell and Councilor Knight. Councilor Knight's for some legal questions. President Morell has amended to strike some sentences around the majority makeup of the bodies as well as has suggested that future committee of the whole look at a phase in or or a change to this proposal. So that is what is currently up for. That is the motion currently on the floor is to send this to committee of the whole for more discussion with those amendments. And with that, I will go back to the podium. Thank you. Name and address for the record.

[North]: Hi, Melanie North, 45 Cross Street. Good evening, City Council. I'm speaking as an employee, taxpayer, and parent of Medford and Medford Public Schools. I am beyond insulted about this proposed raise that President Morell and any other council member is voting for. I feel that it is an abuse of power and pure negligence to even consider this preposterous raise. As an employee, we were told that there was just no money in the budget. In fact, Dr. Cushing just stated last week to McGlynn in a meeting that the budget is the tightest it's ever been. There has also been talk of eliminating even more positions and more layoffs in the next school year due to budget constraints. However, on the heels of winning the election for many of you and the mayor, you have conveniently located $117,000 in the budget. The paraprofessionals were told that although we were invaluable, the school committee was not able to provide a livable wage. If this 140% raise were to go through, the school committee members would be making more than our most qualified kindergarten aides and classroom assistants that work tirelessly year after year with multiple jobs to survive. We work an average of 1,300 hours and more each school year. Most, if not all, overtime is unpaid due to budget cuts. There, this is also being proposed as a general equity issue where the school committee has been dominated by females, which historically has mostly been men. We have held, that have held the school committee positions. However, paraprofessionals are by far female dominated. So shouldn't we be considered for 140% race? If you're making this about inequality, we clearly have some work to do on the negotiation table. Medford is the highest paid school committee in all of our surrounding areas. I've done the research. But we were told that there is no money from the very school committee that you're planning to give this raise to. It seems quite coincidental that suddenly money is appearing to benefit them and not the employees in the trenches every day working with the students to prepare them for the future. If you want to entice people to run, it should be so they can be part of making our district the best it can be, not because of the wages that we are going to receive. You do not run for office to get rich. You run for office to make a difference. Medford Public is also actively trying to recruit paraprofessionals every single week. Who would want to work in a district that will support political roles and not employees? We have so many other issues that surround this raise. How about our custodial staff that works tirelessly, even through COVID when everyone else was home, they still don't have a contract. What about the police department that serve and protect our community? I believe we should be working on getting both contracts done before anything should be discussed about the school committee. I'm on the front lines each day. I've been punched in the face, which has resulted in a black eye from a student. I've been pushed, scratched, and I get verbally abused each and every day. I worked for a prison for almost two decades. I've never been struck by an inmate or dealt with the stuff that I deal with on a daily basis. That says something. A grievance was put in since last year to be paid for the coverage that I thought I'd been told there's no budget to pay this, yet I show up to work each and every day with our most at-risk students. Why? because I love what I do. I'm heavily involved in after school programs that I personally run, not because I'm offered money, but because I believe that students should be given the opportunity to succeed in all areas of life. As a parent, taxpayer, and an employee, this rate is This raise outrages me. Considering our schools are bursting at the seams, McGlynn Elementary is pouring water in kindergarten classrooms every time it rains or snows for the last few years. When outraged parents demanded this be fixed due to mold issues, we were told it's the flashing, just not in the budget to fix. We need a new high school, and the list continues to grow. Yet, Medford Public Schools pays so poorly that potential employees who would excel in our schools and be amazing teachers and or paras go to other districts. It's really heartbreaking that the City Council does not see the need for proper staff and better wages over raising the school committee's raises. The numbers don't lie, it's in black and white. This does not seem like the fiscal responsibility that Sissy Hall preaches about. My direct question to you is, the 2004 budget has already been approved for $179 million. I do my research. Can you tell me what line item will be reduced in the school's budget to compensate for these new raises?

[Bears]: Thank you for your time. I'm going to go to Zoom. I have Rebecca on Zoom. Give us one second, Rebecca, and then name and address for the record. Please try to respect the time. Thank you.

[Rebecca Davidson]: Rebecca Davidson, 101 Yeoman's Ave. Good evening, everyone. I support the fact that this proposal is being presented this evening. It's really important that we have socioeconomic diversity on our elected bodies so that these bodies fully reflect our city. No one is running for the salary. However, not being paid adequately for your time will absolutely constitute a barrier to running for those who are struggling to make ends meet. This is a barrier not just on school committee, but in government participation in general. So I appreciate the spirit behind this proposal. I'm a parent of two kids in Medford, and as many have said, the current pay that our dedicated, hardworking Medford public school staff is nowhere near adequate. And I wanna thank the teachers that have spoken this evening and highlighted their service to the city. This has been an opportunity to hear about and spotlight additional equity issues our city is facing. And from what I'm understanding tonight, there's no way for this body to direct funding to increase pay for MPS staff. That would have to go through different mechanisms. But the intent behind this proposal signals strong support for pay equity within Medford public schools as well. And my hope is that we can move this conversation to a place where our budget reflects the need to increase salaries. And for that, we need to be able to explore thoughtful ways of bringing additional revenue to the city. Thank you for bringing this proposal to the table as an opportunity to raise awareness of multiple inequities facing our city, resulting from inadequate funding, so that we can move forward to make the city a better place for everyone.

[Bears]: Thank you, Rebecca. I'm going to go to Anna on the podium. Just name and address for the record, please. Thank you.

[Silberman]: Hannah Silberman, 15 Maynard Street.

[SPEAKER_36]: Go ahead.

[Silberman]: All right, my name is Hannah, and I work at the second largest school in Medford. That's the Roberts Elementary School. It goes Medford High School, Roberts Elementary School, and then I think the Brooks after that, and then the middle schools. So we need to make that make a little more sense. I think we should talk about rezoning before anyone talks about getting a raise. At the Roberts, we have 576 students. We're running out of physical space to contain them. 576 students, and yet we have the same amount of support staff as the other elementary schools, and some of which are half the size. We're down to a skeleton crew, and administration continues to fatten up on school funding. All we ever hear as teachers is that there isn't enough money, not enough to hire more classroom aides or to pay them more, not enough to raise our substitute pay, not enough money for paper even. ESSER funds are running out, and those funds pay for over 30 people's salaries. And what's going to happen to their jobs next year? We've been told drastic cuts no need to be made, and adding these substantial raises is only going to make that worse. And you aren't going to find any teachers here who disagree with you about equal pay for equal work. This is a profession that's underpaid because it has historically been the work of women, as you said, President Morell. And yet, instead of correcting this, Medford is continuing to do what Medford has always done, spending school funding not on the people doing the physical, emotional, and mental labor of supporting our students, but instead spending the money on those who are already in power. We're talking about paying the school committee the same amount or more as our classroom aides for a part-time political job. School committee stipend pay should be proportional to the pay of the people doing the work face-to-face with those students. If you want to show that you care about equity, this is not the way to do it. Councilor Collins Councilor Tseng you said that this is not a zero sum game but then you need to show us, because so far this is all we see. And that's what we're talking about here tonight, the funding of upper administration, while the students and the staff are drowning. We need to prioritize the schools themselves. Please do the right thing and spend school funds. on what's really important. We need to fix our buildings and increase substitute pay. We need more aides, more social workers, more SPED and Yale staff. We do not need to spend even more money on upper administration. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_37]: Thank you Hannah.

[Anthony]: My name is Anthony Guillaume and between this meeting and the healthcare negotiations tomorrow, I live here today. I am the president of the Medford Teachers Association, and I appreciate the call for civil conversation, but my member's anger is real, it is palpable, and we're being antagonized into this anger by this proposal. We're being antagonized because every day we walk into the schools, and we hear that amount of money is available, and we see where it can go. We see a lack of substitutes, we see a lack of aids, we see a leaking roof, And then we hear that the school committee is our bridge, is our connection to the city. We passed a vote of no confidence not a year ago. 96% of us said we do not have the confidence in the school committee during contract negotiations. That has never been rescinded. We never said, oh, okay, it's good now. And yet we're being told this is all connected. This isn't a zero sum. Well, I can appreciate the call for civility. The anger is real and that has to be recognized. I want to talk about some part-time jobs if we're talking about part-time job pay. I want to talk about, first, our football coach, who's been celebrated all this year producing Massachusetts athletes of the week. That coach has paid $3,000 to $6,000 less than all the surrounding cities, and even that is comparable to Medford. Our soccer coach, $2,000 to $3,000 less. Our hockey coach, $2,000 to $3,000 less. Our basketball coach, $2,000 to $3,000 less. Move out of athletics, move into the school. Our Gay-Straight Alliance advisor, who makes our LGBTQIA plus students not only feel welcome, but celebrated in our schools, gets $600 to put on dances, to organize protests, to speak at rallies. Our senior class advisor, who puts on prom, who does fundraising, who works with the class, gets $1,000 for the year, which is an increase from when they're the freshman class advisor, and they get $600. The advisor to our Black Student Union who puts on our celebrated Haitian, who helps, I should say, the students do most of it, as they have said, but supervises our Haitian Flag Day and our Black History Month assembly, no compensation, does it out of the goodness of his heart. We're all doing part-time jobs to make it work. And some of us don't have the option to step away from our part-time jobs. It's not a matter of something we'd like to do, it's something we have to do to survive. So I ask now that this money that is available by whatever means necessary be moved back into the schools. I ask that we enter this new year on a platform of transparency and trust and not of nepotism and top-down priorities. I ask that we come to work in a city that believes and cares about us. And I thank you all for your time.

[SPEAKER_43]: Thank you.

[SPEAKER_39]: I'm going to go to President Morell, and then back to the podium. President Morell.

[Morell]: I just have a brief point of information. I just want to note that no money has been moved anywhere just at this point. No vote has been taken. I just want to make sure that's clear, because I understand the intent of what you said. I just want to make sure that's clear, because that happened.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Name and address for the record, please.

[McKay]: My name's, can you hear me? My name's Joanna McKay. I'm a teacher at the Roberts Elementary, so I'll give 35 Court Street. So I'm a fourth grade teacher. I'm a member of the Teachers Association. I was on the negotiating team. So I understand some of what you go to, to an extent. Like many people tonight, I'm here because the extent of this raise being proposed confuses me. It disheartens me. Quite frankly, it disgusts me. I'm not here to argue whether or not they need a raise. Everyone should get a raise. That's a whole different point. I don't understand the level of this raise and the context in which it came about. From speaking to many people on seeing comments on social media, it's evident that people don't agree with this. It's too much of a raise. And the idea that it has to do with equity and parity and diversity is ironic to me, as what you heard everyone saying. I don't get it. I reached out to Nicole Morel. I asked who she spoke to. She spoke to folks. And she spoke to Paul Rousseau and Jenny Graham to find out about the legalities. And then I asked you, Zach, who you spoke to, and you spoke to many people, and you spoke to Jenny and to Paul.

[SPEAKER_37]: I have spoken to many people.

[McKay]: That's fine, about the legalities of it. So what confuses me is how do two separate people, committee members, council members, sorry, speak to the exact two council members and no one else. There are eight people, six more phone calls. Is that difficult? We have over 450 people and we survey every single one of them. We don't assume their needs when we negotiate. It's a long process before we bring anything to the school committee. Okay, so that confuses me, that's disgusting. You heard from Kathy Kretsch, you heard from Nicole Branley, I heard from them myself, I heard from Mia Mustone, they never heard of this before, they don't understand it. I also heard that other members felt this way, but I won't quote them because I won't assume since I didn't talk to them, unlike what you did. I do find it interesting that Paul Rousseau and Jenny Graham, who are often very vocal on social media, radio silence. So your community feels this is fishy. Your community feels that you're in cahoots. If you don't think that is true, then I don't know. It's mind boggling to me.

[Bears]: I said I talked to them. So I'm just saying that's who I talked to.

[McKay]: But I'm just saying that your community feels that this is a backhand deal that that we're in cahoots. I'm just telling you what the public meeting. Yep. Okay. Well, I'm just saying speaker to say that this is for diverse candidates, I find that insulting to every diverse candidate out there that they would only do this job for money. Okay, you did. I can read you the quote to say that you could do this job if you're financially privileged. I suppose if you don't, you did say that. So for people that don't pay mortgages, or have very rich husbands, that's who we're going to attract. That's it. Disgusting. Because you're financially privileged, you can do this job. So someone that's not financially privileged can't do this job?

[Bears]: I'm just saying it's less likely, and that's statistically true.

[McKay]: It's less likely.

[Bears]: I'm going to stop now.

[McKay]: Statistically. We're going to get first. No, that's OK. The extent of this raise is why people are upset. the teachers, the aides, the paraprofessionals, to think that a part-time school committee member is gonna make more money than them is outrageous. These people that get kicked, spit on, yelled at, sworn at. I really invite people, the community, to come and have you have one session where people kick, bite, spit on you, pee on you, where you have to stop and change a diaper, and see how well you do your job. Because these people are rock stars. I want to know if they take this raise or if a raise somewhat substantial like this goes through, how they're going to look their employees in the face. How are they going, the powers need to negotiate coming up. Take this raise, 140% raise and look them in the face and tell them there's no money. Okay, tell these custodians, these custodians who have not gotten a raise, these police officers, look them in the face and tell them that that's what you deserve for a raise. These parents that have their children getting rained on and are sucking in mold, look them in the face and tell them there's no money in the budget. And I'm gonna leave you with two things. One was the same question about where it's coming from in the budget. The same budget that we told has no money is bleeding and that we were in jeopardy of laying off teachers because the ESSA funds are, all right, that's my one question. Where is it coming from exactly in the budget? And then I'm gonna leave you with a statement. I have a very good friend who's finishing his term on Tewksbury School Committee. And I said to him, how much do you make? And he said, and I told him what the proposal, he said, and I quote, oh my God, that is crazy. We make $3,500. It is a part-time job. For 30,000, I may have to come and make a comeback. Ha, ha, ha. This job is a lot of work, but anything over $5,000 and they're stealing. I leave you with that.

[Bears]: That's a cut. You're good. You're on. Give me an address for the record, please.

[gqBOBLNPKLQ_SPEAKER_14]: And just, you know, thank you.

[Bears]: I'll let you know when you have 30 seconds.

[gqBOBLNPKLQ_SPEAKER_14]: Thank you. And I'm also president of the Bedford PAP Professional Behavior Specialists, Kinney-Gotton Kids Corner, Kinney-Gotton Assistants, and anything that has to do with teaching assistants and instructional tools. When I heard about this, I called Rick. I called George. Love calling Adam, gonna miss him. And I was hoping that... You know, they all said the same thing. We don't think that a city council could propose this. But Adam said tonight that there was something in the books that could happen that you guys could give a raise. Well, here's the real, I'm just gonna give you statistics. A girl was hired yesterday as a kindergarten assistant at $18,868. She's in one of the most high needs classroom. She is making $18,000. It will take her nine years to make $29,000, what you're proposing for Paul Russo, Jenny Graham, McLaughlin, and everybody else. So I propose that if they want that raise, they need to come to a MEEP classroom, a kindergarten classroom, and assist the assistant. just to do the same job as the assistant. When they change diapers, when they chase kids because they're unsafe and they bolt, when they use Google Translate to see if the kid's sick or has to go to the bathroom, then I give you my blessing. Take the $29,000 as a school committee member. But I'm telling you, $29,000 for each of them for 22 meetings, I hate to say the word, but it's the S word, okay? And I can't say it in public, because I wanna be, my students are watching, but don't worry, they kick us every day, so don't worry about that. So my point is, I'm going into negotiations with the superintendent. I'm taking staff with me, all right? Can I say to the super, I want to put it to a vote because it's on the city council, that I want 140%. Will you support 140% for women who are putting food on the table? Will you support that? Then I will give you my blessing for $29,000 for the school committee. But I want the school committee to come and do my job. One day, Do I have my two minutes of up?

[Bears]: They are Gina, thank you.

[gqBOBLNPKLQ_SPEAKER_14]: Thank you so much, Zach. I appreciate you, I appreciate you, I appreciate you, thank you. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you for your time. No one on Zoom, we'll go to Ms. Douglas.

[gqBOBLNPKLQ_SPEAKER_14]: Hi, hello everyone.

[Reporter 1]: Shaolin Douglas. I'm a president of the Method Teacher Association, resident 414 High Street, Method, Massachusetts. To say I am disappointed to be here tonight to discuss a raise is beyond words. I didn't write anything because I'm really disappointed. Gender equality, sure. I'm all for gender equality. I think it should be number one. Your school committee refused to negotiate FMLA, paid leave for our, maturity paid leave for our female teachers. That's gender equality. They wouldn't even talk about it. They held that over our heads. Refused to talk about it. Gender equality. Tomorrow, I will be meeting with the mayor and other members to negotiate our health insurance that we have not had a new health plan for over what to a year and a half now, almost two years. And I've talked about that $25 million in free cash. Ms. Collins, with all due respect, you said we found that money tonight. But maybe I misunderstood you. That money's been there for a while. And when we've asked about it, we've been told we can't touch it. We can't use it. And I think you've made that clear. You can't use that tonight. Am I correct?

[SPEAKER_36]: Correct? There's no, Mr. Lewis, there's no money. Right. This is not a money proposal though.

[Reporter 1]: Right, I understand that. But even if we were to come and say that's where that money's coming from, we have been told that money is not available. We have been told there is no money for FMLA. There is no money for opt-out. There is no money for better insurance for our employees. There is no money for our custodians. There is no money for our, police. There's no money for our cafeteria workers who came in during COVID and never missed a day. My sister being one of them who got COVID three times. And you know what she's gotten? Nothing. A goose egg. That's what she's gotten. It's a disgrace. And all of you should be ashamed of yourselves for putting this forward and not thinking of the little people out there. You're right. My sister can't run for school committee. And nor could I. But I will. I will run for school committee.

[SPEAKER_43]: Because I don't really care. 30 seconds.

[Reporter 1]: Seconds, I understand that. And as president of the Method Teachers Association, where I worked many nights till three, four in the morning. You wanna know what my stipend was? Are you ready? And that was my last year. So don't tell me about gender equality. Don't tell me about equal pay until you give it to every single person who works in this city. I'm done. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_39]: Name and address for the record, please. Two minutes.

[James O'Leary]: James Chip O'Leary, 30 Norwich Circle, lifelong resident of Medford and taxpayer. I'm also a custodian.

[Bears]: Sorry, go.

[James O'Leary]: I'm also a custodian in the school system. And we have not had a contract in two and a half years. And from what I'm hearing, it could be longer. I have a couple of questions. And first, Mr. Scarpelli, maybe you can answer this. When you were on the school committee, did it ever come before you about putting a raisin? Never. So why all of a sudden now is this coming out? This is the problem right now in Medford, two divided houses. Medford's suffering big time. People don't want to come to Medford. People are taking their kids, sending them to other schools, so forth. Why? Because we're divided. We have storefronts that are empty, but worried about giving raises. Let's get our act together, make Medford better, and put the right foot forward. Next year, two new councils, a new council, a new school committee have to work together. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you for your time.

[Morell]: I do just want to thank Ms. Douglas for bringing that forward about the PFMLA. I wasn't aware of that fact. Vice President Bears and I actually introduced a resolution two years ago about extending PFMLA to the entire city. And we were essentially rebuffed by the administration about it being a possibility. So it's really helpful for me to know that that is continuing on. It's something that still is on our books. It's nothing that's been disposed of. So I hope that the next council will continue the conversation around it.

[Bears]: Ms. Douglas. I just asked.

[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you.

[Bears]: And I just want to clarify, we wanted, we proposed that we'd be the first in the state to take it on. We were told the same thing that everyone else here has been told. And I think we all would like to see the city spending more of its reserves on the priorities that we all share. Thank you. I'll go to the podium.

[Thompson]: Jamie Thompson, 86 Lawrence Road. There's been many more intelligent, better spoken people that have already covered most of my points. I just want to, you know, I understand the spirit that this was put forward with. I appreciate the amendments to it because that's been challenged. Councilor Scarpelli, Caraviello and Councilor Knight, your comments about pay equity by offering your salaries to compensate that. I appreciate those. These are service positions. People run knowing what they're going to be earning in these roles. I hope that the city council that's coming, the school committee that's coming, and the mayor's office can work together. We need to get the city solicitor. We need to get the community development director. We need a building commissioner. And we need to get a tax base in here that can support so that we can fund the schools and the employees for what they need so that they can make our schools better.

[Bears]: Thank you for your time.

[SPEAKER_39]: If you name an address for the record, please.

[SPEAKER_09]: Maria Geneska Micheli, I live at the Brooks School. I have been an educator in the city for 30 years, born and raised. I was not talking tonight, but I've compelled. I can go on and on, but I'm just going to piggyback on Gina that spoke a couple of minutes ago. She put out there that the school committee should come out and do their jobs, to do the jobs of the paras and the kindergarten aides. I'd like them to just come to the schools. I'd like them to just come. to visit the schools, to come read to the classrooms. Not to come only when it's an election year. Pass out the appellate. Well, maybe they can't. I don't know if they can pass them out or whatever. I don't know the laws. That's why I'm only a kindergarten teacher. Don't come only. I know. I know. Don't come. for the photo ops, come visit us in the classroom. Come see what we're doing every day, all day, all the staffs. I have not seen a school committee member, might be the last one was George Scarpelli, when he came to read, how many years ago? I can invite them to come. I have no time to invite them to come. They know the addresses. They know the schools. Come to the schools. That's all I know. I could ask for a lot more. And I can go on and on and on. But that is my two cents.

[SPEAKER_37]: Thank you for your time.

[Bears]: I do want to add, and I don't know if this law has changed since Councilor Scarapelli was on the school committee, state law asks and requires that school committee members be invited because they don't want school committee members walking into the schools unannounced, uninvited, to pass out pamphlets per se. So that formal thing is a requirement.

[SPEAKER_47]: Are they invited? We're invited. We're officially inviting them.

[Bears]: I hear you and I think a lot of people would like to come. I don't know if it satisfies the legal requirements, but thank you. I just wanted to put that out there. Name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_47]: Sarah Sossfield, 141 Street, Medford. I was also not going to speak and felt compelled and started writing notes while people were speaking. I love that the committee feels that you know, you could take a recess because people aren't showing expected behavior. We don't have that opportunity in the classroom. If people aren't showing expected behavior, we need to continue on with business as usual. And while you're actually speaking, I want to be able to throw things at you. I want to be able to scream in your face. I want to be able to maybe bite you here and there, but you also still need to carry on and hope that everyone else here is retaining the information that you're putting out.

[Bears]: There was a recent court case, you may be well able to do most of that. We just ask that everyone do it one at a time.

[SPEAKER_47]: And that's fine. Okay. Well, we don't still have that opportunity to have them to tell a child, sorry, you need to wait your chance to do your unexpected behavior. I hear you. Okay. So also with that being said, Let me say, let me go down a little bit. Any parents that have had me as their parent in the classroom know that my little nuggies come first in my life. They are always first. And we also know that kindergarten isn't considered mandatory in the state of Massachusetts. But we are always being given extra ELA time. We need to give extra science time. We have extra all of these things that are mandated. We are losing out on playtime. We are losing out on social and emotional support. We are losing out on all of those things. Who has to offer that support? Me as a kindergarten aid. I have to give these kids teach them how to deal with their peer support. I have to show them what it means to play in the playground and if someone pushes them, what needs to happen. That doesn't happen anymore because we don't have playtime or kids to be able to have that one-on-one time in the classroom anymore. So to tell me that school committee now is going to get more money than I am in the classroom, who works hard every day, that they now work harder than I do in the classroom, is very disappointing and it's very frustrating. And I have to say, if it goes through, you will see my resignation. Because I can't live on my 17 to $20,000 a year. It is absolutely not possible. It is absolutely not possible. So you need to have additional support. So to say that, well, this is my extra job. I have three extra jobs to have to maintain what I do in the school system. I have a college degree, speech and hearing science. I could be working, making way more money doing than what I do as a paraprofessional in the kindergarten classroom. But I love my kids. I love my parents. I love my community at the McGlynn. I wouldn't give it up, but it's now getting to the point where I need to choose between my school family or my home family. And my home family is suffering because I'm not receiving the pay that I frankly deserve and work for every day. I am a female. I choose Medford. I just want to feel like Medford chooses me for once in a while.

[SPEAKER_43]: Thank you, Sarah.

[Bears]: Thank you. Name and address for the record, please, and I'll let you know when I have 30 seconds.

[Giddings]: Jimmy Giddings, and I live at 25 Vernon Street in Melrose. I teach at Roberts Elementary School. This is my third year teaching kindergarten. I have a para in my classroom. For the first six months, when I first came to Medford, I did not. And I can tell you the big differences as soon as one came. And I've been with my same power for three years, and I don't think that's like that in a lot of instances. I think powers turn over quite quickly in a lot of places because of the low pay. And we couldn't do what we do without them. I see this proposal on the table, and I think how I can look at my power in the face, And it's not fair because I can't fix it. The people that can fix it are before me. All of you are charged with this duty to help them. And I'm asking you, all of these people are asking you and the people on Zoom to help them. We want them to feel like they deserve to be here. And the only way we can do that is by increasing their pay. If we take money away from the school, it's going to take money away from potentially going to them. And the only way to fix that is to make this change. I understand why that you brought this to the table. And I think that is a good thing to discuss. But unlike city council, it takes directly from the schools, and that's where the big difference is there, because the money that's going to the schools isn't going to go to the para first, and it should. I can't tell you how often I entrust my para with responsibilities. She runs tables in my centers, and I trust her to almost run the classroom as I'm in my small groups, and she can do that. So many of the other paras do too. And they can do so much better if we show them their trust by giving them what they deserve. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you for your time. I just want the clapping so we can hear you. Name and address for the record.

[Petroni]: I'm Mary Jo Petroni. I'm at 12 Greenhalgh Street. Just laying pinto 108 Woodruff Avenue. Michelle left me. My third person, I want, we are three of the secretary's administrative assistants that work for the school. So I'm going to tell you, we are the heart and soul of the buildings. And I have the distinct opportunity to work with the custodians who have not had their contract and who do work very hard because we're short staffed. And I am the one that I'm calling them all the time to clean up their mess. And this is disrespectful to everyone that works for the school department. And especially for those people who are putting in their time and effort, we get no extra money for all the extra things that we do. Michelle works at a school where, I don't know how many parents, we filled in just Lane and I occasionally at outside schools. I can't imagine what their life is like. And I want to thank you, Mr. Scarpelli, Mr. Knight, Mr. Caraviello, because I know you guys and what you've done. And I want to think back to Mrs. Van der Kloot, Mrs. DiGentimasso, Mr. Brady, Mr. Pompeo. Those are the people that served for 25 or more years on the school committee. And there are other names that I can't even think of. And those are the people that came with the actual attitude. You are here to serve us. It is not a job that you expect to earn money for. And Mr. Singh, I appreciate that you need to earn more funds on Mr. Beers. I have worked for two jobs. I have raised my family. My kids have got work, two jobs, because that is the life that we have, unfortunately, in order to survive in this state. We know that. And the fact that you're trying to take money away from the schools for the kids, for the grandchildren that I have attending these programs. It's absolutely disgusting. And not only are these people correct in that we are underpaid, we choose to do this because we love Medford and we love the students. And again, every one of us could make double, and I'm not kidding because I worked in the real world, double what we're earning right now. Just Lane speaks multiple languages. And if we didn't have her half the time, we wouldn't have people be able to register in our programs. So I want to tell you that the reason why you ran for an office is because you want to serve your community, not make a living. So I thank you.

[SPEAKER_37]: Thank you for your time.

[Bears]: I do want to note, I believe Ms. Vanden Heuvel, Mr. Giacomasso, Mr. Brady, and Mr. Pompeo were all on the school committee in 2000. And that budget that passed that year had a similar increase from $5,000 to $12,000 for the school committee. So just want to put that out there as a fact. Well, that's just a fact. Is there anyone else who would like to speak? We have one person on Zoom. And I will go to them. Name and address for the record, please.

[Lillard]: Hi, this is Kim Willard. I'm a resident of Medford at 10 Florence Street. I am also a special education teacher at the Curtis Tufts High School. I would just repeat all of the points that my colleagues have said about the budgetary issues that we've been going through for the past decade, and would like to formally invite any school committee members or any city councilors to the Curtis Tufts High School to see the kinds of understaffing that we're going through. We currently do not have a science teacher. What?

[Bears]: Sorry, just we have some noise there. I want to make sure everyone can hear you, Kate.

[Lillard]: Oh, sorry. We have not had a science teacher at the Curtis Sucks for the past two years. Currently, the director of our high school is teaching three science classes without additional pay because she was told past practice principals don't get paid to cover classes. Um, because that's not a thing that happens anywhere else Um, we don't have a secretary. So the nurse answers our phones. We haven't had a nurse in the past week because there's staff out at audi's outing Um throughout the district in the past couple weeks um, so Again, just inviting any city council members, and I know a few, George Scarpelli and Rick Caraviello already have a connection to the Curtis Tufts, so you're familiar with our program. I'm not sure about anyone else, but anyone who would like to see what's actually going on in the schools, I can invite you to mine. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_39]: Thank you, Kate. And the rest of you, please.

[Buckley]: Walter Buckley, President of Local 1032-340 Salish Street. I'd just like to know, with this money, you have to pay more taxes in order to fund these positions and pay these raises. How many board members, how many council members own a house in Method?

[Bears]: I don't think we're gonna ask personal questions.

[Buckley]: Oh, okay. I thought we were debating, but I was wrong.

[SPEAKER_36]: We're not actually.

[Buckley]: Fact, fact, here's a fact for you, not many. So it's getting passed on to the homeowners, that's a fact. Second fact is, the teachers negotiated out of the contract for two years, the fire department for almost three years, the police are out of the contract. It would take us over 40 years to get the raise percentage that you are proposing here, over 140% raise. That would take us 40 years to get that pay raise. So when we talk about equity, we have a secretary who makes $60,000 a year for the fire department. So a person that goes to a meeting twice a month is going to make $30,000. Is that equitable? Is that equity? Is that what we count as equity? No, it isn't. It's sad. And the fact that we have to go out of contract and the mayor stated at the debate that she can't negotiate with unions because they're asking for 9%. but she's gonna get 140% raise, where are they? Where are the people on the school committee that are for this? Where are they? I can't find them. Yeah, that's all I have to say. The people on the school committee that are for this should be there talking about it. It's not fair to these people at all.

[SPEAKER_43]: Mr. Pencil.

[Penta]: Good question, Robert Pencil, Zero Summit Road. It's quite obvious from the comments that have been made here today, whether you're a paraprofessional or you're a full-time employee, you just haven't been treated the correct way. And I think it's incumbent, I believe it's incumbent upon one city councilor who will have the guts and take this resolution and say, receive it and place it on file and kill the issue now.

[SPEAKER_39]: Thank you. Is there any further comment from members of the public?

[Bears]: Seeing none in the room, and seeing none on Zoom, there's a motion on the floor that has been, oh, Councilor Knight. Oh, sorry, Councilor Morell, then Councilor Knight. Sorry, my apologies.

[Morell]: I'll let you know how to remember. I'll teach you.

[Bears]: Yeah, it's not an easy job.

[Morell]: I just want to thank everyone for coming out and taking the time to speak. Obviously, my intention was never to submit this, and to be inflammatory, my intention was to start a conversation. But I think what's come out of this conversation is so much that we don't get to hear on city council. We get the school budget delivered to us as such. We're not at the bargaining table because we can't be. So I think this really illuminates a lot of issues that they either come to us when the budget is already set in stone, or we simply just never hear about them. So I really, really appreciate the time. I'm sorry I won't be there to continue the conversations, at least in this role. But I think a lot of important things were shared tonight and I do just want to make it explicit that I never introduced this as in insult or to say that the jobs are equal to paraprofessional and the school committee. I noted before my mom taught in a poor school district for 35 years special education and I know how essential her powers were to the success of her classrooms. And I just know how much she had to fight and how much she had to put up with and how much I think she's thankful that she retired in 2011 because your jobs are so incredibly difficult and more multifaceted and challenging than they ever have been before. And believe me or not, but I am so, so appreciative of the work you do. And I thank you for taking the time to come out tonight, knowing you already put in a full day that is exhausting. I watched my mother come home after work and just kind of pass it on the bed. I know how hard your day was. So I just want to make that clear again, believe me or not, but I just want to state that. So thank you.

[Bears]: Can we, okay. The council, the council respected all public comment. I just ask that we keep it to one mic, please. One voice. Thank you.

[Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, thank you very much. First of all, I think we can all agree that diversity is important, and it's commendable for a public official to pursue diversity. I also think that this issue before us here sheds light on a perfect example of why diversity of thought and diversity of opinion is necessary when you go to the ballot box and you cast your vote to elect somebody to serve. Because without diversity of thought, without diversity of opinion, what you're going to see is more and more of the same. So I leave you with this. Moving forward, everybody behind this rail makes decisions. based upon what they feel is those in the best interest of the city of Medford in one way or another. And it's not easy to come out here every evening and be criticized and be trolled and be attacked. And all it is is an opportunity for us to have a discussion. Now, Councilor Penta came up and said that someone should make a motion to receive this and place this on file. Then what? It fails, then what? Then what? I think it's safe to say that we're all acting on behalf of the people. And it's that diversity of thought and that diversity of opinion on how do we address issues like this that's really coming into play right now. For these reasons, I'm going to support the paper this evening, because quite frankly, I attached five amendments to it that ask a number of significant legal questions as to whether or not this is even the appropriate process, or whether or not the paper is even in proper legal form. And as we move forward, this isn't going to be the last you hear of this. This isn't going to be the last you hear of it. It's going to come back. When your landscape is out there, blowing the leaves in your yard with an electric leaf blower. You know what I mean? You guys are gonna still be talking about the school committee and whether or not they're getting a raise. That's the fact of the mat, all right? But with that being said, you know, I think that, you know, when we move forward in this community and we think about what direction we're gonna go in, diversity of thought and diversity of opinion is something that we really need to think about.

[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. And I apologize, Councilor Collins, I missed you. frantically looking over here and I wasn't looking over there. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you. It's okay. There was a lot of, it feels cheap to say, there was a lot of really important perspectives shared tonight. I feel like even just saying that doesn't really do it justice, but I wanted to leave the last word to a lead sponsor of the paper. I did just wanted to quickly clarify one of my previous comments, because I think when I mentioned the free cash number, I was unclear, and I apologize for speaking unclearly. I was nervous. What I really meant to say was to try to recenter my comments on what I think is the most important part of most of the conversations that we have in the city council, which is that tight budgets are a choice. And they're not a choice that we make in this branch of government. I hope that a silver lining of this conversation can be elucidating for this body and for the school committee and for the residents, how our budgets get made. It's an ongoing process of making the budget every year. And for us, it just means approving it. We cannot appropriate, we cannot weigh in on collective bargaining. We cannot move money from one salary to another. We're sorely limited in what we can do. And I hope that this ongoing process allows us to have the conversation with the community how our budgets are shaped, and who shapes them, and what limited power lies where, because I think it's beneficial for the community to get a better sense of how that pie gets baked. But I think what makes me frustrated, what I hear in this room tonight, is that we, the administration, willfully keeps urgently needed funding away from the people and services that need it, year after year, on a scale that exceeds by magnitude the scale of these proposed COLA increases. And that is what I'll be focusing on as we continue to discuss this. And I hope that we can continue to center the conversation around this conversation and achieving equity and just what we need in our operating budget year after year. And I thank you to everybody who brought that to this conversation tonight and will in the future. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you.

[Tseng]: Um, you know, I already discussed it a little bit, but I just wanted to reiterate I know many of you will be disappointed with my, you know, when I vote to move this into subcommittee of the whole. But my whole take on this is I wouldn't, ultimately, I won't vote for this if it does detract from the students, right? I think we all agree on that value. Everyone behind this rail agrees on that value, but only by moving into subcommittee can we have those meetings and conversations with financial folks to give us that better picture. We also, as Councilor Collins alluded to it, have to consider the different magnitudes of this proposal versus the actual needs for our schools, which I completely agree. And I do agree that, you know, with huge raises for teachers in Paris. I really do. And I'll stand by you with that. Before this meeting, I encouraged it. I encouraged you guys to push for more future negotiations. But again, we can't have these conversations without moving forward on this. And so I know again, a lot of you will be disappointed. I hope that you guys will call me, email me, that we can have a conversation about this. I know a lot of you know me personally, and a lot of you have friends who taught me as well, and I really encourage more conversation about this, and it'll help inform my views on this going forward, what a compromise looks like, because I think we can broker a better compromise, and that's really my priority. So please reach out, please talk to me, and we'll have an open discussion about it.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Scarpelli, then Councilor Knight. Thank you, Council Vice President. And again, this isn't easy. I think that this is what we agree to disagree. But I think this is what this council is about. not similar to what we're hearing that happens on the school side. So I appreciate that, that we have this here. So, but again, my intention was to listen to everybody, understanding, weighing the pros and the cons. And as much as I respect former council, my motion was going to be received in place on file. So that would be my motion. to receive and place on file. Thank you, because I feel strongly enough that I've heard enough that we need to move forward without this as an issue. Remember, we're going into this with a new council. Why would we have them give them that responsibility? That's what I feel that it's just not fair. So thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. We're going to go to Councilor Knight, and then we do have one more public comment on this.

[Knight]: Councilor Knight. Mr. President, the more I think about this, the more I think that there could potentially be a solution. And, you know, week in and week out we come up here and we have Mina come up and talk to us about all the great things that the mayor's doing, all these grants and these outside contracts that they have and consultants that they have that are running the city. And one of the things that the mayor's been touting as of recent is the fact that we have a grant. We have this wonderful grant for a compensation equity study. Now, we got the grant. I don't know if the study started or not, right? But we have these titles. And they want to go around to every other surrounding community, and they're going to see what people in these titles make. Why wouldn't we refer this paper to the city administration for inclusion in the compensation classification study that's provided by grant funding? We're costing the city $0. I would second that. Take this off our table. Let's see what the report says when it comes back to see if they're being compensated equitably. I would second that. And if they are, they are. And if they aren't, we've got a report there that's been done by an outside third party that's compared this with all those surrounding communities and people in like responsible positions. And then we'll be able to provide something that's driven by data and it's not driven by desire.

[Bears]: Thank God tonight. There are already motions on the floor. Would you like to include that as an amendment to the paper itself?

[Knight]: I'd like to make it as a motion.

[Bears]: Right, there's already motions on the floor. I'm going to take them in order and it's possible that your motion won't be heard. Would you like to also put that as an amendment? Sure. All right. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Going to go to Fire Eastford Tau, we know as Mr. Castagnetti on Zoom. Name and address for the record, please. Two minutes, and I will tell you when you have 30 seconds. Mr. Castagnetti.

[SPEAKER_39]: And address for the record, please. Two minutes. I'll tell you. Thank you. Cushing Street, Medford mask.

[Castagnetti]: I want to say this. Cushing Street, Medford mask. This is one heck of a heinous-ness meeting tonight. I must say, I want to say that our Council President Morell has the power.

[Bears]: Andrew, I'm going to have to mute you to think of your television. We have a lot of feedback creating noise in the room.

[Castagnetti]: We got the Council.

[Bears]: Can you hear me?

[Castagnetti]: I believe it would cut their salary in half.

[Bears]: Sorry about that. We'll try to go back to him. Jamie, I'll go to you, then we'll see if we can get Mr. Castagnetti.

[Thompson]: Thank you. Jamie Thompson, 86 Lawrence Road. Just want to respond. Councilor Collins spoke to what the City Council has the ability to do. Councilor Knight, you spoke about diversity. One of the things we have going on right now is the charter study, and I would push everyone to look at the opportunity to go to ward-based representation. If you want diversity on the council, go to award based representation, you will have a different community, you'll have different representation, you will have a specific community that you will be representing. You will not have to look to representing at large as an entire committee council. Our as a committee, you'll look at lower costs for campaigning. I know that funds have been talked about and that's where some of the salary compensation conversation. has come from, but better representation and better opportunity comes from more based representation. I really think that some of these conversations need to wait until that decision is made. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you, Jamie. All right, Andrew, I'm going to go back to you, but I need you to mute your television.

[Castagnetti]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor. Can you hear me?

[SPEAKER_37]: blue bad connection it's a very bad connection i'm sorry blue you know you can submit comments and write it to the clerk all right any further public comment

[Bears]: Seeing none, there's a motion on the floor to refer to Committee of the Whole as amended by Councilor Morell, and then Councilor Knight, and then Councilor Morell, and then Councilor Knight. On that motion, seconded by Councilor Collins. All those in favour? All opposed? Roll call. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll. Do you want to read all the amendments? All right, I will summarize the amendments, and you can let me know if it's sufficient. There was an amendment initially from President Morell to strike the whereas clauses referring to the majority membership of each body. There was a further amendment to refer this to Committee of the Whole, along with the suggestion that this proposal be looked at as both a phase-in over time and potentially a different amount. There were several motions by Councilor Knight made by email and text regarding legal questions in various sections of Massachusetts general law, and asking for those questions to be answered as part of this discussion. And then I believe, Councilor Knight, that there's also an amendment that this, at some point, be referred to the compensation study that is being conducted by the administration for a response. Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Scarpelli has a motion to receive a place on file, I'll take that after the first motion, that was seconded. So on the motion, as amended, please call the roll, Mr. Clerk.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Caraviello? No. Councilor Collins? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? No. Councilor Tseng?

[Bears]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: President Morell? Yes. Vice President Pierce.

[Bears]: Yes, 5 in the affirmative, 2 in the negative. The motion passes and the paper is referred to committee as amended. Is there a motion on the floor? Motion to revert to the regular order of business by President Morell, seconded by seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion passes. We'll average the regular order. Would we like to take a five-minute recess? Motion, President Morell, five-minute recess, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion passes. We are in recess for five minutes.

[Morell]: So, I believe we are back from recess. I know I motion to revert to regular business. Someone would like to revert? We have someone from public participation that I thought had left and he has been here the entire time and I feel like we should take him.

[Bears]: Motion to suspend the rules to take public participation.

[Morell]: The motion by Susan Baird to suspend the real estate public participation is seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favour? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Please come up. And just name and address for the record, please.

[Crott]: Thank you for the microphone. My name is Jim Crott. I live at 22 Winter Street in Medford. That's the hillside neighbourhood. Wow, that was a really interesting session. It's really eye-opening and saddening to hear about the dismal state of schools. I actually feel a little bit embarrassed to talk to you about my petty issues, but I wanted to talk to you a little bit about things that are going on in my direct neighbourhood that I have a lot of experience with. I've lived in Medford for 15 years now, and during this time there's been a lot of changes in the neighbourhood that I've been aware of. A lot of these changes have been positive, like the Greenline extension, the new police the new library and such and such. A lot of people are doing construction on their houses and improving their houses, doing new roofs and dormers and porches and stuff, all of which is great, and I've done those things too. What I'm noticing more recently, though, is that there is a lot of new—more and more gut renovations and new construction in Medford of accessory dwellings or attached houses in the neighbourhood. In fact, there are two of these projects going on right now on my street, on Winter Street, and two have just completed on the corner of Winthrop and Summer Streets. As opposed to homeowners like me making modest improvements or renovations to the house, professional developers that come in to build new construction stuff have an extended impact on the neighbourhood in terms of access and noise and all sorts of obstructions. So what I want to talk about was three issues related to this that I've noticed. Three aspects related to the professional developer activity that I'd like to discuss and have you guys consider. Let me preface this by saying that I'm not opposed to development, and I think we need to build more houses, especially affordable houses. But I think, as a community, we need to carefully think about the impacts of these developments. Firstly, regarding the two projects on my street, at least two working-class families have been displaced, and now four $1.6 million condos are being built. So, across these two projects, the number of houses is going from three to four. I would argue that the number of houses that are affordable to regular people is being reduced from three to zero. Next, as far as I know, when a developer is planning a new development or a large kind of housing complex, they're obliged to set aside some of those, a proportion of those for low-income families. But if a developer comes in and one by one turns these regular houses into luxury condos, they can do as many of them as they like, so there are no restrictions there. I think that this runs counter to what you guys are trying to achieve with the housing in Medford. Thirdly, and probably on a little bit more of a selfish note, I'd like to discuss a little bit about what me, myself and my neighbours have been experiencing over the last two months. We're about two months into this construction process and I'm told it's going to last about 10 months, eight to 10 months. So just as a little taste of the things that we're experiencing is that, you know, workers are arriving before 7 a.m. six days a week. Most of the time they wait until seven before they actively start working, but they often arrive in big trucks before seven and keep them running, or they start their excavator up to warm it up before seven so they can start on the dot. They excavate all day for more than a week straight with dump trucks coming in and out all day, you know, causing a lot of vibration and noise. Frequent noise greater than 80 decibels. Digging holes in the street without any prior warning, verbal or with any signs, no cones, nothing. Repeatedly blocking driveways. We have to ask people to move their truck or move their excavator so we can get in and out of our driveway. blocking the street, rubble, excess dirt, debris and various trash on the street from food and drink containers and construction material and dust in the air. Excavation undermines neighbouring property. Just last Saturday, my neighbour, Mark, two doors down, had his property undermined and there was a section of his fence that was just floating in the air. The guys also piled up dirt on my fence and pushed our fence over. There are reserve spots on the street with cones and parking large trailers on the street, just some of the things. When you take all these things together, they're all kind of individually minor, but they add up. At the end of the day, it makes it impossible for us to use our houses normally. I'd like to kindly request that the Council consider. that these longer-term, high-impact construction projects by professional developers really negatively affect the neighbours and make it difficult to work from home, makes it difficult to find parking, kids to do their homework or study for their exams, or even just to sleep in on Saturday. They also may create additional costs for neighbours, including increased cleaning needs of the houses and cars and noise mitigation devices like noise cancelling headphones if you want to work at home. If it were for a few weeks or a couple of months for someone to do an extension on their house, that's fine. But what I'm talking about are professional developers that are coming here, making a bunch of money from these projects, laughing all the way to the bank while we're suffering for a year at a time on these projects. In light of these facts, I'd like to suggest that the construction permitting process in Medford be re-evaluated to consider whether work is being done by a homeowner or a professional developer, and also to consider the length and severity of impact to the neighbouring residents, with potentially the cost of permits increasing with the impact and duration. To finish off, I'd like to reiterate that I think the current trajectory of development is undermining what the city is trying to achieve in their housing production plan. I didn't read the whole thing, but I skimmed it a little bit. but because developers are focusing on the production of expensive luxury condos at the cost of affordable and smaller houses that regular people can afford. So, that's all I have. Thank you.

[SPEAKER_27]: DEPUTY MAYOR WILLIAMS.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you. Councilor GRIFFITHS. Councilor GRIFFITHS. Madam President, if you can, I think that—we really can't debate it, but what we can do Unfortunately, when you come, developers are smart, so they're not stupid. They're trying to circumvent the system. But what we can do, if we can, if we can share your information with the clerk to get the information to the code enforcement officer. Because what you're saying, what they're doing, we have everything in place for that because we do have some developers out there that take total advantage of this in our community.

[SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, it's kind of like death by a thousand cuts and they also do it and then ask for forgiveness later. I don't want to do that every day.

[Scarpelli]: You know, we can be pretty hard on some developers and I think that and making sure that they told the line. So if we can make sure that our code enforcement officer has that, that address, and they get out there tomorrow, I'll make a phone call tomorrow as well to the code enforcement office to make sure they come out and set up a regular, you know, visit where they check in periodically throughout the day. Yeah, because if it's that bad,

[Crott]: I mean, the most ridiculous one was when they just started digging a hole in front of our street without any warning, in front of my house without any warning. Excavator in front of my driveway, we have to request permission to exit our own house.

[SPEAKER_04]: Yeah, so we're at Winter Street.

[Crott]: I think that that property, I'm at 22, they're at 28, because there's a number or two missing, they're right next door.

[Morell]: You want to just list the infractions out in the email we have? I'll just copy and paste. Yeah, so copy and paste, and we'll make sure we get that. Go to Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: I just want to say, excuse me, thank you for bringing your concerns to us tonight. Glad to hear that we have some action steps we can quickly take on the construction infractions piece of things. really appreciate you speaking to, especially appreciate you actually reading the housing production plan.

[Crott]: I skimmed it, I didn't read the whole thing.

[Collins]: Well, I think that's probably the average way to read it. But I think that your comments resonate with a lot of the work that we've laid out for ourselves on the council. We've been trying to work on this term and we have a lot more ahead coming up over the next two years. I think that aligning the goals of the housing production plan in terms of making sure that the development we're building is not exclusively or heavily weighted to luxury development, serving a wide range of users and households is deeply embedded in the work that we're trying to do through our zoning overhaul which we're very much gearing up for. We have a condo conversion ordinance that's still in progress so there are some, there's some ongoing council projects that touch on exactly what you're speaking so just encourage you to, you know, we'd love to, you know, have you be engaged in the public process and those as they unfold and These are projects that have come about because of what the community has said. We want housing to look like and not look like in Medford, so we welcome your continuing participation in the high-level policy that we try to implement to make sure that we don't just turn into a community of luxury condos where nobody can afford to live in.

[Crott]: Literally within 200 feet, there's two and then two and then another, say, six on the corner. Winthrop and some, it's just, you know, it's a formula they have, buy these regular houses, put all the, you know, bells and whistles on it and flip it over for like a million dollars. I don't know who can afford that.

[Tseng]: I'll be super brief, but I wanted to thank you for coming and sharing all these concerns. Like what Councilor Collins said, this is a top priority for us going on into the next term. And we have the whole zoning reform process going on, phase two of that. And we'll be looking at a lot of policy ideas that might touch it. I would, again, encourage you to stay in contact. Please let us know. what's going on in their neighborhood as well, and we'll try our best to refer to the code enforcement officers in the future. And if there's anything policy-wise, any ideas that you might have, feel free to reach out to us as well.

[Crott]: Thank you.

[Bears]: I'll be super brief if we want to move to the next item. I just want to be clear that what's happening here is that the land is so valuable and the prices are so high that it's worth building luxury units. And they're going to keep doing that unless we allow them to build something else on the site. And that's likely a larger number of smaller, affordable units. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you so much for bearing with us.

[Caraviello]: Madam President, if we can take paper 23466 so this gentleman can get to go home tonight. Out of order.

[SPEAKER_27]: What page?

[Caraviello]: 23466 on page 14.

[Morell]: 23466 offered by Councilor Caraviello, be it so resolved that Medford City Council vote to authorize the Mayor of the City of Medford to petition the General Court for a special act in the form set forth below, providing that Medford Retirement Board be permitted to retire Joseph Albino, a former uniformed member of the City of Medford Fire Department who was involuntarily retired for accidental disability retirement, for superannuation retirement as provided by sections 5 and 10 of chapter 32 of the general laws of Massachusetts provided, however, that the general court may make clerical or editorial changes of form only to the bill unless the mayor approves amendments to the bill before enactment by the general court, provided further that the mayor is hereby authorized to approve amendments which shall be within the scope of the general public objectives of this petition.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. So for those who don't know, Mr. Albano was a He's a business owner in Medford, and he was injured fighting a fire some years ago in 2001, and he was able to return to work. So in 2019, the fire chief filed an application for an involuntary accidental disability retirement. with the retirement board. The board over Mr. Albano's opposition approved the chief's request and Mr. Albano was put on disability requirement. While Mr. Albano was aware of the limitation on outside areas for disability retirees, he had no idea that PERAC, who's a retirement group, would treat his necessary business expenses, that is to purchase or replacement of vehicles to comply with federal relation as personal income exposed to a business expense. So had Mr. Urbano known about that, he would have accepted a different form of retirement. And his attorney said, he could probably explain it a little more better than I can, but what it is, the gentleman's trying to get his retirement so he could live. And his attorney would probably explain it better than I can.

[SPEAKER_23]: Thank you, Councilor. Is this on right now?

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Yep. And just name it just for the record.

[SPEAKER_23]: So my name is Jerry McDonough. I live at 13 Hollis Street in Cambridge, Massachusetts. I'm an attorney practicing public retirement law. I represent Mr. Albano. And as Councilor said, First off, I want to thank you all for taking the time to listen to me this evening. We first filed a piece of legislation to deal with this in the House of Representatives, and the House clerk said, no, you have to do a home rule petition in Medford. contacted Adam, who gave me a little bit of instruction on how to arrange for that. But as Councilor was saying, it's been a long road for Mr. Albano. He founded a company in 1985, a transportation company that has been doing fairly well. And around 2001, he fulfilled a lifelong dream and became a Medford firefighter. And he loved the job. He wanted to continue on that till he reached the maximum retirement age of 65. But in 2017, he was injured fighting a fire on Henry Avenue, and he was put on injured in duty leave. and he wanted to come back to work, but I understand the problems that municipalities have when people are out on injured on duty leave and they have a position that they can't fill, so the fire chief filed for an involuntary retirement, and Mr. Albano was involuntarily retired on accidental disability retirement. He had no say in that. He tried to oppose it, but it didn't get him anywhere. And so he now has restrictions on his outside income. And the problem that he has is that there's a certain amount, there's a tax you know, provision that treats transportation business expenses, and he has a transportation company, treats transportation costs differently than other business expenses. So while you might buy a computer for your business and be able to deduct that from the business expenses, you know, he pays, he paid $300,000 and the business paid $300,000 in 2021 for transportation equipment. But Parak considers that to be his own personal income. So consequently, he doesn't get any retirement benefits at all. That's because he's on this accidental disability retirement. And if he had known that this is a new interpretation of the law by Parak in the last few years since Mr. Albano retired, he couldn't even have known of that. back there at the time, but he would prefer just to have an ordinary, regular retirement that he worked for over the amount of time that he spent as a firefighter in the city of Medford and not have to deal with disability and these earnings restrictions and things like that. And so he's, you know, he would like to give the business to his sons. His sons have been doing most of the work of the business since he became a firefighter. And he's unable at this point in time to transfer the business because he's under a lot of stress, litigation stress, because his business was involved in a terrible accident. and he can't give the business away at this point in time. So he's kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place. So all we want to do is try to get a home rule petition filed with the legislature to convert his retirement from an accidental disability retirement to a superannuation retirement. Superannuation retirement is much lower Then, the disability retirement, disability retirement is 72%. I think he'd be getting about 40% or something like that if it's on superannuation, but he wouldn't have these other restrictions. Plus, he has an ex-spouse that he has to pay part of his retirement allowance to. His ex-spouse is getting her half of the retirement allowance. and which is fair but you know he now has to make up for every year he's missing his retirement allowance he has to wait two years because he has to pay the whole you know, amount of his of his retirement allowance back to the to the bed for retirement for it. So we would just respectfully ask that that you consider this as a matter of basic fairness for somebody who worked for the city for so long and, you know, wrecked his, you know, wrecked his health fighting a fire that if it could be helped some way, we appreciate it very much.

[SPEAKER_27]: Thank you so much. Any discussion on the council?

[Caraviello]: It needs a vote to send it to the mayor to approve it. Send it to the state house. Yeah. Yes. Motion to ask for the home rule petition. Send it to the mayor to sign and send it to the state house.

[Morell]: So on the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Tseng, is that a roll call? Yes. It's a home rule petition.

[Bears]: Where's the mayor on this? Excuse me? The mayor, has she been, did she say she would advance this?

[SPEAKER_23]: Oh, I haven't spoken to the mayor at all. We have to, you know, the first place we go is here to the council, so.

[Bears]: Okay, so if we do this, then the mayor has to approve and then it'll go.

[SPEAKER_23]: The mayor would have to approve it or amend it. She can change it in any way she wants, but. Okay.

[SPEAKER_27]: Mr. Clerk, please call the roll on my right.

[SPEAKER_41]: Vice President Peers. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Yes.

[Morell]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, zero in the negative, one absent. The motion passes.

[SPEAKER_23]: Well, thank you very much. Thank you. I guess some people are leaving. Councilor Caraviello is leaving soon, and you're leaving, Madam President. So thank you for your service, and thank you all for your service. Thank you. Thank you. I appreciate it.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Thanks for sticking around. I know you had to, but I appreciate it.

[SPEAKER_39]: We're to the regular order.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Yeah, we need to take a couple more.

[Morell]: There's a couple more. Yeah, it's a regular order. All right, motion from Vice President Bears to revert to regular order of business. Second by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Hearings, two, three, four, four, eight. Notice of a public hearing, Medford City Council, Chapter 94, Zoning. The Medford City Council will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, December 12th, 2023 at 7 p.m. in the City Council Chamber on the second floor of Medford City Hall, 85 George P. Hassett Drive, Medford Mass, 02155, and via Zoom remote video conferencing relative to a proposed amendment to the City of Medford zoning ordinance and zoning map. A Zoom link to this meeting will be posted no later than December 8, 2023. The purpose of the amendment is to comply with Section 3A of MGL-40A MBTA Community Zoning Law by establishing a new zoning overlay within a half-mile radius of the Wellington MBTA Orange Line station that will allow multifamily housing and mixed-use development as of right. A copy of the full text of the amendment is available in the office of the city clerk and on the city's website www.medfordma.org slash department slash planning dash development dash sustainability by clicking on current city board filings. For additional information and aids for accommodations aids call the Medford city clerk's office at 781-393-2425 TDD 781-393-2516. as advertised in the Boston Herald on October 30th and November 6th, 2023, by order of the Medford City Council, signed Adam Hurtubise, City Clerk. So this was referred out to, do you wanna talk about the process? You might say it better than me, but we do have, the council has received comments from the CD board, but I'll hand it to our planner and director of PDS to just remind us of the process.

[Evans]: Sorry, my laptop died. I didn't bring my charger. I don't have the dates off the top of my head. Anyways, so we were here recently. It was on this December 6th that we came here and had The referral meeting, we basically explained what it was, but that wasn't the public hearing. And per chapter 48, it was referred to the city board who held a public hearing over the course of two meetings. There was some feedback, and they voted five to one to approve the version that came back to you with a reduced parking requirements and correcting a scrivener's error and to reduce the height from five to four. I explained the rationale for that in the memo, but we have Emily Innis, our consultant, that is being provided by MHP. So fortunately, we are not paying for this. And she can walk us through the details and nuts and bolts of what's in the ordinance.

[Lazzaro]: Thank you. Before we turn it over to Emily, are there any comments from the council at this time? Thank you, Planner Evans. I will turn it over to Emily Ennis to just remind us where we are and what's before us.

[Emily Innes]: Thank you, Madam President. I just had to wait to be allowed to be unmuted. For the record, my name is Emily Ennis from Innes Associates. And as Danielle said, I have been assigned by MHP Mass Housing Partnership as part of technical assistance to assist the city with developing the zoning for compliance with 3A. I appeared in addition to the work that the CD board has been doing. I appeared in front of the committee of the whole on just checking my dates, November 29th to present this initially. So the zoning is applicable, it is an overlay district, which means it sits on top of the existing district. That means that somebody who owns property has a choice of using the existing zoning or using the overlay zoning, whichever is more beneficial to the project that they're trying to do. So it's important to understand that property owners have a choice. This particular zoning is for the Wellington station area. This is an area that was identified in the recently approved Medford comprehensive plan as an area that could use additional attention and development as a station area. It is a critical part of your city strategy for compliance. The zoning itself is based on the sample zoning that was distributed by the executive office of housing and livable communities. And the key was to make sure that the zoning fit the needs of Medford for this area. So with the edits that were or the recommendations from the CD board, we're looking at a minimum lot size of currently a minimum lot size of 10,000 square feet of a suggestion to make on that our recommendation to City Council maximum building coverage of 80%. Minimum number of stories of two and a maximum of four, but with bonus incentives, a maximum of nine stories that's consistent with some of the existing buildings in the area. Maximum height of 80 feet, again, with the bonus incentive of 140, again, consistent with stories for nine stories with potential ground floor use. front yard setbacks, side yard setbacks and rear yard setbacks are consistent with the area. I think the important component for you all to be aware of is this idea of the development incentives bonus. And the idea is that there would be, sorry, I can hear laughter, so can you hear me all right?

[Morell]: Oh no, sorry, the clerk was just reminding me to do something.

[Emily Innes]: Okay, fair enough. I wanted to make sure I wasn't ever saying my welcome with zoning. The development incentives are for additional stories for developments that meet city goals and those city goals are for affordability. for developments that is responsive to concerns about climate change and helps to adapt or mitigate to that climate change, or that provides for an active ground floor use. So, as I'm sure you're all aware, the MBTA Communities Act does not allow you to mandate ground floor use. So in areas like, for example, the Wellington station area where it's important to continue to have a mix of uses providing a development incentive is a good way to encourage that. Same thing is true of affordability. The MBTA Communities Act has a limited recommendation or ability to institute affordability. The idea of a development incentive allows for the developments to offer either more affordable units or deeper affordability or both. Again, being respectful of the city's needs for different housing types and different levels of affordability. Finally, there's a development incentive or a floor incentive for certifying buildings as either net and zero emissions or as certified as legal or lead gold or lead platinum. Again, being responsive to concerns and this also came out of the comprehensive planning around climate resiliency. The zoning also allows for reduction in off-street parking. This was a recommendation from the CD board for to 0.5 spaces. There are bicycle parking spaces required, and then there are also site plan development standards to be used in the site plan review process by the CD board. Most of these are either consistent with what was in the sample zoning, or specifically targeted to developments in this area. The only change that I would recommend post CD board and this was just as we reran the numbers to make sure that any changes recommended by the CD board stayed in compliance. We noted that reducing the lot size from 10,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet would mean that all non publicly owned lots in the area would be conforming so that is a change that we would recommend. And I think I'll stop there with a summary and if you all have any questions, I'm happy to answer them, or defer back to Alicia and Daniel.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Thank you. And I know it was stated, but I just want to remind that the council did ask a number of questions when we met on this on the 29th.

[Morell]: So if questions are asked tonight, it may reflect that fact. So I don't want that to come across as a lack of interest for anyone watching.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: We did ask a number of questions that were helpful. Vice President Bears.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, everyone, for sticking around on this one. I know it's important. I know we have a deadline on it. My one question, sorry, and I just didn't catch it, Emily, was, Was that a reduction in the square footage, an additional recommendation beyond what the CD board has recommended? And that's the recommendation of, that's your recommendation, or is it the staff's recommendation?

[Emily Innes]: That is my recommendation. As I was reviewing the numbers, I did discuss it with Danielle and Alicia. But as I was reviewing the numbers, I noticed that there were a few non-conforming lots. Looking at them, a couple of them were publicly owned. So we just wanted to make sure that all lots in the area would conform with the new zoning in terms of the dimensional standards.

[j0qza4ZNB3E_SPEAKER_18]: OK.

[Evans]: And I can respond to that through Madam President. and it was also something that was brought up at the city board member, the one dissenting vote thought that the lot size was too big, but we were able to run the model in time to find out the implications. So it wasn't, no one felt comfortable voting on something that hadn't been modeled and not tested. So in this intervening time, we were able to run that again and see that it would, I think it adds like 21 or something units but that could be possible, but it also made all of the non-public lots buildable rather than unbuildable with the overlay.

[Bears]: Okay, great. That's helpful context. I was wondering what the offer was on the recommendation. So I was wondering why there was one to center. But that's helpful context. I don't have any further questions. After questions and comment, I would move to approve and adopt the recommendations of the Community Development Board, as well as the recommendation to change the lot size from 10,000 to 7,000, if I got it right, square feet. and I'll hold until discussion is complete.

[SPEAKER_27]: Thank you. Councilor Tseng.

[Tseng]: I wanted to keep it simple and reiterate how grateful I am for all the work that you guys and Emily has been doing for our city. We know it's not been easy to work with the state government when it comes to getting the details about how we can be in compliance with the MTA Communities Act. But I think this solution is something for people in Wellington to be very excited about, for residents of our city to be very excited about. I know there's some excited chatter about potentially having more commercial or more people in the area, making it more walkable and bringing our attention to the walkability of the area as well, forcing us again into action. And I just wanted to thank you for your hard work on this.

[SPEAKER_27]: Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. I'll echo that. I'm excited to vote on this tonight. I appreciate your office and the consultant making yourself so available throughout this entire process. And to echo what President Morell said, if there's a lack of deep questions and comments tonight, it's because we've had so many opportunities for that in recent months and weeks. I think that the recommendations that came out of the CD board, they affirm what's distinctive and significant about this district, its transit proximity. Had some really interesting conversations with your department about making sure that this is dialed in to have the right incentives for like really what we're trying to promote in this district, excited to see what comes out of this and you know for residents who are, you know, further curious about what this means for Wellington and in the greater context of, you know, development and rezoning and Medford, you know, as we talked about the last time a couple weeks ago. We still have the opportunity to look at the underlying zoning in the course of our already planned zoning overhaul beginning next year. So we'll continue to talk about Wellington and the conversation of comprehensive rezoning for Medford. But for today, excited to hit the deadline on this for state compliance and excited to make sure that this works in concert with the rest of our zoning for Medford. Thank you.

[Morell]: Any further discussion? I just want to echo my fellow bouncers and thank you for your hard work on this. Also, just not short of just being here at 10.15, 10.30 to take this. Thankfully, Medford is more amenable than I think some communities have been to receiving this. So we at least have that going for us. But I know it's not been easy as the state continues to change and adjust and tweak here. So I appreciate all the work you've done to be in compliance with this and get us to compliance with it.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: So vice versa.

[Bears]: I just want to say one thing since we're all here late. I did talk to someone on the phone today, and they asked me, is there going to be a big controversy tonight? And I said, about what? And they said, about the MBT community zoning. And I said, luckily, I don't think so. So interesting conversation, but thanks for sticking with me.

[Morell]: So we do have a motion on the floor. This is a public hearing. This is still the way we do it. We haven't figured out a better way yet. But as this is a public hearing, I will open the public hearing. Is there anyone who would like to speak in favor of the paper before us? Thank you. Is there anyone on Zoom who would like to speak in favor of the paper before us? Seeing none, this portion of the public hearing is closed. Is there anyone who would like to speak in opposition of the paper before us? Or on Zoom or in person? Seeing none, this portion of the public hearing is closed. So going back to the motion for Isis of Paris to approve for first reading? Or no, this is no, sorry. To be ordained.

[Bears]: To be ordained with the recommendations of the Community Allotment Board and to change the the minimum lot size from 10,000 square feet to 7,000 square feet.

[Morell]: So on the motion of Vice President Bears, as seconded by Councilor Tseng, am I making that up? Am I making it up, or? Okay.

[SPEAKER_43]: It doesn't matter, as long as it's passed. Oh, that's it, oh yeah.

[Lazzaro]: All right, please call the roll when you're ready.

[SPEAKER_41]: Yes. Councilor Collins. Yes. Councilor Nugent's absence. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. Councilor Morell.

[Morell]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, zero in the negative, one absent. The motion passes.

[Bears]: Why don't we say we have the president read the whole solid waste ordinance just for fun.

[Morell]: I remember, and I guess we had to, I remember President Falco read 70 pages of the marijuana ordinance. I don't know if he had to do that or not, but he did it.

[Bears]: Yeah, he was like, no, I will not summarize it.

[SPEAKER_41]: That was awful. Was that on Zoom? It was on Zoom. People may have gotten up and walked away.

[Bears]: 131 Fuzzler West. I'm 625. Now you know where I live. It's just on the city website. Oh. We're good.

[Morell]: Oh, where you live.

[Bears]: Yeah.

[Morell]: Let's wave back. Going to motions, orders, and resolutions. 22605, offered by Councilor Collins.

[j0qza4ZNB3E_SPEAKER_18]: Motion.

[Morell]: Chapter 70. I'll at least read the title. Chapter 70, Solid Waste. Yeah, Chapter 70, Solid Waste. Do we have a motion?

[Scarpelli]: Yeah, so we change the title to the Council of King Kong's resolution. Solid waste resolution.

[Morell]: So we have a motion to waive the reading and for a summary from Councilor Collins who did a tremendous amount of work on this. So motion for vice of affairs, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Roehl. So this is a project that we've been working on in subcommittee since March. The real seeds of this project were in the Solid Waste Task Force that met for a lot of 2022 under the direction of Director Hahn and consultants towards the goal of looking at tools available to us to start our next waste hauling contract with best possible deal for the city both in terms of cost effectiveness and in terms of progressing towards our zero waste goals which of course is integral to our overarching sustainability goals and one of the things that came out of that conversation not just recommendations for our next waste hauling contract was actually to tweak the existing Medford legislation around solid waste in Medford to make sure that we had the legislative foundation to make sure that we could hold our future waste hauler vendor to account in accordance with our sustainability goals. So in the Subcommittee on Ordinances and Rules, we worked closely with Director Hunt and her department. There are a couple main changes that we made, but overall we just took our existing waste hauling ordinance, which was pretty outdated in a lot of ways. So we made sure that it was updated to align with best practices coming out of the MAS DEP. And the origins of this document start with their template language. So it's been thoroughly vetted. This aligns with what other communities do in terms of waste hauling. One of the most consequential changes is that there's now a bundled service requirement, which essentially just says, if you offer trash pickup in Medford, you have to also offer recycling. And this is significant, because that way, vendors that only offer trash pickup cannot undercut vendors that offer both on price. And this will allow us to recycle the most in Medford in the most cost-effective way, which affects people on the city contract as well as everybody else. That's the main strokes. We did work with Director O'Connor from the Board of Health to make sure that this document aligns with current Board of Health regulations for waste haulers because they do, they operate the permitting side to make sure that everything is consistent to make this legible and understandable for generators as well as vendors. I do have a few last amendments that I'll make from the floor just on the definitions in article one after any further comment or questions from my fellow Councilors.

[SPEAKER_27]: Thank you, Councilor Collins.

[Scarpelli]: I disagree with everything. I just want to honestly, I think you've done a great job with this. As I'm following through, it's very thorough. I feel secure that you've done your due diligence and feathering your cap. This is a big, big contract. And to see the work that you put into it, I have so much faith in it. So I appreciate your hard work, Councilor.

[Collins]: Thank you.

[Morell]: Yeah, to echo Councilor Scarpelli, for all the work you did for this. And I reviewed it all and I work with this in my day job. So this is very much in line with best practices and where everything is going. So I really appreciate the work and just bringing this into the modern era and our needs for waste these days. And it's something we definitely make jokes about. It's easy to make jokes about, but it's one of those parts of the city that doesn't get talked about when it's going right. The second it goes wrong, you're hearing from everybody, and it impacts everybody dramatically. So this is really important work, and I appreciate it.

[Collins]: Amendments? Great. And thank you so much for your comments, and to everybody who worked on this with me. So just quickly, just some quick amendments for Article 1 in general. This was the last piece that we didn't amend in subcommittee, but I have some amendments that were run past a whole host of department heads, and I have a list if people are interested in seeing. We just wanted to take section 71, 72, sorry, 70-1, 70-2, and 70-3, put those into contemporary language and make sure that everybody who ought to be, every department that ought to be mentioned in those sections so that they could be tasked with enforcement would be. So I can read off those amendments. They're just a short paragraph each, and I'll also email that language to the city clerk. Yes, I'll email it to you. have the draft queued up but I didn't send it unless there was any controversy about this.

[Bears]: I for one would like to make a stand for the broken boards and the coal ash and the crockery and the cinders.

[Collins]: Who will speak for the cinders? Well, I don't know who speaks for the cows. So for Section 70-1, the motion would be to strike the existing and replace with, you should have this in your email inbox, No private property may become a gathering place for debris, refuse, discarded, or abandoned items or other waste. Any property owner who has received written notice from the Department of Public Works, Medford Police Department, Code Enforcement Officer, or Medford Board of Health to remove any such material from their property must do so within the timeframe directed. Second is to take the existing section 70-2 and strike that and replace it with no debris, refuse, discarded items, or other waste, including yard waste and construction debris may be placed or dumped in any public place or public way in the city. All waste must be properly contained and properly placed for collection on scheduled collection days in accordance with the regulations, schedules, and policies promulgated by the Department of Public Works and Board of Health. Any person who has been ordered by the Department of Public Works, Medford Police Department, code enforcement officer, Medford Board of Health, or designee thereof to remove any improperly discarded material or waste from private or public property must do so within the time frame directed. And then finally, to just strike 70-3 because that information has been subsumed into the proposed 70-1 and 70-2. Thank you, Councilor Collins.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Any issue with the amendments? What color? What color what?

[j0qza4ZNB3E_SPEAKER_18]: Black.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Oh, so we have a motion, I know, a motion to... Motion to accept.

[Bears]: Motion to approve for first reading with the amendments.

[Morell]: As amended, yeah.

[Bears]: As amended.

[Morell]: So we have a motion from Vice of Affairs to approve for first reading as amended, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Bears]: It's going to take a while, so I want the whole thing read. I just want to remind us, even with this meeting, it's only 11 o'clock.

[SPEAKER_41]: Vice President Pierce?

[Bears]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Collins? Yes. Councilor Lanzano? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli?

[SPEAKER_40]: Yes.

[SPEAKER_41]: Councilor Tseng? Yes. President Morales?

[Morell]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, zero in the negative, one absent, the motion passes.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: It's always a good day to be tremendous.

[SPEAKER_20]: That's terrible now. Your new nickname for this council. Trash Collins. Trashy Collins. That'll go over well with the population. Council Scarpelli's at it again. Good old Trashy Collins.

[Bears]: Half of us will think it's endearing, and the other half will think it's accurate, right?

[SPEAKER_43]: Yeah, yeah.

[Morell]: Tell your great kids how you became one of those trashy Collins.

[Bears]: Trash Collins, waste of time fairs. Another one for my page 13. Another word for my list.

[Morell]: 23465 offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council call for a meeting to resolve public safety concerns from malfunctioning streetlights on South Porter Road and beyond. If you have further resolve, the superintendent of WIRE, Steven Randazzo, a representative from the administration and a representative from National Grid to be invited to that meeting.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. This is a problem that's going on for years. So I know we've heard from the state delegates that said that there are issues that are going on. I know that Rick's worked on it. I know that And what I'm hearing from all these sides is that there's different entities, there's the state, there's the electrical utility company, there's the private entity, there's the city. We need to get everybody in a room and realize before somebody gets killed and then everybody's gonna be pointing their fingers at everybody else, we need to get everybody in a room for this meeting and find a resolution. Because they say the simplest thing is meeting with the neighbors and taking up the pavers so they can make the changes. Well, if the neighbor doesn't want that because they're afraid it's not going to be replaced the proper way, let's find a resolution to make this happen so we're not sitting here and talking about a horrific accident or a jogger or a bike rider that's going down South Border Road that gets killed. So I think it's important that through public safety we call for this emergency meeting to make sure all the parties are in a room because I think everybody's working their tail off, but They're all doing their own thing. No one's sitting together and saying, let's do that. So that's why I bring this forward tonight, Madam President.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli, for bringing this forward. I drive through there pretty regularly, and it's just not good at night. Probably six, seven, eight months ago, I worked with Director Hunt to contact DCR. I actually saw Commissioner Arrigo at the Clippership Connector, and Councilor Tseng and I talked to him, and I brought this specific issue up, and I completely agree with you. And I talked to Mr. Randazzo, I talked to Steve about it, and he's like, I've been talking about this for two and a half years. And so I completely agree with you. I think if we can get everyone in the room, I know Representative Donato was on an email chain that he would be trying to do that. Maybe this could be the meeting that he tries to work through his office to invite the state agency and the neighbor and everybody in.

[Caraviello]: So thank you.

[U1EIl_L-LWc_SPEAKER_00]: Thank you, Mayor President.

[Caraviello]: I've worked on this for almost two years. Dickie Peter is the head of the Fells, and he's explained to me what the process is. There's a relay in the grounds, right in front of those houses there. And all those houses have got the nice pavers there, and nobody wants their pavers ripped up, because who's gonna put the pavers back? That's really the big issue. But it's a relay that's in the ground. It's in front of one of those houses, but that whole section has to be ripped up. And until the neighbors get together and agree to get the driveways ripped up, it's not going to move anywhere.

[Scarpelli]: And if I can, I think that that's important. I wouldn't want anybody to touch our pavers unless we have a commitment by the the public entities that are all involved to say, hey, listen, this is what we'll do to make sure at your discretion with your contractor, making sure that everything gets put back the right way. I think that's the only thing that's fair, because I think what's happening is, it's dogs chasing his tail until somebody gets seriously hurt, and then all of a sudden we're sitting there saying, all it was is just moving some pavers. So I think having everybody in the room is important. I think that if Mr. Vita's, we should invite him too. Yes, we should get him involved as well, so he's familiar with that, so thank you.

[Bears]: I know this is for the meeting that we're talking about, but to be honest, if the issue is we can't get the papers up to get the stuff in, take the bulbs out of the lights. I think you might actually be better off with no light than with the blinking, and it's really disruptive. Yeah.

[Morell]: So the motion is to continue working with Rep Donato's office to schedule this, or what's the thought there?

[Bears]: You can refer it to subcommittee on public works.

[SPEAKER_40]: Well, if we can do that and call for the meeting with the subcommittee on public works and ask for it, invite all of those parties. Yeah, ask them.

[Bears]: Yeah. Specifically ask Representative Donato to get the state to show up to the meeting.

[Morell]: Okay, thank you. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Vice Mayor Bears. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion adjourned. Motion passes. The motion of Councilor Scarpelli adjourned. Motion, third reading.

[Bears]: Unlimited terms. All right.

[Morell]: All right. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpell, I'd like to adjourn, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes, meeting adjourned.

Morell total time: 25.28 minutes total words: 4651	Bears total time: 19.41 minutes total words: 3560	Caraviello total time: 4.35 minutes total words: 685	Knight total time: 11.45 minutes total words: 1767
Scarpelli total time: 12.5 minutes total words: 1924	Collins total time: 15.58 minutes total words: 2757	Tseng total time: 11.51 minutes total words: 1891	Cugno total time: 3.44 minutes total words: 513
Penta total time: 5.63 minutes total words: 921	Branley total time: 3.05 minutes total words: 511	Kreatz total time: 3.52 minutes total words: 524	Lazzaro total time: 0.3 minutes total words: 51