[Morell]: 21st regular meeting of the Medford City Council May 24 2022 is called to order Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: 7 present zero absent the meeting is called to order please rise.
[Morell]: Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. Records, the records of the meeting of May 17th, 2022 were passed to Councilor Knight. Councilor Knight, how did you find them?
[Knight]: Madam President, I find the records in order and I move for their approval.
[Morell]: Second. On a motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Vice President Bears. All those in favor?
[Hurtubise]: Aye.
[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes. Reports of committees, 21-057, May 18, 2022, committee of the whole report to follow. This was our meeting last week to discuss the draft ordinance regarding regulations around leaf blowers. There were a number of motions to get some additional language and options as well as to invite landscapers, chambers of commerce to a future meeting. I know we've heard from some residents about this. This is very much still a work in progress. All feedback is welcome and we're probably gonna work on this together. Do I have a motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by various with the committee report, all those in favor. All those, all those in favor. Okay, all those opposed motion pass I only got one I think I only heard one. Announcements, accolades and remembrances 22-358 offered by Vice President Beyers. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council congratulate Building Commissioner Paul Moki on his retirement and 38 years of service to the city of Medford.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. As all of us behind this rail know, Paul Moki has been a public servant in this city for 38 years. He certainly has been in front of this council many times in my nearly three years on the council and helped us spearhead the zoning recodification was incredibly helpful throughout that process attending you know hours and hours of meetings working with our zoning consultant making that all of that possible as well as all of the constituent service and management work that he did on a day-to-day basis. His last day is this Thursday and I was able to luckily able to catch a quick celebration and thank him for his service just yesterday. So I just want to congratulate him and then send that congratulations along through the clerk and on behalf of the council for his many years of service and hopefully we will be able to find someone to fill his shoes quickly. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Council bus brings forward. This is a happy day for a great person but a sad day for this community. Mr. Mulkey, I don't think I've ever met somebody so well-versed in their position in this building in a long time. He is prepared, educated, calm, cool, collective. And even under the most strenuous circumstances, I've never seen the man in a negative light ever in my life. He was someone that you would call and hope that he would give you the answer that you wanted. But when you hung up the phone, you were confident. And even though you didn't get the answer that you needed or you were looking for, you felt confident because you were educated enough to answer our constituents with a lesson and anything that we needed in our community, dealing with a code enforcement issue or a building issue or, I mean, the simplest things, the most intriguing items. So it's gonna be sad because we seldom work with many department heads, especially lately, that will call you back in a timely fashion, listen to your concerns and find a solution for you, whether it's what you're looking for or not within minutes. And to say that he wasn't one of the busiest department heads in this community for a long time would be an understatement. So I wanna thank him for his service. I wanna thank him for his commitment to the city, his ability to probably lead, I think, one of the best departments in the city. I think his whole staff is a true reflection of his personality and his educated background. I think he has made his staff multi-talented. I don't think we have one, inspector downstairs one officer downstairs that that isn't well versed in many different building topics. And I think it's because of his leadership. And when you talk to those people, not one ever have a bad thing to say a negative word to say. And They're always working as a team, always supporting each other. And it's comical. If you look at that department, and if you can only clone that throughout the community and society, boy, we'd be a better place today. And a lot has to do with Paul Mulkey. So, you know, we're going to miss him. I hope that one of his staff will be the next to succeed him, because I think he has groomed them in his fashion. So, again, thank you Council yes bringing this forward. I'm sorry Mr. celebration, but publicly I want to say thank you and if we can ask them to come up and make a motion to have them come to our next meeting and present him with a citation of service and something that we could publicly thank him I think would be important and I think that'd be well deserved. So thank you, Madam President.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpella. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Again, Paul Mulkey, one of the nicest guys in the building. Again, you call him, he calls you back. But, you know, the sad part is we've got 38 years of institutional knowledge walking out the door. And how do you replace that? That's the real key. I mean, you know, you can get other people that are smart and know their craft, but you don't get the institutional knowledge that Paul had. And again, that's where the sad part about him leaving. But again, you know, I'm happy that he's going to be retiring less of a schedule and be a normal guy now. So again, I just want to congratulate him. But again, it's just that institutional knowledge that keeps walking out of the door of this building that doesn't get replaced. And he had a wealth of knowledge that can never be taught to someone else. So again, I want to thank him for all the services of the community and his work to other people. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello.
[Knight]: Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much. Mr. Mookie is one of the best department heads, I've had the pleasure of working with, and I've worked with department heads all across the Commonwealth of Massachusetts as representative for union employees in a municipal setting. And my relationship with Mr. Mookie over the years has grown to a friendship. He's someone that I respect, someone that I admire, someone who, as Councilor Caraviello said, brings a wealth of knowledge to the table. When you think about 38 years, that's a pretty long time. When you look at the city, look at the community, you see what's happened over that 38 years. Anytime there was a shovel on the ground, Mr. Moki was there to make sure that it was done the right way. That includes the new schools, stations landing. It includes Chevalier. It includes the science labs. It includes the field of dreams. It includes the turfing of Fort Melton. So when you think about the impact that he's had on this community over 38 years, that impact is going to last well, well, well, well into the future. These are things that have made our community great. And he's someone that had a hand in it. When you talk about his style as a department head and the way that he runs his department, I think it's safe to say that that is the only department in city hall where every employee is cross-trained. Where every inspector can be a code enforcement officer and every code enforcement officer can be an inspector. And when someone's out, they don't miss a beat. That's a testament to the vision that Mr. Mookie has, and how this is supposed to work. I've always said that the building department here in the city of Medford is a team, and they work very well together. And Mr. Mookie just happens to be the person that's driving the bus. And when we talk about institutional knowledge being lost, that's always a concern. But I think that Paul's done a great job cultivating talent in his office as well. So I look forward to seeing the next generation of leaders coming out of the building department here to work with us. But this is about Paul and all that he's done for this community. He's a great person. He's someone I've had the opportunity to speak with a number of times. I've had the opportunity to sit down with a number of times and enjoy his company and his conversation in a professional setting as well as in a personal, private setting. He's someone that I will certainly miss and I thank him for all that he's done for this community. And I second Councilor Scarpelli's motion to invite him down for citation.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Ike. Any further discussion?
[Tseng]: If I could, Councilor Tseng. I, you know, I am one of the newer Councilors here, so I haven't had the pleasure to work with Commissioner Moki as much as the rest of my colleagues have, but in the committee meetings that we have had with them, Commissioner Moki has always been a vital resource to us as a council and someone who's brought a wealth of knowledge and who has really helped us shape the work that we do here. And so I just wanted to congratulate Commissioner Moki on his retirement.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. And if I could, I mean, my fellow councilors have said so much, and I think just hearing people speak at length about Commissioner Moki just is a testament to who he is and the work he does. when she helps us all I think one of my early wins as a Councilor in my first term was a resident had reached out about their neighbor had you know large shipping container a lot of open storage and something that was a violation of code and it was an issue they've been battling for so long and Mr. Moki was finally able to get you know get it taken care of getting it to the right person and you know the resident thanked me profusely but it's it's it's not a lot of times it's not us it's the people who work at City Hall it's people like Commissioner Moki who go the extra mile they are they they're so responsive and just really get it done for the residents of our community and he's come to countless meetings as vice president bears said and you would never get a sense of you know how he feels about an issue personally he comes with his his work hat on and he says you know this is what we can do this is what we can't do and it's always been so welcome and I appreciate it so much. And he will be absolutely sorely missed. As I said, 30 years of institutional knowledge is really tough to top. And I think, you know, he's working to the last minute. I had sent him a paper before I knew he was retiring, our tree ordinance, to see if we could get some feedback. And he said, sure, I'll get that to you right away. When, you know, he's retiring in three days. And I said, you know, we'll figure it out. So it's, he'll absolutely be missed. And I thank him for his many years of service to this community and to this body in particular as well. So on the motion of Vice President Bears as amended by Councilor Scarpelli, all those in favor? All those opposed? The motion passes. Motions, orders and resolutions, 20-573 offered by Vice President Bears, be it resolved that the Medford City Council reconsider the vote on paper 20-573 for the third reading. Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President, in my everlasting persistence for consensus, I respect the request that we vote again on the snow removal ordinance, and my fingers are crossed that we will reach that intended goal. Thank you.
[Knight]: Madam President, can I speak to the debate that Councilor Bears and I had? Go ahead, Councilor Bears. It was very persuasive.
[Morell]: So very Tuesday is the snow and ice removal ordinance that came before us for third reading last meeting. This just updates the language that was in the council a number of times. Mr. Clerk, if you could please call the roll, unless anyone would like the ordinance read back. Okay, Mr. Clerk, if you could please call the roll. Who's the second? Councilor Caraviello.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Yes, can't secure beyond. Yes. Council calls. Yes. Council night. No. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Morell]: Yes, six in front of one in the negative the motion passes.
[Bears]: I'll take six six is good enough.
[Morell]: 22-three five. Very good. All right, to do that 359 offered by Councilor Knight, the result of the Metro City Council request that the DPW purchase necessary equipment to grind sidewalks and stems to assist in addressing the backlog of necessary sidewalk repairs Councilor Knight, Madam President, thank you very much.
[Knight]: Last week we sat here with our city engineer and our director of DPW and they talked about a need for certain equipment. to take certain functions in-house, that being grinding of stumps and the shaving down of sidewalks that are in disrepair. Annually, this council normally appropriates anywhere between a million to $1.5 million for sidewalk repairs. We also talk every year about whether or not we could handle this in-house. Earlier this evening, we talked about our budget priorities, and one of our budget priorities would be increasing the staffing level at the DPW. And in partnership or concert with that, I think it would make sense for us to also increase the equipment that they have. So they get some of this work that is necessary. As we said earlier in the day, the function of government is to provide services and we need boots on the ground in order to do that. We also need equipment to do it. So this is a request that the administration price out with this piece of equipment or cost that the city engineer and the city public works director was speaking up and to present it to the council for either inclusion in the capital plan or for a supplemental appropriation request.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Any further discussion? On the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor.
[Hurtubise]: President request a roll call.
[Morell]: Sure. Mr. Clerk, if you could please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Morell]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Morell]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Pricers and bearers, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. So 22360. So what this paper is, it goes just into the efforts of corporations like Uber, Lyft, and DoorDash to keep their employees classified as independent contractors. And as such, these employees do not get benefits or pay into things like social security. A lot of times they are not getting a living wage once, or even a minimum wage once the hours and their shifts are calculated These companies contend that these folks are independent contractors and not employees, despite the fact that they are required to perform a set number of shifts. They do have flexibility in scheduling. They are not allowed to refuse a certain number of rides or they won't be able to be on the app anymore. So this is in response to House Bill 1234, that would continue to exempt these gay economy businesses from paying into Social Security unemployment, which costs Massachusetts taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars, and we can use these programs for everyone. And it would affirm our support in joining Councilors across the greater Boston region, workers, consumers, community members, faith organizations, environmental and racial justice advocates, labor rights, civil rights, and union organizers to urge Massachusetts legislature to oppose House Bill 1234, and the proposed 2022 state ballot initiative with similar language. So this is just really something to affirm our support. I understand Councilors, you know, certain times don't like to go on issues that go up to the state level in this way, but I would just argue that this is something that very much impacts our community. These are people who live in our community. These are workers that are As I said, oftentimes not making a living wage they're not making a minimum wage. And these are services that use our roads our streets. And we talked about the congestion and the dangerousness that happens because of all these services, and they're essentially. they're allowed to do whatever they want. They say these people aren't employees, we're not going to give them benefits, we're not going to make sure they have a living wage, and they want to codify that. So this is just asking the council to join with other councils and leaders in the area to stand up and say that these workers deserve the same rights as all other employees, because that's what they are. Vice President Bears, Councilor Caraviello, Collin Sands, go around. Vice President Bears first.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for putting forward this resolution. Fundamentally, this is about the future of work in Medford, in Massachusetts, and in our country. And these big tech corporations have gotten out ahead of the law and out ahead of regulation. And now they're trying to solidify that position. In California, a very similar ballot question was passed by a very close margin. And the only reason it passed at all is because Lyft and Uber and DoorDash and these large companies spent tens to hundreds of millions of dollars on ad campaigns to confuse the voters, to confuse the issue. And they're doing the same thing here. If you ever see any of the ads, they say yes to independent drivers, yes to supporting drivers, And most of the time, you know, the people that they have in those advertisements are the people that they're talking about. You know, the people who drive occasionally, you know, once in a while. But the fact of the matter is over half of the rides on these services and half of the trips on these DoorDash, you know, delivery type services are done by 9%. of the workers. So the vast majority of this service is being provided by a small number of workers and those folks, they want to be called employees. If right now, a lot of these folks split between multiple services. So even under the proposed benefits that have been written by their bosses, they're not going to qualify for health insurance, even though the bosses ad say they will, they're not going to qualify for benefits that the bosses ad say they will. And beyond that, I think it's pretty clear you've got these multi-billion dollar corporations. Lyft gave a $15 million donation to the ballot campaign to support this ballot question, the largest single donation in the history of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to a ballot campaign, and they're expected to give tens of millions more. There's a reason that these companies are spending tens of millions of dollars to put out ad campaigns to confuse people. And it's because at the back end, if these bills pass or this ballot question passes, they're going to save billions of dollars. And why are they going to save it? Because they're not going to be paying it to the people who are making them their profits. At the end of the day, this is a basic issue. of workers rights worker justice. And I think the point is also well made that these services are all over our streets and all over our communities and if they're not paying their workers well, and they're not paying federal income taxes and you know they don't have a yard or a taxi, you know they're not buying a taxi license or anything else they're paying what I can't remember a $1 fee or something like that. It's, I mean, ridiculous. So they're completely abusing our system and they're trying to abuse it further with this obscene spending to functionally confuse people and get them to vote against the interests of their neighbors. So I think it's incredibly important that this council speaks up and says that that model of business has no place in a community like Medford and in a Commonwealth like Massachusetts. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
[Caraviello]: They make these people come in and they tell them, you're now a business owner. And they sell them with that story, you're a business owner now, you work for yourself. When technically they're not, they're not business owners, they're employees of these companies. They dictate when they work and when they don't work. And I see them out there. You got men and women, they're working 18, 20 hours a day. I mean, not even for other people, but for their own safety, they shouldn't be out there that long. They get no benefits, they get nothing. And at the end of the day, they're paid a substandard wage. So you're working 20 hours a day and you're not even making a real wage that you should be making. The vehicles have now, they went out and bought vehicles under the dream that you're going to make all this money. And meanwhile, they're out there, they killed themselves. And now the vehicle is old and all broken down and they still owe a lot of money on it. Well, all these companies are making more and more money. So again, this is not a new thing. It's always been a way to skirt the law and not pay taxes and not pay these people a living wage. Listen, I know a lot of them that do this kind of work and I see them. I see people sleeping in cars. It's because, I don't know if you know, but New York has capped Uber and Lyft. So now they're all coming over here. That's why you see all the New York plates here, because New York has capped them. And other cities have done the same. So they're trying to go to the cities that have no cap. It's something maybe we should, maybe this state should look at doing too. But I agree wholeheartedly with this. And again, I'll support it, but it's been going on for years. And again, you know, the big companies keep, they keep making more money and more money. If you get a chance, watch the series, Super Pumped, about Uber and how they take advantage of their employees. So again, I'll support this. And as I say, these people just, they deserve to make a fair wage.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you President real and thank you for putting this on the agenda tonight, I have to say, advocating against each 1234 is something I thought of as one of my priorities for this entire calendar year in our capacity the city council in my private life to restate some of what's already been said, I think this constitutes one of the biggest assaults on workers rights that to my knowledge that we have seen in years and years, it's an issue that it's hard for me to contemplate without getting emotional because it is such an insult to the people of this Commonwealth to incite a campaign of, as Councilor Caraviello said, voting against the interests of our neighbours. It's an insult to the workers who perform these jobs, who do these gigs, which has become one of the backbones of our, you know, modern, local level economy. I don't think that these apps are going away anytime soon. I think the horse is out of the barn. And what these companies are trying to do through these ballot questions is to enshrine the chipping away of essential protections, protection from liability, fair wage, just and safe working conditions for all of these people who are doing the rides, delivering the food, you know, often, you know, to people who, you know, they need that that sort of mobility service in order to make their life work. Um, so I'm glad for this city council to have the ability to get to advocate for this. And, you know, as stated this is this is a state issue but it's also of course an issue on the most local level, because We have gig workers in our community, and we have people who are on the consuming end of these companies in our city. And I think one of the other things that propositions like this do is they complicate that question of how do we, as a city, as a constituency, have a relationship with these companies if know, wrongdoing is going on. And so, you know, if people know, this is a quote unquote, small business owner, who's, you know, wrong is blocking the sidewalk, who's, you know, performing badly in our community. And they know they can't take it to the appropriate person, which would be the company, they know that if there's a finger to point, it's pointing an individual who probably this is, you know, they wouldn't be, you know, doing this job if they had a better, more accessible option. So for so many reasons for protecting you know, generations long hard one workers rights workers justice to make sure that we can have a proper working accountable relationship with the companies that are doing business in our city. I think that this is a resolution that we need to pass that we need to follow that up with making sure that h 1234 isn't allowed to distort worker relationships throughout our state. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Tseng]: Thank you, President Morell, and thank you for putting this on the agenda. Essentially h 1234, you know what what it does is it makes a bad situation worse by enshrining it as Councilor Collins said into law. If you, if you know, you know, an Uber driver. Personally, many of my friends and family friends, drive for Uber or Lyft, you know the working situations are great. you, you'll know that, um, you know, they've, they have been tricked, as Councilor Caraville have said and the rhetoric that these big corporations are using doesn't reflect their actual lived reality on the ground. And by institutionalizing by legalizing it. It makes a bad situation worse. If if h 1234 goes through and I encourage people to read the body of the text of this resolution. You know, drivers might make as little as for $4 82 cents per hour, and those who qualify for a health care site that may earn as little as 674 per hour. When we have people making those amounts. You know that also puts a strain on our, on our city's resources, and it puts a strain on our, our society as well, because we'll have to do more to as a government to fill in this hole that big corporations are leaving for us. We also you know we spend a lot of time talking, both in the chambers and outside of the chambers about equity, but you know, h 1234 and the, the ballot proposition on the proposed the ballot proposition would would you know would reverse all the good work that we are doing as a society when it comes to insurance equity. This House bill would create an underclass of workers here in Massachusetts that is disproportionately black or brown and disproportionately immigrant, disproportionately working class, disproportionately veterans, and you know, this is, this is all things that we should be concerned about as a city and things that affect us in our work is as a city council. And so, you know, I, I urge everyone to do your research on this issue to read this resolution and not and not to be tricked by the big corporations that are running ads on TV, and on YouTube that you see all the time. And I think, again I think President moral for putting this on the agenda because it's just so important that we address this.
[Morell]: Thank you. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. This has been a topic of much debate and as evident by future governor Healy's. lawsuits, also legal proceedings. And it's really the age old argument of, you know, is this an employer, an employee or a contractor? And, you know, when I think about this, I think about it in the simplest terms, right? I mean, I've called Lyft before a bunch of times, I've called Uber a bunch of times, I've never called Joe the driver. I've called Uber and Uber has sent me a driver, right? So, you know, it's really employee misclassification, in my opinion. You know, Uber, Lyft, these ride share hailing companies, you know, they have the control, the direction of the employee and anything the employee does is really in the furtherance of Uber and Lyft's name, right? It's in their interest, it's in furtherance of the employer's interest. That's a three-part test to determine whether or not you're a Councilor or an employee. I mean, I'm sorry, contractor and employee. So, you know, when you look at what's going on, it's clear that these companies are taking advantage of workers. They're doing it through, like Councilor Caraviello said, vehicle leasing programs and financial lending programs that are making these individuals, quite frankly, financially bound to these organizations. So if they wanted to leave, they wouldn't even be able to. You know, so when you look at this and you sit back and you say, what's right is right, what's right is right. The, the way that they're classifying people the amount of money that they're putting into this case. It's ridiculous. It's absolutely ridiculous and just shows you there's something wrong. I haven't seen this since what was the last one with a right to repair. Right. Millions and millions of dollars are going into this to fight something. Why, because it's good for the working person that's why. And what we're seeing this console concept is this is the first step. in an effort to eliminate workers' rights and workers' benefits, so that big business doesn't have to be on the hook for these liabilities, and so that individuals are going to be tasked with the responsibility of planning for their own retirement, their own future, because they're not paying into Social Security, because they're not paying into healthcare, and at the end of the run, we're going to see a situation where we have a lot of people that are going to need more from government. So this is actually a policy I think that's going to make sense because it's going to protect us economically it's going to protect that name is going to protect the residents of this community, and it's going to prevent big business from taking advantage the little guy. So I support this whole heartedly and I think the council put it on the agenda this evening.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President, you know, you know we talked about, you know, all this other stuff but at the end of the day. These men and women are working 20 hours a week. No one cares about their safety, the safety of the people around them, the safety of the people in these cars. And they get into an accident, what happens? They get fired. So that's the loyalty that these companies give them. And again, safety should be the number one issue. These people shouldn't be out there working. You shouldn't be in the vehicle 18, 20 hours and sleeping in your car. Again, because now you're putting yourself at risk, your passenger at risk, and the people all around you. And the reward is They owe thousands of dollars in taxes because no taxes have been withheld. So at the end of the year, again, they say these people, they're not making a lot of money. They're struggling to save for their families. And now April 15th come, no one's withheld any taxes on you. Now you owe all this money. And if they get into an accident, you're fired. That's these companies that just don't, they care nothing about the employees at all.
[Morell]: Zoom would like to speak on the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. 22-361 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Metro City Council have a representative from Eversource attend the next city council meeting to give the council an update on an ongoing project on Mystic Avenue and Winthrop Street via further resolve at the city engineer and dpw also be in attendance.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Um, ever so is this this is a gift that keeps on giving never goes away. People are asking, where are we on this project? I don't know. I don't think anybody knows where we are anymore. They're there, they're not there. I think we need an update on where this project is going, how much longer it's gonna be. Again, and the reason I like to have the city engineer, not only to be involved with this here, but, you know, before we paved Winter Street and all these streets again, are there any other projects that are gonna be done after we're paved. There's nothing worse than seeing a brand new paved street and a month later, we're up there digging it up because a pipe should have gone in there before. So if the engineer will come in and coordinate with the gas company, any other water company, all these other people that are looking to do projects down there, let's do it now before the road is paved and then we dig it up a couple months a that's probably the one that aggravates me to the worst and just is no coordination. So if you could reach out to them and have DPW here and say in some of my episodes we haven't had a we haven't had a conversation with them and I think the longest time. So let's see where we are and see how much longer this project's gonna keep on going.
[Morell]: Thank you. Further discussion.
[Knight]: Madam President. Actually, a question. I recall getting a correspondence from the administration at some point saying that they stopped the construction on the episodes project because they wanted to make sure that the condensate con and shell was accessible for the summer.
[Caraviello]: No, I think we project slowed down because we were short of policemen to cover the details that was that was one of the issues, two months we got it I think we got something from maybe Mr. smurdy.
[Knight]: I'm just trying to look it up.
[Morell]: I have asked the city engineer if they have any updates on timing. And it's obviously nuts on them and resources and give them information. I've asked them, you know, month, two months ago, because we're in high construction season, and nothing's happening.
[Caraviello]: And nothing, they just they started doing a little bit of work down by the rotary. Yeah, the last few days, I don't know what they're doing there. But again, the thing, you know, they, there's still holes that have to be dug, they mean that they haven't even got to yet. So again, I say, Where are we and how much
[Scarpelli]: point of information I know we did have I know I had a few calls about the South Street intersection and the work that was being done by EvoSauce overnight because the I believe the chief had decided that due to safety concerns of that intersection they needed to do it overnight so I don't, they haven't stopped the process. I think they're sort of working backwards now. That's what it seems like to me. So, but again, it'd be nice. And this is, again, this is where, when we first sat down with Eversource, when they came to talk to us, one of the biggest things I kept saying, and I think all of us have said, having a representative paid for by Eversource or by the utility companies to be the clerk of the works. We can't expect our city engineer to be the person that is sitting there making sure that they're held accountable because it's not feasible. But at the same time, this is something we're lacking in our community. Other communities have the clerks of the works that make sure that all these jobs are being, you know, you know, all the neighbors in the areas are being informed, making sure that, you know, the preparation isn't hindering traffic, that the cleanup is done satisfactory, so constituents aren't left with concerns and issues after they leave. Again, we're gonna keep coming across this until we have someone with boots on the ground there that's making sure that they're responding back to the city engineer or DPW director in some communities or the mayor's office. So this is definitely an issue. I think we've lost communication again with Eversource. They get to a certain point and then they forget that they have to report keep people informed. And that's, that's not good business. So again, utilities shine again. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you. Any luck Councilor Knight.
[Bears]: I got nothing.
[Morell]: I don't remember getting that I did a quick search I couldn't find it.
[Bears]: I couldn't find it either but I do. recall something coming across somewhere about, I don't know if it was the Eversource project but there was work to be done. I think in the parking lot, there was a MWR a MW okay okay. Right. Yes, that's it. I just add this to counsel's point, the Department of Public Utilities I mean it's another example of a public entity that's just completely unaccountable to the public. So, maybe if, if his. divine prophecy is true, Governor Healy will address that. They put the PU in the DPU, don't they? The PU and DPU, I like that, Councilor Newton.
[Morell]: Any further discussion? On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by?
[Hurtubise]: I second.
[Morell]: Councilor Scarpelli, all those in favor? All those opposed, motion passes. 22-362 offered by Councilor Tseng, whereas the US Supreme Court's decision in Shurtleff versus City of Boston creates important implications for municipalities and public entities with regards to flag raising practices and policies, and whereas the city of Medford has been advised to examine existing practices and policies regarding flag raising to ensure compliance with the First Amendment, and to also consider examining their formal or informal policies and practices regarding display of banners, flags, message boards, and other signage on and use of public buildings and property. Be it resolved that the city administration provide a report to the city council on its current practices and policies regarding flag raising and other displays, which may be affected by the short-lived decision, especially with further regard to requests from private or non-governmental groups slash individuals. And be it further resolved that the city administration also provide its plan to ensure that our policies comply with the Surleaf decision, including any updates to policies and practices. Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: Thank you, President Morell. Essentially, the U.S. Supreme Court decided a few weeks ago in a case called Shurtleff v. City of Austin that the city has to be careful when it comes to approving or denying what flags can go up on government property. Essentially, the most important lessons for us is that we either have to have a stated policy where we say that our flagpoles and our places for banners on city property constitute governmental speech, or we just have to allow everyone to essentially be able to apply and use those platforms for speech. You know, a lot of this has to be done through our law department, our legal department, they'll have to be the ones looking at looking at the policies but I think it would be good for our city for our city council to be updated and to be able to have a voice in terms of what policies are being developed in response to the shortlist decision. And so this is just a simple resolution asking the city administration to give us an update as to what it's doing in this case, before we get into any legal trouble.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng, Vice-President Bears, and then Councilor Caraviello.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I don't know if folks remember, but prior to in 2020, in summer of 2020, I had put a resolution on the agenda around putting up a banner on the front of city hall and went into a pretty extensive resolution, legal diatribe on the case law behind the government speech doctrine. And this was about putting up a Black Lives Matter banner on city hall. And at the time the district court had ruled that the city of Boston, basically the Supreme court has overruled the court of appeals and the district court since then. But what's very clear from the case is that of what existed and was true in 2020 is true now. which is that as long as the city has a policy or I may say an ordinance that clearly defines how, you know, government entities, the city council or the mayor can use government buildings or flagpoles or places of displaying any sort of banner or message. As long as there's a clear policy as to how that can be used then that is completely allowable. And I think it would, I agree with Councilor Tseng what we ran into and in 2020 was that we didn't have a policy. It was really nilly, and I believe in 2020, we passed a resolution and asked what the policy was. And I don't believe we ever received a response from the city administration on that. And I've had it on my list for a couple years now that maybe we should write an ordinance and if we're not going to have a policy that maybe we have to take it in our hands to protect ourselves in the future so I'd love to get a response to this resolution and see if a policy has since been implemented. I don't think it's behooves the city to have a policy that any private entity can put up any message they want on a public building I think that's incredibly dangerous. I certainly don't think that having a very clear policy about the government itself putting up messages should be an issue. And I certainly don't think the excuse should be made, as the excuse was made by the Bayroll administration in 2020, that if we put one thing up, we have to put anything up. Well, no, if the government wants to put something up, they can put up what they want. And the Supreme Court just made it very clear that as long as we have a clear policy, we don't have to let anyone put up whatever they want. I'm going to thank the Supreme Court, which I very rarely do with the Supreme Court, for making it very clear what our legal standing is when it comes to government speech in public buildings. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Vice President Bears. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. I think when we were coming into the building tonight, we saw a new flagpole being put up. So I'm assuming that's that'll coincide with some of the stuff here, because we were in violation that we were taking the POW flag down putting up other flags, even on a temporary basis which was a violation of the law so I'm assuming that the new flagpole that's up there. That's, that's, well you'll see it when you walk up the door will address some of these issues.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Collins]: Thank you, President. Thank you, Councilor Tseng for elevating this issue. I think that this decision really provides an opportunity for us to be proactive for us to clarify the city's policy. I think that it is not a great position for our city to put itself in, that any person can use our flagpole for any speech at all. I think that's a huge Pandora's box. But to take the first step first, I think that we absolutely need to see a clear policy or a clear response on what our current policy is. And if we don't have one, I think that's a huge Pandora's box. Let's take this opportunity to make one to close the door on legal troubles or more back and forth diatribes further down the line, whether that's through an administrative policy or through a clear ordinance that dispels out what our flagpole may be used for and by whom. So, thank you, Councilor Tseng.
[Morell]: Thank you Councilor Collins. Any further discussion from the Council? Councilor Tseng.
[Bears]: I'm Councilor bears mentioned possibly wanting to add in an ordinance was that a amendment to this, which I'd be happy to support but just that if we don't receive a response I think it would be a prompt response that clearly states that we will have an administrative policy, then to protect the city would probably be in the responsibility of this council to take our own action, so no amendment just great kind of a path forward. Yeah, I just want, I just wanted to clarify.
[Morell]: I do see Mr. Castagnetti with his hand up on Zoom. Mr. Castagnetti, name and address for the record, please.
[Castagnetti]: Andrew Castagnetti, Cushing Street, Medford Mass. As Councilor Marks might comment saying that this sounds like a slippery slope. Personally, I would think that only one thing should go on to that City property the flag and that would be the United States flag while we still have it and also the prisoner of war POW flag and pretty much nothing else Because it wasn't for our veterans. I don't think any of us would be here today tonight If you allow one entity to put up whatever their mission is and Who knows where that may end and who makes these final decisions? We might end up with some group or entity that wants to worship Satan. And I think it's a bad idea to mix the government with people's missions. That's all I have to say.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. On the motion of Councilor Tseng, seconded by Vice President Bears. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-363 offered by Councilor Tseng. Whereas the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, MBTA, has provided its bus network redesign proposal which includes changes affecting Medford residents in all neighborhoods and is now soliciting feedback from the public. Be it resolved that the city administration inform residents of the proposed changes to bus service in Medford and the MBTA's feedback survey, which is available online in English, Spanish, Portuguese, Chinese, Haitian, Creole, Arabic, Vietnamese, and French, and be it further resolved that the Subcommittee on Climate Sustainability and Transportation meet to draft feedback for the MBTA on changes to bus service in Medford. Councilor Sanders.
[Tseng]: I, I'm sure many many residents of the city of have now seen the bus network redesign proposal, but I wanted to put this on the agenda so that we got this the word out to you the more people. These are redesigns that would really impact every single neighborhood in Medford. Every single bus route has been affected in Medford and the service will change as well. I've seen residents who have. both positive and negative impressions about this plan. I think it's important to say that this plan is not yet final, and that the MBTA is still soliciting feedback. And, you know, in the past, They haven't always been receptive to the feedback of the council and to residents, we've, I know this, I know the previous council and the Councilors here today have fought very hard for the 325 and 326 to be service for those two bus routes to be restored in Medford. Unfortunately, that's not in this plane. you know, we just need to keep pushing, you know, and it's the only thing that we can do right now. And so if our residents are informed of the proposed changes, if they're informed of the feedback survey and ways to participate in giving feedback, that will push us a step further in trying to get the bus service that we want and we deserve here in Medford. I also attached language in there about having the subcommittee on climate sustainability and transportation, having that committee meet the draft feedback because I think feedback from a council will be what is valuable and will be at a different platform than, you know, if we were just to give feedback separately. I'd be, if there are other councillors who'd want to participate in this meeting, I'd be happy to amend that language as well. But I think this is an opportunity for us to be proactive and to take action on something that will affect a lot of residents in the city. And I wanted to also let residents know that there will be in-person sessions to give feedback As well, it's also on the MBTA website. I'm in the same place where you can find the feedback survey for the dates and times of that meetings of those meetings, and those meetings will run until the end of July.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Caraviello]: I don't know if Councilor Tseng knows, but City of Bedford is one of the fourth or fifth highest assessed communities for the T. And again, and I'm sure once the train station opens up at College Ave, our assessment is gonna go up even higher. And even though that's an additional service, we've seen a cut in service over the last few years. And again, I think our opinion, seeing that we pay such a high assessment, I think our opinion should mean something, even though we send these things to them, they don't respond or anything. It should be, it's a, we should have a seat and maybe some type of table I don't know if we, if the city has a representative to the T, but we should have something to say, because our assessment is ridiculous the amount we pay, and say we keep getting cutbacks and cutbacks. So again, I support this issue.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Councilor Tsengford for this forward. You know, this council has fought very hard for the 325 and 326 and 710. I was actually slightly glad to see that the new 100 route in here would include a lot of the previous 710, except for the part in the heights, which is of course one of the most important. It's still the heights you have to walk to one side or the other to get transit access. I will say that I think the, proposed T 96 and T 101 with 15 minutes service is a great addition to the community, especially the T 96 connecting the red, orange and green lines with service every 15 minutes, but I do completely agree that there are some major gaps in here that need to be addressed. I very much doubt we're going to get the express bus service back I know that nobody wants to hear that, but there. If you look at this redesign it eliminated it everywhere. It's not just Medford it's all the express buses are gone. And that has been an initiative of the Baker administration to privatize or otherwise eliminate express bus service, which we have seen impact our community. I think it makes a lot of sense for this council to serve. I, I hear you on the climate transportation subcommittee. If you're amenable I think a committee of the whole might be a better venue. There's a lot of residents clamoring for for a voice in this. way that this was rolled out, there is kind of a specific PDF for Medford. It's talking about impacts specific to Medford. So I think we could host a committee of the whole, have residents issue their opinions, have Councilors issue theirs, and then submit that as a public comment as you intended to the MBTA. So if you wouldn't mind amending that to committee of the whole, and I would also just add for the benefit of the public, in addition to the in-person, Comments sessions, there's a virtual public meeting Wednesday, June 8 at 6pm for the mystic river and North Shore region for the bus network redesign so that should be focusing a little bit more on on our area as well. And I know that there's a lot of residents who are concerned and some residents who are happy, and I'm hoping that we can keep the good and maybe ameliorate some of the bad as we work through this process with the T. I think they're not gonna start changing routes until next year, and this whole process does go through 2028. So I am, while skeptical based on past experience, I am slightly hopeful that the extended timeframe means that some adaptation and adjustment may be possible. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you. Councilor Tseng for bringing this forward. I think that as the former chair of the transportation subcommittee, it was daunting to get their assistance. But one thing I realized that I would if we can add is maybe using some influence with someone in this room that maybe could bring someone from the transportation department to our meeting and actually have a voice there that can answer some questions. So I think that maybe adding an invitation for someone from transportation to come in and help with that. So I don't know who that person can be, but maybe if we can, um, ask, uh, uh, clerk her to be, so if he can reach out to maybe any of his, uh, former colleagues, if we know of any to really just to push, I know you've been, you work very closely with me, uh, uh, Mr. Her to be seen clerk her to be used to, to get some initiatives pushed forward in the last few years because of your, your, um, knowledge of some people in the DOT and hopefully that might help to get someone to our meeting. So if we, I would second the motion to make this into a committee of the whole meeting. And then I would also add to add someone from the MBTA to be there as a representative.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpello, do you want somebody from MassDOT and the T, or one or the other, or both, or?
[Scarpelli]: You have vast experience, I think. You may be adding your guidance. I think that in the past, you've led me to bring in all the stakeholders. So, you know, the stakeholders that are really in charge of making these decisions, I think I leave that to you. If you can guide us a bit, I'd appreciate it. Done. Thank you.
[Morell]: further discussion.
[Knight]: I'm just Madam President. If in fact, we are going to be sending a letter right past that that letter come out of the Committee of the whole subcommittee. That's the only question I have but I support them out.
[Morell]: As long as you accept that you don't have to formally motion.
[Hurtubise]: Okay, great.
[Morell]: So on the motion of Councilor Tseng as amended by Vice Mayor Bears and Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor. Aye. All those opposed, motion passes. 22-364 offered by Councilor Caraviello, be it resolved that the Medford City Council have Eversource repaint the crosswalks and bike lanes on South Street in the interest of public safety.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. For those of us who drive up and down South Street right now, you'll see that all the bike lanes are pretty much wiped away and the crosswalks are pretty much all gone, along with some repair work that's been done over there. I think that, I'd like to have Eversource go by there and repaint crosswalks and the bike lane for the interest of public safety, but before they repaint the crosswalks, a couple of neighbors have reached out about maybe repositioning those or maybe Todd Blake could maybe reach out to some neighbors and find out what their issues with the crosswalks are, it would be greatly appreciated. And if I could further amend this to from Method Square right down to the Winthrop Street Rotary, almost every crosswalk in front of the school, library, and everywhere is pretty much gone. If we can further amend that to at some point have those crosswalks in Method Square, all the way down to the Rotary at Route 60 repainted in the interest of public safety also.
[Morell]: Yeah. Gone now. Yeah. Oh yeah, it's gone now.
[Caraviello]: Yeah.
[Hurtubise]: Yeah, the bus lane was gone, so waste of paint.
[Caraviello]: Watercolors.
[Scarpelli]: Thermoplastic, I got four words for you. Thermoplastic sidewalks. Yeah, thermoplastic. So whatever we can.
[Caraviello]: They did do it on High Street, the crosswalks are thermoplastic. I'm gonna give them that. But the green paint that they painted on High Street is gone now. We'll approve.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Caraviello. As amended. Sorry, question on bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I realize this now. Could we, well, I don't know, I don't know what to do about this, but I think maybe we should actually have Mr. Blake down along with Mr. McGivern and Mr. Wartella whenever source comes. I know we've already passed that. So maybe I'll throw it on as a V paper to this one to invite Todd Blake as well to request that Todd Blake join us, because maybe he could give us an update on all of the painting and whether or not it was temporary or permanent or whatever. So B paper to invite Todd Blake to come down to discuss the Eversource project.
[Morell]: Do I have a second on that? Second. All right, we'll take the B paper first. So on the motion by Susan Bares to invite Todd Blake to come down to discuss the status of the Eversource project, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? B paper passes. And on the main motion from Councilor Caraviello as amended by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by
[Bears]: Second.
[Morell]: President Bears, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. Public participation. We do not have anyone in the chambers tonight, so is there anyone on Zoom who would like to speak for public participation? Please raise your hand. I do see Mr. Castagnetti. Mr. Castagnetti, name and address for the record, please.
[Castagnetti]: Same address, Andrew Castagnetti. What's the population of Medford, by the way?
[Knight]: It's 60,000.
[Morell]: It's give or take 60,000.
[Castagnetti]: And how many people did you say are in the audience?
[Knight]: We don't have the number ratings, Mr. Castagnetti. We're not aware how many people are in the audience.
[Castagnetti]: Thank you for the answer. Thank you very much. Have a wonderful evening.
[Bears]: In terms of the in-person audience, it is currently zero, Mr. Castagnetti.
[Castagnetti]: Thank you, sir. I appreciate your input. Good night.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Castagnetti. All right. Unless there's anyone else who would like to speak for public participation, moving on, I did get a note from the clerk that paper 20-600, we could probably move up unfinished business. If anyone would like to motion to take it up. It is the National Grid grant of location. They need to resubmit, so we can just receive and place a file. So motion to... A motion of Councilor Knight to take 20-600 off the table and receive and place on file, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. That is the end of our agenda. On the motion of Councilor Knight to adjourn, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes, the meeting is adjourned. Thank you. And just a reminder that tomorrow night's Committee of the Whole has been canceled as we addressed it tonight's Committee of the Whole.
|
total time: 12.59 minutes total words: 2240  |
total time: 6.42 minutes total words: 1315  |
total time: 11.7 minutes total words: 2039  |
total time: 7.35 minutes total words: 1114  |
|
total time: 8.82 minutes total words: 1585  |
total time: 6.65 minutes total words: 1091  |
total time: 3.88 minutes total words: 662  |
|