[Morell]: 20th regular meeting of the Medford City Council is called to order for May 17 2022 Mr. Clark, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears present counter carry over.
[Knight]: Madam President, motion to suspend the rules.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Knight to suspend the rules to take a paper out of order.
[Knight]: That is correct, Madam President. I'd like to take the last paper on the agenda out of order for this evening, paper 22356, a request for an expenditure from the law department.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Knight to take paper 22-356 out of order, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. 356 request for expenditure. Department for claims over $1,000. To President O'Connor and honorable members of the Medford City Council from Brenna Lungo-Koehn. Claimant name, Adam Hurtubise. Date of incident, April 1st, 2021. Date of trial result, not applicable. Amount of request, $2,850. Claimant's attorney, not applicable. Description of alleged claim. The claimant, Adam Hurtubise, seeks reimbursement of fees paid as a result of sewer damage to his property on Saunders Street in Medford, Massachusetts. The case was settled prior to trial. The necessary release has been obtained from the claimant. Breakdown amount requested, medical costs zero, loss wages zero, property damage 2,850, other zero, and total settlement $2,850. Mr. Herbie would like to speak to this for a moment.
[Hurtubise]: I have to recuse myself. This is obviously my house. It's sewage damage to my basement. So just to avoid any appearance of any kind of conflict of interest, the assistant city clerk is gonna preside for this. We're gonna record this vote total.
[Morell]: Good evening. Good evening. Thank you, Madam Clerk. So on the motion of Councilor Caraviello to approve second by Vice President Bears. Any discussion? I do not see her on the call.
[Knight]: The only reason I ask is because we're the clerks and employee of the council. When we need to invoke the rule of necessity to properly appropriate the funds. concerned about that. But I certainly have no problem proving the funds and gentleman had a switch back up into his house. I certainly warranted remediation questions whether or not how we take the vote, we take the vote is a straight roll call vote as we usually do it, we have to invoke the rule of necessity, or does it doesn't matter. Because the city solicitor has not provided us with an opinion, it does matter. It doesn't. So just like to be on the record, you know, I raised the issue
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. So on the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Vice President Bears, Madam Clerk, if you could please call the roll.
[SPEAKER_12]: Okay, Vice President Bears. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Collins. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Schapelle. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Morell.
[Morell]: Yes. Seven in favor, zero in the negative, the motion passes. On the motion of Councilor Nieto, we're back to regular order of business. Second by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. I'll give a moment for the clerk to come back up. I know you're ready, Mr. Clerk. Okay. Announcements, accolades, remembrances, reports, and records. Records, the tabled records of the May 3rd, 2022 meeting were passed to Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Caraviello, how did you find them?
[Caraviello]: Madam President, I had the opportunity to review them and I do find them at all in motion for approval. Second.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Vice President Bears. All those in favor?
[Caraviello]: Aye.
[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes. The records of the meeting of May 10 2022 were passed to cancer Collins cancer Collins, how did you find them. I found them in order and I move for approval on the motion of cancer Collins second by second. All those in favor.
[Hurtubise]: All right.
[Morell]: All those opposed. Motion passes reports of committees to zero dash zero to four May 10 2022 committee of the whole report to follow. Why am I blanking on what this was?
[Bears]: Affordable Housing Trust.
[Morell]: Oh, this is, okay. This is the second meeting of the Affordable Housing Trust. We had a number of changes and we're waiting for feedback from the city as well as council. On the motion of Councilor Knight to approve, second by?
[Hurtubise]: Second.
[Morell]: Vice President Bears, all those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. Announcements, accolades, and remembrances. 22-351 offered by Vice President Bears. be it resolved that the Medford City Council that we recognize and celebrate Haitian Heritage Month and Haitian Flag Day on Wednesday, May 18th, Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I'd move to join this with Councilor Tseng's motion 22-352.
[Morell]: On the motion of Vice President Bears to join 22-351 and 22-352, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. And thank you, Councilor Tseng as well. I'm glad that we had the same thought on this one. As folks know, this is Haitian Heritage Month and Haitian Flag Day is on Wednesday. I do know there was a ceremony at the Andrews School over the weekend, which I think is fantastic as well. And I just think it's a great chance for us to recognize and honor our Haitian American community here in Medford. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Vice President Bears. Councilor Tsai.
[Tseng]: The Haitian community is significant here, and they've, they've done a lot to move our city forward, especially as our city is doing better now to to engage with our Haitian community here in Medford through the Haitian Community Task Force. And I wanted to commend their efforts too, and their successful event on Saturday that Councilor Rivera mentioned, which I was able to attend. I believe there's a flag raising later this week as well, which members of our community are welcome to attend. All, you know, all of our communities are important to us. And I think it's, I think the city council is very, you know, a champion of, of inclusivity and a champion of inclusive measures. Earlier in our session, we as a city council passed a resolution supporting Haitian migrants in Medford, which actually through a collaboration with neighboring cities actually did have an effect in changing their administration policies. which the Biden administration stated, and I'm proud of our council's work in the last few months to make sure that we are making Medford a home for everyone, and our Haitian community is part of that.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further discussion? On the motion, Vice President Bears is seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Morell]: All those opposed? The motion passes. Petitions, presentations and similar papers, 22-339 petition for grant location. On the motion of Councilor Ntuk to waive the reading, seconded by Vice President Bears. All those in favor?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes. Do we have anyone in person or on the line for this grant of location from National Grid? We did have the information in our packets this week. I'm not seeing, I know I'm not, sorry, go ahead. There's anyone on the line who can speak to this grant application from National Grid, if you could raise your hand. I'm not seeing anyone motioning so far. On the motion of Councilor Knight to table, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. I'll keep an eye and see if anyone shows up. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 22-353 offered by Vice President Beyers. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council, that the council and the mayor invite DCR Commissioner Stephanie Cooper to Medford to conduct a site visit of DCR roads, parks, and properties in the city of Medford, and meet with the mayor, council, state delegation members, city staff members, and local advocates. be it further resolved that the goals of this meeting are to detail the great benefits and significant impacts of DC our own ways and properties on the city of Medford and improve communication between DC are the city of Medford and the residents of Medford to ensure prompting collaborative responses to improve conditions for all stakeholders, be it further resolved that the mayor send a copy of this resolution invitation Senator Jalen's office as the center has graciously offered to help set up the visit by Susan affairs.
[Bears]: Thank you Madam President. So, I think as this council as well where, as many Councilors here have put forward resolutions regarding the DCR and the state of the properties in our community. that there's a lot of work that we really need DCR to step up on in terms of keeping their ways and properties clean, making sure that their construction projects are communicated with the city and that they're making the improvements that we want to see as a community, and that we also have, you know, clean and safe and fair access to all of the parks and those great benefits that we have from DCR managed properties as well. And I think, as this council knows the responses to us have been either slow or non existent, and the same is true of the city staff the mayor as well. You know, and I think, given the advocacy of this council and the municipality as well a number of resident organizations, Walk Medford, the newly formed Route 16 coalition, which is looking at the entire stretch of Route 16 and trying to improve that, as well as I think what likely will form between Medford and Malden, some work around the Felsway and improvements on that property. I think it's time that we invite the new commissioner of DCR down here to meet with us, to hear our concerns directly, to meet with city staff and build stronger lines of communication so we can get those prompt and speedy responses to our requests, as well as having a clear And, you know, advanced notice when DCR is going to come in and impact our community, and I think this is a way to do it. I was meeting with Senator Jalen and we kind of discussed this and she thought it would be good for the council to originate this, I did speak with the mayor and she was in favor of this as well. So I'm sure that with this council's support that all of us can work together to get the DCR folks down here to make a real impact and try to make a real change in the relationship between the city of Medford and DCR. So I asked for my colleagues support and I hope that this effort can try to jumpstart the work that we've already been doing around this issue.
[Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you very much. Thank you very much.
[Caraviello]: We've got so much property known by them, and they leave in such disrepair, and you know what there's a lot of stuff to the safety hazards for the last three years, we have that we have that the kayaking and the club number has been that tree in the middle of the water for three years now I've asked every year for them to at least get the tree out of this so people don't get hurt when they go by that still there. The roads, all their properties are all on disarray. And again, I support this with Councilor Beza. Something that I've been on them every single year to do is stay on top of their property, because hey, I think we have our fair share of DCI property here that should at least be clean, trimmed, and kept in an orderly fashion. So I'll second Councilor Beza's motion.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion? Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. I know that there are a number of DCI-owned properties that have service contracts with the city, where the city is afforded the opportunity to maintain and upkeep certain properties, one of those being the Condon Shelves, Councilor Caraviello was speaking of down at the sleeping hall. So I just ask that as part of this paper that we get a copy of all the service and maintenance agreements that we have with the DCI, so we know who's responsible for what. Ultimately, it is the DC has land, but the city in the past has signed on to be responsible for the maintenance and upkeep of certain houses. So for us to make an informed decision, I think we need to know what fossils those are, and whether or not those agreements still exist, and whether or not they need to be maybe beefed up a little bit to get us what community needs and benefits necessary to protect this.
[Morell]: Thank you. Would you like to be an amendment? Any further discussion? I also just want to thank Vice President Bears for bringing this forward. I know it's frustrating for residents, it's frustrating for us. Anytime that someone raises an issue, we realize it's a DCR road, a DCR property, and we know that oftentimes we're going to hit our head against the wall trying to get something done. So hopefully this can help us move on that subject. So on the motion of Vice President Bears as amended, oh, sorry, Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: Thank you. I was just also going to mention, you know, during my time here, during the session, we've passed countless resolutions on DCR property, you know, trying to get it clean, trying to get things fixed, trying to make things more accessible, more friendly to residents. It is certainly frustrating to see the lack of response from the DCR. And because of the structures, you know, the institutional structures, the accountability is just not there right now. I thank Vice President Bears for introducing this because I think this is one of the ways that we can leverage our power as a city council and as the city of Medford to try to get the DCR to do better and to do more for our city.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. On the motion of Vice President Bears as amended by Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor?
[Bears]: Aye.
[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes.
[Bears]: Madam President. Motion to take paper 22339 off the table.
[Morell]: I do just want to know that. Thank you. Oh, great. That's the one on the motion of ice and bears take to to dash 339 off the table as we do have a representative with us now second by tonight all those in favor. Petition presentations and similar papers 22-339 petition for a grant of location on National Grid North Andover Massachusetts relocation of utility pole jointly on the horizon New England for Massachusetts. I do believe we have a representative from National Grid with us. If you could please come to the podium, share your name and address for the record, please, and just give us an overview of the proposed project we're looking at.
[SPEAKER_13]: Correct. John Jankowski, 170 Medford Street in Malden, Mass. I apologize for being late. And I was here on last week. I couldn't get on. Sorry about that. Thank you for coming back. I remember when Robert Penta called, so I was there. I just couldn't get on. I apologize for that. So that pole is going to be relocated. They're going to build an underground residential development there. and they're gonna have to move it 15 feet, I believe. The road won't be disturbed. It's just the panels, the sidewalk. So if you have any questions or concerns, I can definitely answer those questions. When do we expect the work to be done? As you know, as soon as possible. I know they're doing some work out there.
[Scarpelli]: So the is a date, daytime hours.
[Scarpelli]: How long would that take? Oh, it would be just one day. All right. And would it impact impact any neighbors driveways or anything? I don't believe so. No. All right. That's a case.
[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for being here.
[Bears]: For the panels that are disturbed, are they just going to be replaced with concrete? And this is a little out of scope, so I understand if we can't insert right now, but it was something I was thinking of last week when we were taking a look at this. Is there any long-term plan by National Grid, and I know Verizon co-owns these poles as well, for moving services underground, or is that not really on the radar?
[SPEAKER_13]: No, it's an overhead area, so it's going to stay overhead. Okay, if someone wants to go underground, there'll be a cost involved in that. Okay, thank you.
[Morell]: Any further discussion? I just have one question. So I know there's obviously long-term work there with that new development. These sidewalk panels, you'll do the work and it will be replaced immediately. And then whatever happens down the line happens down the line, not waiting for that project to fully replace them. Okay, thank you. On the motion of Councilor Knight to approve, seconded by? Councilor Caraviello, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes.
[Hurtubise]: Thank you very much. Thank you so much.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Naito to revert back to regular order of business, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-354 offered by President Morales, unless anyone objects, be it resolved that the Medford City Council, by the Medford City Council, the Council submit proposals or ideas for the FY23 City Budget to the City Clerk by Monday, May 23rd at 3 p.m. for consideration at the City Council's FY23 Budget Proposal Committee of the Whole meetings to be scheduled for Tuesday, May 24th. and Wednesday, May 25, as needed. So this paper is before us, I think, since the then new administration came in two years ago, there was the hope of having these pre-budget meetings and for whatever reason, they've never materialized. And this is just the intention to take things into our own hands to at least communicate what we as a council are seeking from the budget, rather than getting the budget delivered to us kind of at the last hour and really not having as much for the woman's life. So that is my intention. I would hope to schedule them for Tuesday and if we need to, we can go to Wednesday as well for next week. Any further discussion?
[Knight]: Second.
[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Naik, seconded by Vice-President Paris. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. 22-355 offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council have the company that installed the bocce courts at Riverside Ave, return to repair them with the proper materials and make them the proper size. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, this is the third time I've had this on the agenda. City of Medford went out and hired a company that supposedly does tennis courts and bocce courts. And anyone I know, I don't know very much about bocce, but I know those aren't bocce courts. Those are sand pits. and their voucher cards don't have sand in them, they have clay and they're too big. And I can't believe we paid money to a company to put in voucher cards for people to play on them that are just not voucher cards, they're just sand and you throw the ball, the ball just sinks. I mean, they, and I said, suppose a company does it, this is my third time asking them, if not, I say, make a motion that we have the city solicitor file suit against them to bring them up to where they're supposed to be to be considered a budget court, not a sandbox.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion?
[Knight]: Madam President, I just asked that this paper also be sent to the Director of Recreation. I know the Recreation Department's been expanding their programming related to blotchy. If you look at the Recreation booklet, you'll see that they have pickup games, I guess is what you want to call it, of blotchy down there as well. So I think this is something that the recreation department's really trying to take a look at investing some energy and effort into and having the state of the art quality facilities is what's going to really increase participation, I think, so I think it's a great measure. The budget quotes are something I was always very supportive of. I was the sponsor of the initial resolve under the Burke administration that brought these to fruition, and Councilor Caraviello is right, the specs are not up to community standards.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. And Councilor Caraviello, do you want to amend the paper?
[Caraviello]: Yes, that if it's not repaired that we have to see a solicitor go after the company financially to repair or some type of reimbursement and we'll do it on our own. I mean, not that big of a deal. All you gotta do is come in with some clay, put it down there, but probably an hour's worth of work, two hours worth of work. So again, it's been three years. We're waiting for this to get done.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. On the motion of Councilor Caraviello as amended by Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. On the motion of Councilor Knight to take 22317 and 22318 from the table. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22317, the loan order for Sidewalk Fonz is eligible for its third reading on May 17th, 2022. I do believe, is there any current discussion on this? I do believe we have representatives from the administration that are able to speak to this.
[McGivern]: Good evening, councillors. It's me, Gibran. Now I'm the DPW commissioner. So, and Owen Motel with me. He is the new city engineer.
[Wartella]: He hasn't left already. I'm the new city engineer, Owen.
[Morell]: Thank you. And we did have a number of questions addressed by Chief of Staff Nisarian, but I think also if you were able to more speak to the work that could be anticipated with this bond, but of course there's specific questions from my fellow councillors. have a presentation, go ahead.
[Wartella]: We have no presentation, basically. You have a map. We have a map, yes. So we were going to... I can do that. So this is a heat map for the sidewalks on the stated sidewalks, which ones are priority. And within that report, it gave the amount of money that our backlog is, and it showed the state of the sidewalks, and it also showed the hot zones, and it created this presentation map here, which overlays, it's a heat map with the priority of the sidewalk state.
[McGivern]: Yeah, I would add to that that the other piece of data that's used is the amount of pedestrian traffic that is going towards the central location. So a lot of these are schools, hospitals, T stations, you know, major bus areas, things like that. So that's what this map identifies. So it helps the engineers try to figure out where to focus the attention. I will mention that this is really the first year that we're using two sets of data as opposed to one. The one set that was used prior to this year was a list of sidewalk repair requests that the DPW maintains. That list is approximately 1,700 locations long and reports long. And we were going by that prior, but now this makes the data a lot more rich and usable because now we're able to say, oh, OK, well, know what we want to do, what the heat map tells us, and what this set of data is telling us. And then we're able to cross-reference it with the requests that are being made by the public to make sure that we're putting a list together for the contractor, the engineer, or even in-house as well to know what we need to be focusing our attention on. So that's a key difference, I think, from other years. Also, another key difference I just want to point out is that We know what we need to do now, which we didn't really before because we did not have this assessment. a very good idea of how much money we need to spend, how much planning we need to do to get to where we need to be, and I'm confident we'll get there. But it is going to take all the tools and toolbox approach. So one of the reasons I'm here is to try to explain in-house what I'm looking at strategically to get us to a place in-house where we can do more sidewalk work, And we can do more street and road work, to be honest. So that's things like, right now, evaluating the use of a sidewalk grinder so we can take care of a lot of the obstructions that have been reported both by residents as well as the data that was collected as part of this project. And we can probably take care of a lot of those in-house with just grinding down the panel. So that's one thing that I'm trying to do. And then I am also trying to talk strategy about our highway department and how to get them the resources that they need. For example, we're looking at a used spreader machine so we can do greenhouse paving. So we started doing greenhouse patching but we're doing it by hand, so I'm looking at getting equipment so we can even become more efficient at that. That strategy is slower, and we also know we have the immediate need of sidewalk repair work to do. So in my mind, it's really both. We're doing in-house strategy and figuring out the best way to do to do that and grow that and then in the meantime we know we have these 1700 locations and we have this data that tells us where we need to be so we're basically ready to go with the locations and maybe you can talk more about the specific locations with a contractor to do you know the one million over two years really try to get as many locations as we can resolve so that's that's you know the the pitch I'm making with that that piece.
[Wartella]: So yeah, the last bond, we were able to do about 220 to 250 locations per year. And this year, we anticipate that that number will probably go down due But, you know, that's why we have roughly, I think the studies said we have around 2100 locations to do within the city. And, you know, we're, you know, this heat map basically helps us prioritize those.
[Scarpelli]: So first, thank you for coming out tonight. I know that first I want to thank Chief of Staff Nazarian. I had some questions last week and I've been championing a sidewalk hot top crew for, I think, since the year I started. I think that until we do that, and it's good to hear that we're trying to find some equipment and have some onsite with our staff, but until we do that, even if we catch up, if we don't have, this isn't ongoing, year round as soon as the week that the cement is is mixed and we can stop pouring cement. This is going to, it's just going to continue no you know as well as I do. So I'm glad to see that we're trying something I, I, you know, I did talk to the mayor and I know we have some budget concerns coming up and I know it's difficult hiring a whole new crew, but it's something that when keep coming to us and the city keeps coming to us and asking for $250,000 million. It's frustrating, and I'm sure you can understand that. It's frustrating because this isn't an issue that just happened this year. This isn't this is something that's been going on for years. So, you know, I've always been taught to think ahead and try to find a way, not only to try to fix the solution, but make sure we stay ahead of that, that that's that problem as we move forward. So, those are my concerns and my questions I think that with that. The other concerns I had were the fact that unfortunately the procurement system is that has to go out to bed. And what I fear, and working municipality I get a different advantage by talking to colleagues that I work with and understanding the lack of true contractors that are out there. that aren't busy that aren't working that can do masonry work that that's a piece that I'm hoping we have licensed masons or people that work with cement I hear in some communities that they're bidding out to landscapers, and they're making big bucks because they can bid for an easy, an easy buck because no one else is bidding for them. So, I just, we just want to make sure that we're, we're handling that the correct way and making sure that we're staying on top of that. Because again, We have a crew that comes out there and uses the wrong mix or pours it the wrong way or whatnot and slopes it the wrong way. And now it's turned into a rain issue in someone's neighborhood or someone's property. So these are concerns that it's comical that people just listen to your concerns that you want to express as a council that constituents have asked for and said, shame on you for not wanting to fix sidewalks. you'd be a fool not to want to fix sidewalks, okay? I think everybody here wants that done. I think making sure that all of our questions are answered and we're putting the best foot forward, which I think the assessment's a great, great step. I know that I've talked to the mayor and people, from what I gather, we're looking at the most needy sidewalks where most dangerous sidewalks correct it's not going to be people aren't going to jump because somebody calls from one side of the city or not and everything wants to get done in front of this person's house of that we're going to we're going to track we're going to go after the number one sidewalks.
[McGivern]: That's correct. Yeah, we're still going to track the links coming in, and that's not going to change. And we do cross-reference that list or the spreadsheet for this one. And even if we get it more than once, that's logged in the spreadsheet as well. So we try to capture everything in the DPW that comes in. But this is a whole new set of data that really allows us to hone in on not just the dangerous, most dangerous areas, but the areas that have the most pedestrian traffic, and then we want to focus on as a representative of the public. The long term plan in my mind as the DPW commissioner is to do just what you explained. It's just much, it's a longer arc. And I am a new person at the helm at DPW. And I think hopefully you've seen what I've tried to do in engineering is sort of steer the ship towards making sure that our data is backing up the work that we're doing. and I think a lot of people are familiar with the assessments at this point, you know, really to keep ahead of ourselves, to match the deterioration rate with the work that we need to put into it, whether it's in-house or contract, you know, the estimates are about two and a half million dollars worth of effort annually. So the half a million dollars that we're talking about is just a piece of a much bigger puzzle. We're going to, in my opinion, we're going to need to be building our in-house capacity, as well as doing contract work for many years to catch up with ourselves and to get the 1700 locations down. and to make sure we're focusing our attention and our resources on the hotspots located on this map. So I think that's what I'm really focused on that piece.
[Scarpelli]: Well, I appreciate that. And this is why this meeting is so important. I appreciate you coming out tonight. I think that the last piece is, in the past, we've asked for lists. We've asked, just tell us. The proof is in the pudding people want to see so when they when we would ask in the past can we have a list. It was daunting so I'm glad to see that we have this assessment that we can, we can actually now chart and follow the data as we're taking them off. So I know I talked to the mayor and she said that that's not going to be a difficult task now we can now be informed. of you know maybe monthly updates saying this is what we did and this is where we're going so it gives us a good understanding what what's getting done so we can actually see it and you know we you know the question a lot of times in the past um is we just bonded 250 000 and it doesn't seem like we've done anything well it was tough for us to say well look at this area this year because we didn't know so i think that it's important that we get that data as well
[McGivern]: You are highlighting a very important point. And I think that we want to provide that information. And I believe that I don't want to speak alone, but I've just been around this sort of work for a while. And I think in previous years, because the engineering office has done a lot of resident engineer work for this project in prior years, there's uh this desire to want to get it all done and there's a desire to satisfy the squeaky wheel so to speak and those are very strong desires so i think what has happened in the past is we don't always know where the resources are going to be focused. Necessarily, we have this great list, we have inspections in the field, and we have the anecdotal and the institutional knowledge, that's what we're going by, right? This time, it's like I was saying, and that it's really the point I want to keep highlighting, it's different this time, and I think if know we're doing it the way we'd like to do it and focusing on the data and approaching in that way it will be much easier for us to provide something like monthly updates here's what we did this month here's what we're planning on doing next month that's something that i think we can definitely if we can make that to a motion that'd be
[Scarpelli]: you know, to ask for the DPW commissioner for once this project had started, even for a monthly update, that would be great. And I'll end on a personal note. I kid you not, as I'm walking in here, fellow Councilors heard my wife call me crying. Avid runner, marathon runner, going for a nightly run, raised sidewalk, hit their foot, hit the top of the race sidewalk, and now my daughter's taking her to the doctor. So this is stuff that, this is what you wish, as we're going through, it's that important. And I'm sure I'm just one case. And so it's imperative that we need to get these sidewalks fixed. We need to focus on our infrastructure. It's a vital piece of our community. We all know that. So, and again, the questions I brought up in last week's meeting where I think very valid and appreciate the answers. I think that between the chief of staff, the mayor, and two fine gentlemen in front of us, I think that I'm satisfied with what direction we're moving into, and I hope we see some real movement, and I appreciate that. So thank you.
[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I was talking to Commissioner McGibbon the other day, and made the faux pas that I thought he'd been around for like a decade because of how much work he's done in the last three or four years. So you have big shoes to fill, but I'm just mentioning that to somebody else. I'm confident that you will. But just to follow up on actually one of Councilor Scarpelli's questions, one of the things we were talking about last month was trying to get this out a little early, you know, get the first reading done in April so we could try to get bids and procurement out. Has that happened or are we waiting for this third reading to start the procurement process?
[McGivern]: You wanna answer? It has been procured and we did receive some bids and they're high, like Owen was mentioning. So those bids do reflect the inflation. So the way that we would do that is work with the contractor.
[Scarpelli]: Point of information, sorry. Qualified bidders though, Tim, are we getting qualified construction companies?
[McGivern]: I didn't get that detail, but I know you and Marco did it. Yes. Yes.
[Bears]: Thank you. Great. Thank you. And thank you both. No, you're fine. So that leads into my next question. Obviously going to support this. I think it's good. I think whatever work we can do to try to at least stay afloat, right? Not keep things from getting worse. That's sometimes maybe the best we can do with the limited conditions that we have right now. But as I recall, we had, and I'm just trying to remember the numbers in my head, you probably have them in yours, the $100 million backlog, that was streets and sidewalks together, correct?
[Wartella]: There's 51, as of 2021, there's reports state that it was 51 plus million in resurfacing work for roadways. The sidewalks are around 31 plus, closer to 32 million backlog.
[Bears]: Right, okay, thank you. That's 31 numbers what I was looking for.
[McGivern]: know and do we expect that those numbers have increased since 2021 just with the inflation and yeah there's a conservative numbers when they do these types of reports yeah but yeah we're starting to approach that sort of getting close to that conservative number just based on cost materials okay great uh well terrible but but but it's good to have the information yeah um so
[Bears]: You said the 2.5 million a year, that's what we're kind of trying to piece together. This was going to be 500,000, you know, just doing the math in my head, how long is it going to take us at current investment levels to get to a state of good repair?
[McGivern]: This sidewalk is tougher to answer that question because we didn't have a full condition index economic analysis that we did with the pavement, which really laid it out in that report. Sidewalks, that, We didn't have that type of work done. But, you know, half a million dollars a year of just contract work obviously is not going to cut it. It's got to be some combination, and I don't know what the combination is, of in-house work and contract work for a while to get to a place where we don't have backlog anymore. I don't know how long that will take.
[Bears]: Okay. Thank you for the honesty and the directness. know, again, you've heard me make this point a million times before and I'm just going to make it again for the sake of making it. People are getting hurt on the sidewalks. We know that there's a sidewalk problem, we know the reason of decades of disinvestment in sidewalks, we know how important it is to have good high quality sidewalks and streets for people to be safe for all modes of transportation for all of the issues with collisions and crashes and injuries that happen on streets and sidewalks. Nevermind that we are also probably have liability exposure on things like that, as we know from some of the cases that have come against the city. And I really do think it's imperative. And this obviously is not in your purview, but I'm just saying it anyway. That, you know, this council and the city administration come up with a plan to significantly invest in the backlogs of capital needs this community has, I think this community is ready for it I hear people asking for it I hear people. from all across the political spectrum all the time saying what's wrong with our roads what's wrong with our sidewalks what's wrong with our high school why don't we have a fire headquarters. And I think that if we all came together across, you know, different political beliefs different different, you know, voting groups that we could come up with a package and a plan that the people of this community would support to address those long term needs and get us on a good footing. where we can actually start to think about the go forward basis and keeping things in good repair, not thinking about how long it's gonna take us just to get there. So again, I'm gonna support this tonight, but I think it's pretty clear that we have a lot more investment and a lot more work to do in the long run. And I'm gonna keep making that point from this seat. And I hope that all of our colleagues in city government will come together and help us with that. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.
[Wartella]: Sorry, yeah. So, to repeat, basically, we typically do around 220 to 250 locations a year. And this year, due to inflation, we're expecting probably a little bit less than that, like on the lower end.
[Caraviello]: So, how many, how many reds, how many, how many panels are in that red group there? It depends on the location.
[Wartella]: So the way that this was mapped out on visually, well, the way that it was mapped out was on segments of roadway. Most of those segments are one location. Sometimes there's two. So on average, it's plus one. So that's, you know, that's times 200. So those. Okay.
[Caraviello]: But again, I say, how much, how much of the rate are we going to get done this year? We're going to, are we going to cut that rate in half? I think there's a lot more red than... I see, I see there's an awful lot of red there. Three to four years ago, I brought in the company that wanted to do sidewalk grinding here and we kind of let it, no one ever contacted them and along with the company, that that ground and ground and build the car, the asphalt right on on site. So as they as they ground they put it back on and, you know, we could probably get, you know, on secondary roads, and we could probably be paving two streets for the price of one. And again that and I say that was brought in and it kind of went kind of went no way I know.
[McGivern]: Well I know.
[Caraviello]: I don't know where it is now but I said that was brought in seven years ago. And again, didn't say didn't know it didn't materialize that there's a better way.
[Wartella]: Also the red priority is also non compliant ADA ramps. So those are, you know, a lot more of a priority to try to fix those first.
[Caraviello]: And I share the same concern, Councilor Scott. So we're late, we're late into the construction season. And by the time this goes out to bid and we bond it, maybe we might be starting in August, maybe July.
[Knight]: six to eight weeks, it's July.
[Caraviello]: July, okay. So, I mean, and I'm concerned about the quality of company that we're gonna be able to attract because everybody's, no matter what city or town you drive through, there's construction going on everywhere. And there's, everywhere in this whole state, there's construction.
[Wartella]: Just to be clear, we have bids already.
[Caraviello]: Right. Right. And who's gonna be monitoring? Are we gonna have someone on like a, Somewhat of a clerk of the works on these?
[McGivern]: Yes, yes. And who will that be? Yeah, an engineer from the engineering office. The past couple of years now has been being both resident engineer and sort of design engineer at the same time on this type of work. So in other words, the design part is helping the contractor figure out the scope of the spot. So it's a key panel. Is it just that panel or that one next to it is also not compliant, so let's do that one at the same time. So we have an engineer doing that and we also have an engineer checking quality control and measuring. So those are the two sort of points that we have.
[Caraviello]: Now in those registries, I'm assuming we're doing those first, if there's a stump there, are we going to be removing the stump at the same time?
[Wartella]: The stumps are in a different.
[Caraviello]: I know it's a different, but if one of the stumps is located on the right and they happen to be on the street, are we going to do both at the same time?
[Wartella]: The stumps are under a different contract that I don't believe was analyzed.
[McGivern]: I know what you're saying. I think we're going to try to find those synergies if we can, but we do have a contract list for stumps. And then we have another list of stumps that's just going to be ground down sidewalk work. And then we have this just sidewalk work. So to your point, I would like to find synergies as well with those two overlap. So we're not working in the same spot twice. But they will be two separate contractors under two separate sets of direction. And they do have the freedom of leads and methods. You know, but I think when those times when you say, oh, well, that stump needs to go and it's impairing that sidewalk, we're going to be trying to get that stump out of there. And if it's not something that we can repair correctly, we may not actually do that spot until we can repair it correctly.
[Caraviello]: So do you feel that we'll be able to get the 200 panels in by the end of the concrete season?
[Wartella]: I'm led to believe that we can do 200 locations if they could stretch that by that far.
[Tseng]: Thank you.
[Morell]: Other side.
[Tseng]: Thank you, Madam President. I just had two quick questions. The first one was, you had mentioned that a lot of these red sites are places with high traffic, for example, with schools, with commercial centers. Does the green line coming in change any of the prioritization for the sidewalks?
[McGivern]: that was included in this study as a location, a pedestrian desirable location. So yeah, the simple answer is yes.
[Tseng]: Great, thank you. And the second short question was, how did we get to the loan order amount of 1 million? I mean, was it just because we had done it in the past or?
[McGivern]: That I do not have an answer yet.
[Tseng]: No worries. I just asked because, you know, in times of inflation, it is actually wise to borrow more. And because, because of how inflation works. And so I was I was just saying, the point I wanted to make was, if we're in the same economic situation next year, nationally, with high inflation, it might be worth borrowing more. If, if we're in a similar situation, of course, the ideal is to have it in the city budget and to plan ahead. But That was the point I wanted to make. I also wanted to just state my kind of view on this issue. You know, I think it's clear that we need greater investment in our infrastructure in the city and I think there's wide political consensus for that. I think that this means bring things in house, so that we are creating better jobs, so that we are creating a system that's more reliable and a system that's more accountable for City Council to hold to hold our city accountable. I think ultimately this is an issue of accessibility it's an issue of, of equity for different neighborhoods. As we can see on that map different neighborhoods have have fallen behind when it comes to infrastructure. um coming over to the city council meeting we saw tons of young people especially using our sidewalk and as a young person you know who just graduated from medford high you know oftentimes we walk from the high school to medford square and you know these are these are routes that we take to go home and it's important that um we all you know we keep that safe and it's not just young people using of course all of our um residents use our sidewalks so i think it's important um that we get started now and i think that's the point that you two are trying to make is You know, there's a big challenge ahead of us, but it's really important that we start now, and that we make the investments that will make people's lives tangibly better today. And that's usually, you know, that's the metric I use to determine my votes is, will this vote make residents' lives better? And I think you two have created a very compelling presentation as to why that is the case. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Collins, then we'll go back to Vice-Chairman Bears and Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Collins.
[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell, and thank you so much for being here today and giving us this. thorough overview of the work that this bond could help to facilitate. I'm looking forward to supporting this tonight I just wanted to say I think that the direction that the DPW and the engineering department is taking us in now, both with the sidewalk improvements roster as well as things like the pavement management plan if I'm getting that name right that was released last year I think that those have been very helpful tools for myself as a representative and also for the communities who are sort of trying to get our arms around these as you say multi multi year projects of addressing the backlog kind of trying to chart that arc of how, where do we go from here and how long is it going to take. you know, speaking anecdotally you know and when folks reach out to me and say, you know, my street looks like this, when will that get fixed. It is not a task I enjoy to look at the plan and say well you're rated a yellow. So unfortunately that means that it's not this year. That's a painful thing to have to share at the same time it's helpful, and to go to Vice President Bears this point. I think that it strengthens the case for taking a very thoughtful focused look at how are we going to get to a place where we can sustainably fund capital improvements on a you know, non geologic timescale, and also how we're going to fund a more robust city payroll, so that over time we can bring more and more of this work in house if that's what's best for the community and best for infrastructure. So, thank you again and I think that this, as you say, data driven approaches, very useful for us and at least for me, and metabolizing it and sharing it with the community.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: I'll defer to Councilor Knight, thank you.
[Morell]: Oh, sorry, was I repeatedly missing you?
[Knight]: I don't think it was intentional.
[Morell]: I thought you were making chitchat.
[Knight]: Does the city replace sidewalks on private ways?
[McGivern]: As a matter of policy, I think in the past, the city has done it. There are issues that have to do with sidewalks on private ways. So I don't know if that answers your question.
[Knight]: I don't think it's... How about if we make it a yes or no question?
[McGivern]: Moving forward, I'd like it to be no, but there has been some precedent that has been set. There has been some expectations that have been set. So to peel away from that, I think it's going to take some time.
[Knight]: So the intention would be, I guess, moving forward, the city would be moving away from paving private ways, the sidewalks are private ways.
[McGivern]: I think it's, I'd like to better describe it by finding a policy that is a policy that we have some direction of moving forward on private ways, because right now, for my palate, there's too much gray area on what we should or shouldn't be doing. it in the past, we continue to work forward, especially with maintenance issues. I know public safety wise, we do make improvements to this issue of public safety for sure in private ways, but I think You know, there's work to be done there to figure out exactly what the city should be doing and what public money should be spent on private ways. And I know that there are options set out in ordinance for folks to do work in private ways. And I know that the city can also do work in private ways. But finding where we should be is the question that I have. So unfortunately, it's not yes or no. It's sort of like, yes, in the past, and there has been work done. And it's still sort of, yes, moving forward in the future, but as the academic commission, I want to make sure that we're spending public funds in the right places. And that could be privately, I'm not saying it's not, I'm saying that there's a lot of gray area there. It's a definition of that over time.
[Knight]: In this map with the 1700, or the 2100 sidewalk panels, Does this include private waste in this assessment?
[Hurtubise]: No.
[Knight]: Does not include private waste?
[Hurtubise]: Just public waste.
[McGivern]: Correct.
[Hurtubise]: Correct.
[McGivern]: City on the street. City full of jurisdiction, so publicly accepted waste.
[Knight]: And percentage wise, number of public waste versus private waste that we have in this community?
[McGivern]: 33%. So a third of the streets in this community are private waste?
[Knight]: There's a lot. Yes, there's a lot. So, in essence, there would be a third of the streets in this community, if we expend these funds, that would receive no benefit from it, regardless of when we do it, right? Because we're not gonna be paying for private sidewalks going forward for right now. If they're issued as well.
[Wartella]: I was gonna say, well, they could, because they don't just live in the private way, they go to the public ways. So, they will experience these funds when they go, you know, to the team.
[Knight]: There's a community benefit, yeah, but as the person that's said, I'm on the list for 11 years, and then you say it's private way, you're going to be on the list for another 11 years.
[McGivern]: I've had those calls. Yeah, so yeah, I will say that in that transition I was talking about, if there is, I'm not sure if we're staying accessible or not, But I will say that I've highlighted some areas that are of concern with public funds in private ways. And I think that public safety is always there. So if we feel that there's a public safety issue with sidewalk repair, that would be something that we would be able to do, spend public funds on it, and not have to worry about that expenditure.
[Knight]: And if somebody resides in a private way and they want to replace the sidewalk in front of the house, can they do it? All they have to do is pull a permit from you guys? It's not our problem.
[McGivern]: They can do it.
[Knight]: They can do it. Do they even have to pull a permit from you guys?
[Hurtubise]: Unless they're- Not necessarily, not by default.
[McGivern]: They just need approval from the form of the letter. We just did one. It does happen, and what I try to be, and as city engineer I try to be as honest with folks that call and want something like that. And the way that I describe it is that there's multiple paths to get what you'd like to get done. Here's our path with the public money in our process. And if you do not like that timeline, then you also have the option, if you have the resources to do it this way, just to make sure everybody understands what all of the options are in the public realm.
[Knight]: We have no real assessment on a third of the streets, just with the condition that there's about a third of the streets that are private ways in the community. We did no assessment on those Starbucks whatsoever.
[McGivern]: Yes, not the formal assessment.
[Knight]: Not the formal assessment, okay. I like this approach. I think that this is very helpful, you know what I mean? It looks like we're going to get more bang for our buck, right? Ultimately, it's like the sneakers that we're wearing most of the rubber off of are the ones we're going to replace, right?
[Hurtubise]: We're focusing the money where it needs to go, right?
[Knight]: Yes, I think it makes sense. You know what I mean? We're getting bang for our buck. you know, methodology, which we haven't seen in a long time. It's something I've been calling for for a long time, you know, so I appreciate what you're doing. I think that we need to really take a look at how we handle private ways in this community. It's not like they pay less taxes. I agree. In some most instances, they pay more. So when you look at the streets that are private ways and the homes that are on them, right? Bigger houses, bigger lots and the like, right? So we need to wrap our heads around this because the taxpayers in this community should receive the same services regardless of whether or not this street has been publicly or privately accepted. You know, that's legal mumbo-jumbo. The regular citizen in this community doesn't care about that. Right, what they care about is the fact that Councilor Bears said, we can disagree on just about everything in this place. The one thing we all agree on is our roads and sidewalks are in bad shape and we need to invest in them. All right, I'm happy to spend this money. I wish there was another zero at the end of it. Right, and I know you guys do too, right? Ultimately, at the end of the day, I know you guys do too. In the future, I'm going to call for a meeting. We can start really looking at talking about this private way stuff because, you know, I think that it really needs to be addressed. But, you know, you guys did a great presentation. I appreciate your work. Welcome aboard. Congratulations on your new appointment, maybe permanency. That's great. You've done a good job and you've proved it, you know what I mean, time and time again when you come up here. So thank you very much. I appreciate your honesty and openness in answering the questions.
[McGivern]: Thanks. Absolutely. Madam President, if I could just respond to that. I wholeheartedly agree, Councilwoman. I think that in-house, we talk about private ways, public expenditure, and how best to deal with it on a regular basis, on a day-to-day basis. And I would say that continuing that conversation with the Council are more than happy to do.
[Knight]: I don't know if you know the answer to this. Does accepting more public ways increase our eligibility or benefits for funding through the state house, maybe?
[McGivern]: It does, yeah, Chapter 90. That's one of the, we're not supposed to specify aid on private ways, it's illegal, right? So that's one of the issues.
[Knight]: Right, but if we turn these private ways into public ways, do we get more money too?
[McGivern]: Yes, yes. It's very easy to say that, and I think that we do, have a very good idea of what needs to happen to get more private ways into the public sector. It's just from an administrative type of work. It's a big chunk of work. Polls and levies involved. Maybe there's no levies, maybe there's city benefits provided or something. And then all the title owners need to agree with what's going on, I think it's more than 50%.
[Knight]: There's a process, right?
[McGivern]: There's a whole process involved. We're hopefully very soon, Freedomway and Steamroller Drive will be in front of this body for public acceptance, and that is a transfer. that was, I wouldn't say onerous, but you know, heavy on the administrative tasks. And when you're talking about private ways that are owned by potentially hundreds of other individuals, you got to get 50% of the people in the street to agree to do it.
[Knight]: You got to get seven, you got to get four here to agree to the five here to agree to this. So that's not enough. So I have to stay where you're coming from.
[McGivern]: both the planning board and this council would need to be okay with accepting a public waiver. That's a really broad topic.
[Knight]: Well, let's forget about that until I bring it up later on, because I think we're getting way off track. No problem.
[Morell]: I just love talking.
[Bears]: That's an helpful outline of it. Just two follow up questions. There's 33% of the streets, but do we know what a percent of the mileage are private ways?
[Wartella]: It's a little less than three miles.
[Bears]: A little less than three. And what's our total?
[Wartella]: Right now it's around... in my head, I have it at like 8.4, but I don't want to keep that up.
[Bears]: So that 33% is actually close to a mileage. It's not just the number of streets, it's actually the mileage of ways.
[McGivern]: I'm going to follow up and give you the correct information. I don't think that's right. OK.
[Bears]: That's fine. That'd be great. Yeah, because that's just, you know, I'm trying to find, you know, you have the number of streets, but some of the streets are this long and some of them are this long versus the mileage. Yeah, yeah.
[Wartella]: I'm way off, actually.
[Bears]: That's fine.
[Wartella]: No, I'm putting you on the spot. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
[Bears]: No, we'll get the right answer. And then my second question is kind of a similar one. When we talk about the 200 locations, do you have that measured out? And I understand maybe they haven't entirely all been selected yet, but could you give that number in linear feet or mileage? Or could you give that to us going forward?
[McGivern]: We talk about what a location is, and a location can be anything from one panel to half a dozen panels, probably on average two to three. Another reason why I like that monthly report idea better than providing a list of funds is because we may end up on a street doing one location, and then 10 feet away, that wasn't on the list. It wasn't on this. While we're here, we should do whatever. There's quite a bit of that that happens. So sometimes we'll make the choice on the spot that day to go to that one day. Even maybe across the street, sometimes we'll say, boy, this whole block is bad. We need to do a lot sometimes. Anyway, so I don't think we have a specified location list at this point. Do we, Ellen? Do we have a list of specified locations at this point? Or just general areas? General areas.
[Bears]: But yeah, in the month of the report, that would be great. I think it'd just be great to take the metric of a location, which is variable, and put it into a standardized metric that we can. We did half a mile of sidewalks this year. I don't know. That would be valuable to me.
[McGivern]: Yeah, we can think about it. And it's, I think, a more awesome way to report metrics.
[Bears]: Yeah. Great, thanks. I will stop belaboring the point at this point.
[Morell]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Oh, is there going to be a separate company grinding the low-priority sidewalks, or the same company going to be doing all the same thing?
[Wartella]: I do not have the answer to that, I'm sorry.
[Caraviello]: That would be good. And I live in a private way, and again, I don't know what it gets me, but back in the 70s and the 80s, before a lot of people were even born in this room, The city used to give you half the money to pay the street. And I remember my, I was where I live, we have like, it was like four or five streets and think I paid about $800 and all the neighbors, you know, we had a Councilor and I said that there was a contentious means to get to get 20 people to agree to pay the money but I don't know if that's something that you know. If people, I think that the council actually eliminated that. I don't know.
[Knight]: I don't remember the policy at one point in time. Same thing where all the neighbors chipped in.
[Caraviello]: Yeah, we all chipped in. I said, I think, I think I paid about $800. Then we all pay about $800 a piece. And they did like four, four small streets. And again, now, now they're ready to be done again. Uh, but as I was curious to see if you have anybody that's going to be, you know, just doing the grinding. on the low priority, if it's going to be the same company or a separate company?
[McGivern]: I would, I'm exploring right now buying a grinder, a small grinder machine just for sidewalks for the DBW and do some training and seeing if we can do those types of just a heap panel and grind off the top to reduce the tributing hazard. Instead of like busting out the entire panel, pouring a new panel, we could take care of a lot of locations. Just having an in-house grinding machine and not contracting out, just doing that piece in-house, because that's buying a machine, doing some training and working it into the schedule, as opposed to a whole other contract. I think we should be doing that in-house anyway.
[Caraviello]: And as we talked about doing sidewalks in private ways, A lot of residents are going to be a little shocked to find out how much property they don't have. Because over the years, you know, you've sort of taken your lawn and sort of kept on growing out toward the street. And, you know, when you want to say if they at some point they want to come in and take a sidewalk, you can see how many walls and driveways are going to be coming down. So you should make people aware of that.
[McGivern]: I think that, you know, be saying not a hard no, no, no night right is me sort of saying that there's a lot of work to do this and try to figure out we really need some sort of a policy when it comes to you have to put curbs and you get up a curb and so is down on those streets that don't have them anymore. Well, the city has an interest in ways we have rights within private ways. It's a question of, and I don't have the answer, where do you draw the line when it comes to public interest and public safety and landowner rights of the owners of the land and how that interplay works, and then add in the factor of, okay, now we want to spend public money on that private land. What does that look like? And what are our boundaries and constraints when we do that? And making sure we have that all worked out. But of course, it's past practice, and there are ways that we have been doing things. So I'm not stopping that in its tracks. I don't think that would work at all.
[Caraviello]: Most of the, I would say the majority of the private ways don't have sidewalks. You might see a sidewalk here and there on the, but the bulk of them don't have the, but I say, when you go to look at that, you can see a lot of unhappy neighbors when they come to find out where their land really is. When you've taken that lead way over the years, you know, it's just.
[McGivern]: Sometimes they feel empowered though too, is now they realize that, oh, I could do this without city involvement. Yeah.
[Morell]: Any further discussion? I do have one question. Sorry. Apologies. I know, um, you mentioned that the thank you both for being here, by the way, that 88 compliant sidewalks being the highest priorities. Does that include so you said? Sorry, non compliant. So is that just ramps that exist that are non compliant? Are there spaces where there should be curb cuts also in that?
[Wartella]: I believe they're both animals.
[Morell]: and did those places, I'm asking, I mean, I'm keenly focused on this. If you look at past resolutions, this is something I'm focused on, but as someone now who pushes a stroller around this city, hopping curbs in a stroller or any mobility device, anything like that is not fun. So I'm just curious about curb cuts, just personally.
[Wartella]: So this contract is for repair.
[Morell]: Okay, so it wouldn't be anything new?
[Wartella]: Correct. Okay. know, working on other avenues for this.
[Morell]: Great. Thank you, Councilor Tseng.
[Tseng]: The director mentioned in response to Councilor Caraviello-Villa's question that you guys might be looking at getting an in-house grinder. Do you know what the timeline on that might look like? Would that be something within the next year, within a few years?
[McGivern]: Well, it's a relatively low-cost piece of equipment, so I'm hoping to have something, potentially even later this season. I've been doing the research to try to figure out what model to get, talking to the crew about what the capacity they have for learning it, putting it into the schedule, things like that. But things are looking pretty good so far. Lights are showing green, so I'm just gonna keep plugging down that app. As far as priorities go, I think, you know, I share the priority of getting our pavement house in order, and I think continuing to work with our capacities of common haves. And so this seems to be like a low-hanging fruit to me, to get something like that in-house so we can get work done. So I would say sooner rather than later, it's a matter of making sure I understand how much one costs new and doing the procurement correctly and making sure that the guys can get trained and I don't want to get it too early, I don't want to get it too late. So finding that sweet spot, making sure that when we buy it, it goes into operation. Hopefully on day one, ideally. I'm going to try to time it.
[Tseng]: Great, and that would that would also affect the which roads go out for which sidewalks go first right because yeah. Okay, great.
[McGivern]: And that's that's really a tripping hazard type piece of equipment so panel shifts, I'm just going to grind off the top of it and make it a compliant tripping hazard.
[Tseng]: Great, thank you so much. I think this presentation, you know, in addition to answering our questions, also answers a bunch of questions from viewers at home. A lot of folks at home are watching, and I think, you know, your presentation was very well put together, very compelling, and thank you for coming to City Council today.
[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further discussion?
[Knight]: Madam President, I move for approval of paper 22317 and 22318.
[Bears]: I'd just like to make sure that that's for third reading.
[Morell]: So we do have a B paper from Councilor Scarpelli if you want to take that first. So the B paper was to ask DPW Commissioner for a monthly update on progress or just- That's correct. Okay.
[Scarpelli]: It's understandable to the- Yes, I agree to that. Okay, thank you. That'll be nice, that'll be helpful. All right, thank you.
[Morell]: So on the B paper from Councilor Scarpelli, the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by- Councilor Knight, all those in favor? All those opposed? The paper passes. On the motion of Councilor... I don't have this page, that's why. On the motion of Councilor Knight to approve for a third reading, papers 22-317 and 22-318. Vice-Chair Stephens.
[Bears]: If we are going to do that, I do have a question on 22-318. And I do think they need to be separate roll calls for third reading. Okay.
[Morell]: So do you wanna take the vote on 22-317 first?
[Bears]: Yeah.
[Morell]: So on the motion of Councilor Knight to approve for third reading 22-317. Second. Second by Councilor Caraviello. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll when you're ready.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Carroll. Yes. Councilor Collins.
[Wartella]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight.
[Morell]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng yes, President Morell.
[Morell]: Yes, seven in front of zero in the negative the motion passes. And then to to dash 318 vice president bears you have a question on this paper, which is eligible for third reading is the loan order for stump removal bonds.
[Bears]: Yes. Thank you, Madam President. when we, this is presented in April, Chief of Staff Nazarian said that this would address 95% of the stumps in the city. And also, you know, we've had some kind of ongoing issues with the stump dump. And the chief of staff said that none of these stumps would end up in the stump dump. And I'm just wanna make sure from you folks that both of those facts are still true. Yeah, so the contractors are moving them they're not going into the stuff. But on the 95% question is that is that wrote, is it going to address 95% of the stumps that are currently in the city.
[McGivern]: That's what she said she is on the line.
[Bears]: Oh, great.
[Nina Nazarian]: Thank you very much. Good evening, President morale and members of the council. Thank you to our dbw commissioner and our city engineer for the work on the prior item. Vice President Bears to answer your question I have further clarification since the last meeting that there's some variation between the work that's conducted for stumps. In particular, I've learned that stumps that are not in sidewalks that are not surrounded by concrete are significantly less costly to remove than those that are surrounded by concrete and I think DPW Commissioner I'm not sure if Commissioner McGivern could speak to that further if there are further questions. My understanding is there's a there's a material cost divide between the two. And as a result, we're going to work to focus on stumps that are kind of as has been stated some of the easier stumps to remove that would be, um in areas that are not necessarily impacted. But again, there's that synergy that So unfortunately, I can't say it's 95% anymore, because I've been educated on that subject, but there's a lot of stumps in the city, but I am happy that we have so many funding sources that are contributing into this project, roughly, as you know, $600,000 with 250 from this proposed borrowing. Thank you, Madam Chief of Staff.
[Bears]: I guess what would be helpful then, if possible, if there's a total number of stumps in the city and how many may be removed by this project, and you don't have to have it now, but if you could just send that over.
[McGivern]: People- We don't wanna misspeak, but we can get you that information for sure.
[Bears]: Great, yeah, and that would be really helpful. People talk about it a lot.
[McGivern]: Absolutely, and we know that it's a priority as well, so that's another reason we're trying to get the stumps in queue.
[Bears]: Great, thank you.
[Morell]: Any further discussion? On the motion of Councilor Knight to approve 22-318, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Collins. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Morell.
[Morell]: Yes. So I'm going to confirm it's here and then I give the motion passes.
[Bears]: Madam President.
[Morell]: Vice President Bears.
[Bears]: Motion to take papers 20-078 and 20-573 for third reading. On the motion, Vice President Bears to take 20-078 and 20-573 off the table for third reading, seconded by Councilor Collins.
[Morell]: All those in favor? I was opposed motion passes to do it's like to zero dash zero seven eight the polystyrene prohibition ordinance eligible for third reading on May 17 2022. Do I have a motion on the motion of Barcelona bears to approve for third reading seconded by Councilor Tseng. Also wait for Councilor Caraviello. This is Councilor Caraviello, this is the vote for 20-078 for third reading for the polystyrene ordinance.
[Hurtubise]: So I'm ready to call the roll.
[Morell]: Okay, please call the roll. So we're taking the role.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Morell]: Yes. Five in the affirmative, two in the negative. The third reading passes. 2-0-573 Snow and Ice Removal Ordinance, eligible for third reading, May 17th, 2022. Do I have a motion?
[Hurtubise]: Motion to approve the third reading.
[Morell]: Second. On a motion of vices and affairs to approve the third reading, seconded by Councilor Tseng. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Need a quick sec, please. Correct. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Morell]: Yes, five in favor of two in the negative, the third reading passes. I have a motion to revert to regular order of business.
[Hurtubise]: So moved.
[Morell]: On the motion of our Southern Bears to revert to regular order of business, seconded by Councilor Favilla. All those in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion passes. Public participation. Do we have anyone either in person or on Zoom who would like to speak for public participation?
[Hurtubise]: I see somebody. Oh, sorry.
[Morell]: Bill Giglio on Zoom, name and address for the record, please. Hello? Yes, Mr. Giglio, name and address for the record, please.
[Giglio]: Oh, great, thank you. It's Bill Giglio, Winthrop Street, Medford. First, I'd like to say thank you to our Method Police Department. As we end the last day of the Police Appreciation Week, it's a little disappointing that the city doesn't really recognize this week as they do many others, and some even getting a full month of appreciation. So I would like to say thank you to the Metro Police Department. Second and through the chair, hopefully, I'd like to express my extreme frustration and disappointment in council members, Collins, Tseng, Zach Beas, and President Nicole Morell for their comments made about the Medford Police Department with members Kit Collins and Zach Beers demanding an apology for an incident that has not yet been investigated or concluded. Myself and many others feel that these types of actions from our elected officials are what continue to divide this city and make all citizens feel uneasy when it comes to the Medford Police Department. Although I know it probably won't happen, we kindly ask that you all rescind those comments made until there is a complete and final conclusion from that incident. Thank you.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Giglio. Anyone else would like to speak for public participation? Seeing none, that is the end of our agenda. Would anyone like to make a motion to adjourn? On the motion of Councilor Collins to adjourn, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor?
[Unidentified]: Aye.
[Morell]: All those opposed?
|
total time: 14.75 minutes total words: 2339  |
total time: 5.87 minutes total words: 1289  |
total time: 6.3 minutes total words: 1265  |
total time: 8.82 minutes total words: 1743  |
|
total time: 5.34 minutes total words: 924  |
total time: 6.15 minutes total words: 1100  |
total time: 1.84 minutes total words: 335  |
|