[Falco]: The third regular meeting in the Medford City Council will now come to order. Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Present. Vice President Caraviello? Present. Councilor Knight? Councilor Marks? Present. Councilor Morell? Present. Councilor Scarpelli? Present. President Falco?
[Falco]: Present. At this time I'd ask everyone to please rise to salute the flag.
[Caraviello]: I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mr. President. Councilor Caraviello. Motion to suspend the rules to take paper 2011 off the table.
[Falco]: The motion of Councilor Caraviello to suspend the rules is seconded by Councilor Marks. All those in favor. All those opposed? On the motion of Councilor Caraviello to take paper. 2-0. 2-0-0-1-1.
[Caraviello]: To take 2-0-0-1-1 from the table. All those in favor? All those opposed?
[Falco]: Motion passes. 20-011, council citation for gold medal winner, Max Stevens. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Tonight we've invited Max Stevens here to receive a citation from the Medford City Council in recognition of him winning the gold medal in the Hockey Deaf Olympics that was held in Italy in December. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you Mr. President. Max are you here? There you are. You can come up to the rails. Thank you very much. Tonight we are here to congratulate Max Stephens for being part of a team that won the gold medal for hockey in the Deaf Olympics that were held in Italy this past December. Max, for those of you who don't know, was only 17 years old and he participated on a team that had teammates 25 to 35 years old, which is somewhere 10 years older than Max. Max played an integral part in this team. I think his dad told me he got a couple of goals and he had a pretty good season. Max has overcome his disability, for those of you who don't know, and this has come over the years. I've known him since he was a little boy, but he's overcome this with a lot of hard work and dedication, and we're seeing the fruits of what's happened for the fine things that he's done. When someone looks at the word disability, it immediately conjures up the idea of what someone could not do, or something physically wrong, with that injury that prevents them from doing something as the majority of society can do. Well, Max has proved everyone wrong, and being here tonight with his family and the gold medal is a tribute to his hard work and dedication. Max, people will always remember your name, but your success today tells a story of your indomitable courage and your inspiration for others to follow. Be the same forever and add many more feathers of success to your crown. Congratulations to you and your family, as you have done yourself, your family, and the city of Medford proud. I want to congratulate you tonight. And before I present you with the citation, I think some of our colleagues may have some words to congratulate you. President Falco. You should be on. No? All right. What am I doing wrong here? Should be on, no? Yeah, here we go, here we go. Who brought the smart kid? I apologize. Ed?
[Falco]: There we go.
[Caraviello]: President Falco.
[Falco]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Max, I just want to say congratulations. Great job. I hear a lot about you. My son goes to school with you at Medford High School. And he always says how you're a great guy. And I just wanted to say congratulations. That's quite an accomplishment. And I think it's remarkable. And it's great to see you've overcome so much. And I just want to say congratulations. Good job. Thank you. Thank you.
[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. And Max, it was a pleasure meeting you earlier this evening. I've known your uncle and your dad now for a number of years, and I just want to let you know how proud we are as citizens of the city of Medford. I mean, think about the accomplishment that you and your teammates were able to achieve. Not only do you represent Medford, Massachusetts, you represent the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and you represent the United States of America, and you came back with a gold medal. And that's something you should really be proud of. And I really want to thank you for all your hard work and dedication. making this possible and bringing home the gold to the old 02155. Thank you very much for your work on this and congratulations. It's a great accomplishment. You should be very proud of your goals. Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: I just want to second what everyone said and also just add that as a Mustang, as a graduate of Medford High School, it's just great that you made the school and the city so proud. And I hope we'll be able to congratulate you for something else again. Thank you.
[Marks]: Councilor Marks. Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank you, Max. Is it two goals? Mm-hmm.
[Caraviello]: Max, where is the gold?
[Stevens]: In my pocket.
[Caraviello]: Right here. Right here. Doctor, we didn't believe you.
[Marks]: You have to wear that proudly around your neck. Sure. If I had one of those, I would never take it off. Believe me. I'd like to thank you personally for representing our city so well. And I wish you well in your future endeavors. And I can tell you there's a local sports team, the Boston Bruins, that can use a goal scorer. So don't stop here. Keep moving forward.
[Stevens]: That's the goal.
[Marks]: Thank you. Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Councilor Morell.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. President. I just want to echo my colleagues and congratulate you on this really impressive athletic feat. It's a proud moment for Medford and I look forward to seeing many more great things from you in the future.
[Stevens]: Thank you.
[Scarpelli]: So as a coach for 32 years at the high school level, you really try to find inspirations for kids to follow. You, sir, are a true inspiration. So this city is proud of you, Mustang Country's proud of you, and I wanna congratulate you on a job well done, so thank you. Thank you very much. Nice job.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Scott. Before we present dollars, we have Dan Hurley is in the house here tonight, and Dan has a citation for you from the State House. Dan, if you'd like to present it to him.
[Hurley]: Thank you, Mr. President. I'll have to echo what everyone here had to say. It's certainly an honor that we have a man from Medford on that hockey team. He had competition to get on the team from the state. He's the only one from Medford, the only one from the state of Massachusetts. And they went over there to Italy, and they put on quite a show. They won, brought back the gold. I don't know much about hockey, but I do know that I used to hear noise in my house because I lived two doors from Max, and I hear bang, bang, bang. And I said to my wife one day, I said, Sharon, what is that noise? And she said, that's Max up there practicing his hockey. When he was seven and eight and nine years old, early in the morning, late at night, I'd see him going out. So it took a lot to spend the three weeks in Italy. He's doing well in school, so they gave him the permission. And we all know, especially George knows, he's been involved with numerous programs. Adam's now starting his hockey career as a coach. Not in hockey, but a couple of other sports, and I know Michael's done a lot with his son, too, in this stuff. This guy with his three children, and you with your son, and you're a hockey player. He was at Tufts University as a hockey player. So, Matt, indeed, it's a pleasure. But I wanted to present this to Matt from State Representative Paul Donato of Medford, Paul asked me to present this, he's unable to be with us today. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts House of Representatives, be it hereby known to all that the Massachusetts House of Representatives offers its sincerest congratulations to Matt Stephens in recognition of being the only representative from Massachusetts in the 2019 Olympic team where Team USA won a gold medal. The entire membership extends their very best wishes and expresses the hope for future good fortunes and continued success in all endeavors. It was signed today, the 21st day of January 2020, at the State House, Boston, by Barbara A. DeLeo, Bob DeLeo, the Speaker of the House, and Paul J. Donato, who sponsored it, State Rep. Medford and Maldon, also side-lined with Sean Garberly, who represents part of West Medford area and the town of Arlington, and also Christine Barber, who represents the Hillside and South Medford, and part of Somerville. So this is something you can hang up on your wall or on your bedroom. You can put a picture on the left. Thank you very much. Congratulations. Good luck. Gentlemen, thank you very much.
[Caraviello]: Max, if I can invite you behind the rail to present the citation from the City Council to you. Max, it takes pleasure for me to give you the citation. The Medford City Council takes pleasure in awarding this council accommodation to Max Stevens. Congratulations on winning the gold medal in Italy as a member of the American Deaf Olympic Hockey Team. And hopefully your name will go in the country rink with Dick McGlynn and Dave Delfino who both played on Olympic teams. Congratulations.
[Stevens]: Thank you so much.
[Caraviello]: Would you like to say something?
[Stevens]: Thank you all for having me here tonight. It was a great experience going to Italy and I look forward to seeing what else I can do in my hockey career. Thank you.
[Falco]: On the motion of council night second of my council appears to take a brief recess to take a few pictures with the With max all those in favor all those opposed. We're now recess. I We will now reconvene the meeting. A motion of Council Knight, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli to revert to the regular order of business. All those in favor? All those opposed? The motion passes. Motions, orders, and resolutions. 20-033 offered by Councilor Marks. Be it resolved that the issue of Verizon 5G installations be discussed. Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Last week, Mr. President, there was a meeting held here at City Hall regarding the 5G network and potential installation in this community by Verizon. Verizon has petitioned the city for, from my understanding, at least three to four dozen locations within the community to add these small cell networks. throughout the community, and we received a letter which I've already read into the record several weeks back from Verizon, dated December 10th, 2019, to then-Mayor Stephanie Burke regarding their applications. And I won't read the whole letter, but more or less the letter is stating that method is in current violation. of the FCC rules and regulations which requires the city of Method after 60 days to either approve or deny small cell applications. Verizon went on to say that they would be willing to give us an extension until January 20th. And I am not sure which I will be asking tonight. where the city stands with these current applications. But for tonight's purpose, Mr. President, I received a number of phone calls and emails from area residents. This has been an issue that I've been on top of for the last several months. And many residents who reached out were concerned not only with a number of issues related to 5G, but also the potential health impact it could have on residents in this community. So tonight, Mr. President, I will be offering a motion tonight. But I would like to go through, which was provided to me by a number of residents. One being Jay Ritchie, who I think is in the audience here, Mr. President, provided this council along with the mayor with an abundance of information regarding health impacts, ordinances in other cities and towns throughout the United States, and also actions taken by local legislatures throughout the United States as well. But, Mr. President, local ordinances note various purposes for ordinances, such as preserving visual character, protecting environmental resources, and protecting residents against adverse health effects. They take a variety of approaches, such as prohibiting small cells in certain areas, creating application and recertification fees, and imposing aesthetic and administrative requirements. Under location ordinance suggestions, Mr. President, and what I'm hoping to do tonight is just to start the dialogue because the mayor, in her wisdom, Mayor Burke, when we were approached with these requests originally, there was no city ordinance that governed these. And I think the mayor did a tremendous job at the time for what resources that she had. She created an administrative policy that would govern the approach to applying for an application and how the city would handle it. And also the creation of what the city refers to as the method ad hoc small cell committee, which is the granting authority. and they may have put together a several page policy, but in my opinion, it was good for the time that it was presented, but it doesn't go far enough. to add the protections that we need as a community and to have a full-fledged ordinance because Verizon is going to be the first of many vendors that will be before us. And you can count on that. So getting back to the local ordinances, location suggestions. Prohibiting small cell installations in residential areas. Requiring installations to be certain distance away from residences, schools, hospitals, Specifying that installations must be relocated when they would interfere with public projects. Aesthetics and environment ordinances. These are just a suggestion. Aesthetic design, noise requirements such as co-location, camouflage, height, and light limits. The administrative legal suggestions for ordinances. Requiring that residents who will be within a certain distance of an installation be notified. instating automatic time limits for permits, requiring annual recertification fees, requiring permittees to defend and indemnify the city for many liabilities arising from permits in the installation, operation, and maintenance of small cell installations, reserving the right to hire independent consultants at the applicant's expense. What was presented to us, Mr. President, and there were several states, but the state of New Hampshire has proposed a bill which would establish a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology. The state of Montana has proposed a joint resolution of the Senate and the House of Representatives urging Congress to amend 1996 Telecommunications Act to account for health effects. So those are two proposals, Mr. President, that I will be offering tonight that we ask our state delegation submit on behalf of the city of Medford and on behalf of the Commonwealth, because we're not the only city in the Commonwealth that's struggling with this issue. Mr. President, as we all know, this is an FCC regulation, and in my opinion, they really do tie the hands of local government to act. And one thing we can act upon is creating an ordinance that will safeguard our residents and also re-insure that When these installations if and when they do get approved that all the measures are in place mr. President that safeguards our residents So that will be what I'm offering tonight One resolution, I would like to offer now mr. President is be it resolved that the method City Council approve a resolution asking state lawmakers the Federal Communications Commission in Congress to limit 5G technology deployment in Massachusetts until the health effects are fully understood. I can't speak for my colleagues, but I can say, Mr. President, many residents that I spoke to, no one's against new technology. No one's against advancements in technology. No one's against having our residents not have the technology that would enable them to use their devices and all sorts of angles and aspects and so forth. But what we are against, Mr. President, is moving forward without getting the proper answers. I have asked several times, I was here at the meeting that Verizon held, and Verizon will be the first to come out and say there are no health concerns that they are aware of. And I got that from every representative. However, when you go on the internet, you'll see experts saying there are concerns. So this is no different than a trial when you have two experts, they may be physicians or accountants, say two completely different things. And on behalf of our residents, Mr. President, we should proceed with caution. And if that caution is that we take a while to explore this issue and make sure that it's safe, these devices are going to be within 200, 300 feet of residents' homes. They're going to be in backyards where kids are playing, close to parks, close to schoolyards, close to churches. So we have to make sure that we do our due diligence, Mr. President, when it comes to creating the ordinance. The second thing, Mr. President, I'd like to bring up is I happen to have bumped into recently a former member of the Burlington Selectmen. And the town of Burlington, I would tell anyone interested in this subject, they should really go on their website. They have an application process, Mr. President, that is literally probably 10 pages long. And it's a very in-depth process that makes these particular vendors jump through many hurdles in order to proceed. And from what I've been told by the town of Burlington is there was enough hurdles that they got tired jumping over hurdles. And the application process is equally, Mr. President, which I have equally as Cumminson, these design rules and regulations, which is about a 20-page report that was issued by the town of Burlington. Very in depth, Mr. President. And then there was a number of correspondence back and forth from attorneys that were hired to discuss the issue on behalf of the town in Verizon, which I won't get into tonight, Mr. President. I would like to just briefly mention that some of the things that we should be looking at as a community, And this is not unique to Method, but prior to any installation, a structural analysis should be completed to ensure the pole can handle the additional equipment. That should be the very first thing either in our policy, which is not there currently, or in our city ordinance. The city should ask about a host agreement. When we sign on, Mr. President, to anything happen in this community, the first thing that we usually do is sign a host agreement to make sure that if there are any issues that arise from this, that the city of Method will be covered. There should be an agreement in place that requires the removal of these systems when obsolete. Right now, you can go down any street in our community, Mr. President, and you see dishes They're on the side of homes. I have one across the street from me. It's a two-family, but they have three dishes that have been disconnected for years. It's just a blight, an eyesore, and there should be a provision in there when they become obsolete, no longer useful, that they be removed, Mr. President. I realize they're on private property, but I feel strongly about that. And this is no different. These will be located on public property. and public right-of-ways, but when they're no longer useful, they should have a plan to remove them. The city should establish design rules and regulations that I won't get into, similar to what the town of Burlington did, as well as the application to ensure compliance with city policy. Verizon should also provide the city with a long-range plan, including future expansion. We should not be subjected to the one and twosies of these, Mr. President. Last I spoke to the city engineer, I believe he said there were three or four dozen applications, and there possibly could be upwards to 100 from what he's being told. And I believe at the very least, as a community, we should know what their intent is. Is the intent to put 100? We should know the locations offhand, Mr. President, and we should know if they are the only ones that are gonna be doing this in the community, because in my opinion, they're not gonna be the only ones. Verizon should also provide a public health, I'm sorry, public health concerns be addressed by an independent study. So that would be, Mr. President, the city requesting, I know Verizon has done their studies on health and the impact and effects of 5G on residents and so forth, but the city should have its own independent study so therefore we can rely on valid information from a neutral party and not someone that's trying to make a dollar. And I wish them no I wish them no animosity, Mr. President, but our job as residents of city council is to ensure the public safety of this community. And this truly is a public safety issue. The second point, maybe the third point by now, Mr. President, is that several weeks back, the city, actually probably more than several weeks now, the city had its own public hearing. And that was conducted by the ad hoc small cell committee. And the correspondence that went out to residents at the time, and I know this has been expanded since, Ashcroft Road, Dutton Circle, Cedar, Lawrence Road, they received a letter from the city that did not really specify the location. They received a letter, Mr. President, that wasn't signed. They received a letter that called for a public hearing at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. making no consideration for people working, people with kids, people that need childcare, people that may not be able to get there, Mr. President. There was no copy or scope of the project within this letter. And they did adhere to the mayor's policy about notification. And that was to notify residents within 300 feet of the installation. As we both know, 300 feet would be here to probably the far back of the chamber and maybe a little further outside, Mr. President, in the hall. It's not much notification to a neighborhood. I requested, along with this council, it was unanimous, that we increase the notification to at least 500 feet. That was passed unanimously by this council. That any other future mailings that go out that the specific location be mailed along with a copy of the site plan by Verizon, and that all public hearings take place after 5 p.m. so that we can have more resident involvement. That was sent to the city administration back, I think it was a month and a half, two months ago. And, uh, I am not sure if the mayor, mayor Burke at the time, uh, updated the policy that was under her prerogative. And that's why I think we need a city ordinance. So, uh, I look forward, Mr. President, uh, to sending word out to our state delegation in the form of, um, If we want to do council resolution, asking that state delegation. Bear with me one second. The state delegation, our state delegation establish a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology. So that's the second resolution. And the third resolution is that our state delegation offer before the House of Representatives and also the State Senate, which would include Senator Jalen, urging Congress to amend the Telecommunication Act 1996, of 1996. To account for health effects. So those would be the three resolutions I'd like to offer tonight, Mr. President, as well as you reconvening a meeting so we can start diligently working on our own ordinance to safeguard residents. And I look forward to hearing what my colleagues have to say and also residents in the community, Mr. President. Last week's meeting, I also thought was going to be a question answer type meeting. I know there were a lot of residents that were upset. It was more of a just an informational meeting where you can walk around and talk to representatives. And I'm not sure you're quite going to get that out of tonight's meeting, but I'm hoping after tonight's meeting we will invite Verizon down, we will invite the Method Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee, who is the granting authority. We will invite the mayor down, Mr. President, and have our own public hearing here so residents can ask Verizon the tough questions. And this council, as well as the mayor, as well as this Ad Hoc Committee, can be on the same page. Thank you.
[Falco]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Marks. Councilor Marks, if I'm actually... Clerk Hurtubise, do you have the wording for all the resolutions? I do have them written down. You second each of the recommendations? OK. On the motion, we'll take individual votes in a minute. So on the motion of Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, there are a number of councilors that want to speak on this issue, so I'll recognize them at this point. Councilor Bears?
[Bears]: Thank you Mr. President and I want to thank Councilor Marks for such a detailed presentation. I think it's incredibly important that massive multinational corporations be accountable to our local governance and not just allowed to run free and do whatever they want. And I also agree that. This process has been reflective of an issue with the city around notification and making sure that residents are involved and engage the decisions that we're making. So I think those changes are welcome and I would also agree with the motions asking our I mean it's ridiculous that the telecommunications act doesn't factor in health. That's that's nuts. So I think we need that state and federal action as well. Just one thing I wanted to bring up and add to the conversation is that the small cell approach to 5G is not the only approach that the large corporations are using. AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint are looking at different ways of deploying this technology. As far as I'm aware, only Verizon right now is moving ahead with installing small cells as the way that this network would work. So I'd really also like to get some Clarification about how that deployment might work differently in a policy or an ordinance. Obviously the small cells, that's been the focus of discussion because that's what Verizon's bringing in. But there's definitely, AT&T, T-Mobile, and Sprint are talking about many fewer antennas that are longer range. And I'd like to make sure that any policy that we implement or any research that we bring up factors in different ways that potentially 5G may be deployed by these companies.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Pierce. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. I just want to thank my council colleague, Councilor Marks. I think he gave a very thorough and thoughtful presentation that laid out the issues that are really concerning this community and also presented solutions. So I appreciate his passion for the subject of thoughtfulness and the way that he put this together, and I support it wholeheartedly.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Again, I want to I thank my council for bringing this up. I was here in and out of the meeting last week because we did have our own committee meeting last week, but I was a little dismayed when I came in and saw a bunch of tables. I thought it was going to be a question and answer period, and I did talk to a couple of representatives myself. just some minimal answers. And I did do some homework, and I did find what Councilor Bears's found. There are other ways of providing this, not just that. But if all these other companies are going to be looking at doing this community, why can't they maybe get together? and do this jointly rather than piecemeally get with Verizon doing it, AT&T, all these different companies. Maybe do it as a joint venture so we're not coming back doing this three or four times. And maybe they can do something that they all can jointly share in. That would be also a suggestion that I'll bring up when we have our committee meeting. But again, I thank my Councilor for bringing this up.
[Falco]: Thank you, Vice President Caraviello.
[Morell]: Councilor Morell. Thank you, Mr. President. I also want to thank Councilor Marks for bringing this up and doing so much research and also thank the residents for all the research they have done. The emails I've received, this is really kind of a deep issue, complicated by the fact that the FCC, beyond the 1996 Telecommunications Act, came down last year and basically removed a lot of the power that local governments have to regulate this kind of thing. So the challenge of the one benefit is that almost every city around the country is dealing with this. So there is a lot to learn from, as Councilor Mark said, people who are successfully developing ordinances to make sure the needs of their communities are being met. So I support those resolutions and I thank Councilor Marks for going even farther than suggesting ordinance work and seeing what we can get from the state delegation because This isn't just affecting Medford. This is affecting the whole state, and we deserve the support at the state level and beyond. So thank you. Thank you, Councilor Morell.
[Scarpelli]: Councilor Scarpelli. To be redundant, I think it's important. So again, I thank Council Marks for bringing up such an important issue. I know that the emails and the phone calls I received, I think the frustration goes more in depth than just what we're seeing. The whole lack of information, the fear that's still out there that hasn't been answered. As we move forward, I wonder if we can put an amendment that we can have the Acton City Solicitor to see if we can extend that period. I know that the 20th is the date, I believe, so- Yesterday. Yesterday, so if there's a way that we can put a hold, if there's a way that the city can freeze that. There's some issues that if you have, some of the members in the audience where other communities have put a stop to this, there's something to be gained by understanding that. So having our city solicitor find any loophole that can stop this ASAP until we get the answers that Council Marks has brought up, I think it's very important. So I'd like to make that into an amendment if I can.
[Falco]: Thank you Councilor Scarpelli. I'd also like to thank Councilor Marks for bringing this forward tonight. It's a very important issue and I thank you for all the research that you've done because I know it takes a lot of time and effort and we all appreciate that. hearing the information that you're bringing to us tonight. And I thank the residents as well for coming out tonight, because I know that this is a concern that many have throughout our entire community. So thank you for being here tonight. There are a number of resolutions, but is there anybody here that wanted to speak on this issue tonight? Okay, please do, feel free to do so. When you come forward, we just need your name and address for the record.
[Aire-Beckwith]: Yes, my name is Jane Aire Beckwith, A-I-R-E. I need to tell you that back in 1969, a group of students... Excuse me.
[Falco]: Sorry to interrupt.
[Aire-Beckwith]: Can you not hear me?
[Falco]: No, we can hear you. The clerk needs your address as well.
[Aire-Beckwith]: Okay, it's 9 Walkling Court.
[Falco]: Thank you.
[Aire-Beckwith]: Apartment F. And I want to tell you that in 1969, a group of students got up in the trees, the sycamore trees on Memorial Drive. They were not cut down by Harvard School, by Harvard Law School. And we did it because we thought those trees were important because it took about 100 years to grow them. I am so grateful to hear you talking like this, Councilors, because things take time to know about health. The environment takes time, and if we don't give it time, corporations will not. I've been doing massage and reflexology for over 40 years. I work with people recovering from all kinds of drugs and alcohol at this point. I have over 30 years in recovery. What I'm trying to say to you is what is important to me is that we take the time we need. I've never had a patient or a client say to me, hurry up and finish with my feet and body. And that's what we have to do with this proposal. Because what goes in the air gives off chlorine with those satellites. And there has to be a lot sent up. And it won't just be Verizon. It'll be Comcast. It'll be all the others. So please think of this. And what's important to us? Is it holding our families as we grow? You know, almost 70 and possibly a great-grandmother in the next few years. That's important that I hold my family. And what else is important is Medford has so much open space and it's very precious to me. And walking my little emotional support animal out in the environment. And so everything I do now, I take in consideration what I breathe, what I drink, what will happen for the future generations and the animals around us. Thank you, and I'm grateful for your consideration on that. Thank you.
[Falco]: Please have your name and address for the record.
[Ritchie]: Sure. John J. Ritchie, and it's 22 Bradley Road, 4A. I'm not anti-business, I'm not anti-technology, I don't think anybody in their right mind is, but I am pro-common sense. and i think you guys are too because this uh... this issue is is not going to go away it's only going to get you know more attention as uh... as the time goes on and i'm thankful that you guys are bringing this up i'm not going to read everything that i have here because most of the stuff that i have here i've emailed to you and then a bunch of you here as well so uh... if you don't have it because of yahoo dumped it in your spam or never Received it. I have copies here that I can give you but I also you you mentioned that article on what other cities are doing But in that article, I don't know if you've seen it, but there is a model Wireless telecommunications ordinance, which I have seven copies here if you'd like me to leave them I don't know if you saw that but it's a model that you guys can look at as a guide to see what can Medford do to you know protect the residents from a new technology that not everybody understands completely. And even Verizon, they were quite disingenuous when I was here at that meeting last week, or information session, and one of the gentlemen told me, oh, if you have any health concerns, you can go talk to our guy over there. But he's already in the bag for Verizon, so he's not neutral. I mean, what incentive do they have to tell us that there might be an issue with health and safety? I mean, they have no incentive as a business, as a corporation, whose bottom line is to make the bottom line. It's not, you know, what is the health of the residents that live around here? You know, how is that going to be affected? That's not their concern. That's our concern. And we want Verizon to feel comfortable with, you know, with Medford. And Medford is pro-business. We're not anti-business. But we want to move forward carefully. And I thought they were disingenuous last week when he told me Because I said, where's this gonna, do you have one of these devices that's gonna be near my residence? He said, yeah, where do you live? Bradley Road. Oh, it's gonna be on 13 Bradley Road. I'm 22. So I'm like, that's right outside my door. And he tells me, oh, don't worry because our technology is 20% stronger than your cell phone signal. I'm like, if it's that strong, if it's that stronger than my cell phone, why do you need it right up my nose? You don't need it that close to where I live. I mean, he says it can go through the wall, but you can definitely pick up the signal when you walk outside your house, but I don't wanna pick up the signal. I don't wanna be bombarded by these EMF waves, and I know that there's a lot of buzz on, Medford Square Facebook page who there's some people pushing back and saying oh, there's nothing wrong with this technology There's nothing to worry about It's only high Frequency waves that you have to worry about but that the research that I've done Suggests that it's not just high High levels of the frequency it's lower at their health concerns and health effects from over 800 studies that detail studies that were done not by people that are already in the bag for Verizon or these other companies, but neutral parties, some of them not even in the country, who have nothing but concern that is driving their research, not that they're getting paid for any American business. And there's there's quite a alarming evidence here that suggests that we shouldn't take pressure from Verizon. We should be welcoming, but we shouldn't have them come into our city and start installing these things in residential areas, by the way. They're not even suggesting only putting them on top of commercial zones or even buildings that are owned by Citi, but inside where we have to go out and go to work or go to school, what have you, and then come back. They wanna put these devices in our very streets, where the residents are. So I think that's an issue. So I don't know if there's a way to submit these to the delegation or whatever groups you have that wanna look into this further because we should, if they decide that they're gonna put them, Yeah, here's the sample ordinance, and then here's a hard copy of all the information that I've done. But if they want to put them in Medford, I think that they should put them further away from where residents don't have to deal with them. There are effects to skin, to heartbeat, to fertility. Yeah, exactly. The further these things are away from where you live, the better. I'm not saying that we shouldn't have them at all, but they shouldn't be right outside where I live. They weren't necessary for 2G. 3G and 4G, but now all of a sudden for 5G they're necessary to have these on poles outside where you live. That doesn't make sense to me. So I appreciate you guys hearing me and I hope I wasn't rambling, but I appreciate you guys taking the time to really discuss this and coming up with a solution that is pro-business and business friendly, but also takes into consideration your constituents and their concerns as well. Thank you for being balanced.
[Falco]: Name and address for the record.
[Devine]: My name is Catherine Devine. I live at 5 Norton Avenue. And I'm glad I don't have to come up here and be defensive. Instead, I'm coming up here to thank you for being so considerate because I think some of what happens with these kind of new, you know, in fact, very exciting technologies is that people get swept up in the movement of them. They seem inevitable. And in fact, 5G installations are already being installed countrywide and worldwide. And so now we're having to try and slow that down. So thank you for being willing to step back and be considerate about it. I actually work for the international leading software producer of software for scientists and engineers and my company makes a 5G toolbox. So I'm gonna take my 5G for dummies questions to that team and see if they can, because I feel like we need to be factual and straightforward and not inflammatory about this issue. I'm not interested in saying that this causes cancer if there's absolutely no evidence that it does. On the other hand, the World Health Organization is recommending that we not go forward with 5G installations because there are so many questions and suggestions of issues. So I'll do my part to become more well-informed, to learn what I can about 5G from my company. interesting, I didn't know there were other ways of deploying it. So that may be a piece of evidence that we can use against Verizon. But it seems to me, this is on a whole new scale. Actually, it's how it's being promoted, 5G. is exploding onto the world as a new thing. It is a new thing. We've never had transmitters outside of people's homes. That's new. And one of the stories, and I promise I'll get you this reference because, again, I want to be factual and not inflammatory. Apparently, they had put a 5G installation on a firehouse, and the firemen all started getting headaches, and they had it taken off. No joke that, you know, there seem to be health effects. And I'll just close by saying I'm glad, oh, there was a meeting in Concord of 250 people. So Burlington already succeeded in stopping 5G. Concord's right in the thick of it, so I'll try and get some contact names from there as well. Apparently there were lawyers there, there was a Nobel laureate there, so you know, hopefully each town isn't having to reinvent the wheel. What was I starting to say before I thought about Concord? Oh, I'm glad you're getting legal help because at least the way it stands at the moment, You know, the way it reads, you can't deny Verizon based on health effects, which is, I think, mostly what we care about. So I think it may take some finagling for you to find a way to slow Verizon down, back them off, and, you know, protect the citizens of Medford. So appreciate all your words today. Thank you.
[Falco]: Name and address for the record.
[Rumley]: Hey everyone. Hi. My name is Aaron Rumley and I live at 216 Grove Street in Medford. So thank you. Councilor Marks for putting this on the agenda tonight. I think it's a really important topic and I'm happy to have the opportunity to discuss it publicly. I also went to the meeting last week and found it largely underwhelming. I specifically felt bad for all of the elderly folks that came here that would have benefited from more of a panel discussion and listening to other people's questions. And thank you for also confirming my understanding that all that's in place right now is a policy for procedure to submit applications directly to the mayor to be ushered to the city engineer. I think that that was all well and good to start. And I agree, obviously, now we need an ordinance. And if I was to craft an ordinance tomorrow, I would want three things to be included. The first is the health and human safety. Obviously, most people are here tonight because they're concerned about antennas cooking them or giving them cancer and all of that. I will say on the record that I think people should be very careful about what they read on the internet. And I'm not really into fear mongering about technology. But it is every citizen's right to have a record given to them saying that what's outside their house is not going to have any harm to them. And in the industry, there are two RF studies that are used from an RF perspective that Verizon and any other proposing carrier can give to us willingly if we make them. The first is a shared study interference that is antenna to antenna interference. That's seen mostly on cell towers where you have multiple carriers in one spot to make sure that one antenna doesn't knock the other out. And the second is called a near study. And that acronym is NIR, and it stands for Non-Ionizing Radiation Study. And that is exactly what we're talking about. It's a study that we can mandate on every installation to say that this is stamped by an engineer who's not necessarily working on the corporate dime, who cares about his license, who will say that this isn't going to harm any humans. Second is structural safety. You mentioned this, Councilor Marks. I think that we should require a stamped structural analysis for each site that these small cells are proposed. I don't think, I'll be candid, I think that a lot of the utility poles in Medford are in some state of disrepair. And I think that putting antennas on these that are gonna create extra wind sail and otherwise you have the risk of a few different things. Is the pole going to fall over if there's a windstorm or any type of weather event? And are the antennas installed in a way that they're not going to blow off the pole and damage someone's house or property? And as a sidebar, I would say we should have a blanket restriction on any installation on the double pole, unless, of course, the proposing carrier wants to replace the double pole with A new Singapore. And the last is the most important to me, and that's aesthetics. And you alluded to this, and we should have conversations about what Medford wants. I spent a little time with the construction guys here last week, and they had, I think, about 12 photographs on a three-sided poster board. I was disappointed to see only one was a stealth concealment. But I thought a lot of them looked pretty junky. And my fear is that if we don't get ahead of this and tell these proposing carriers what we want, they will assume that we are OK with the cheapest possible installation. So if it's not happening in Lexington, it shouldn't happen in Meadowbrook. So we can tell people what we want, and we can demand it that way. And as an aside, I would say we should really stay away from blanket moratoriums on technology upgrades. It's important to have these antennas in places that are going to increase cell coverage, specifically where people don't have landlines anymore. I want to be able to get a signal if I need somebody to come to my house and help me. So we should keep those things in mind as well. Thanks for your time.
[Falco]: Thank you very much.
[Dubuque]: My name is Melissa Dubuque. I live at 10 Cherry Street. I'm one of the lucky ones that is going to have supposedly one of those things in front of their house. My question is, is paperwork was due yesterday, and does that mean that they're going to start installing the 5G towers, or are we on hold with that? Because my concern is, is where the tower is going. is less than eight feet outside of my daughter's bedroom window. And when I talked to one of the guys last week, I think I was talking, he was talking, somebody had asked a question if I was underneath it with the cell phone, would it directly hit the cell phone? And the guy said, nope, it'll just be in an oval, probably only go out eight feet, you know, straight across, so it won't bother anybody. And when I asked him, I said, well, that would be my daughter's bedroom window. He had no answer for me. So my concern is that, last week was just a nightmare out in front of my house. They've already come and changed the telephone pole. So as I'm viewing it, it looks like it's sort of a go ahead and I've gotten no notification about it being outside of my house, National Grid coming and doing everything that they did last week. So I just want, want to know if there is a date because the paperwork wasn't put in place that these things are going to start showing up. if anybody has the answer to that, if there's a way they can stop it or at least postpone putting it in front of my house, because as I said, it's been a nightmare.
[Falco]: I personally have not been notified by any city department telling us, you know, as far as the timeline is, when things will be installed. I'm not sure, Councilor Marks, have you been? Mr. President, just if I could. Yep, one minute please.
[Marks]: Every petition comes with a start date. So the date commences when the 60 day period starts. So the first batch, and I'm not sure how many were in the first batch, the date that we had as a city was December 20th to act upon it. Verizon came back because the city did not act and said, okay, we'll give you another 30 days, which brought it to January 20th. Now, I'm under the impression they still need approval from the city of town, from this ad hoc committee that was created by the mayor. And when that's gonna happen, we can ask the city engineer who happens to chair that committee what his thoughts are. But as far as I know, it doesn't just automatically get approved.
[Falco]: Okay, because the poll is still... Excuse me, if you have any questions, I just ask you to please come up to the microphone just so everyone can hear and so people at home can hear as well.
[Devine]: So from my reading, the carriers had initially wanted part there to be a deemed approved clause in the FCC regulation. and the FCC declined to include that. So I have, and I can send it to you, a two-page synopsis put out by a congressional advisory board instructing Congress how to think about this regulation. So nothing automatically happens when the timeline has not been met, if anything, if I was reading it correctly, they said that Verizon would have to come sue Medford. So that's part of what I think your legal due diligence needs to be. So what's happening in other communities when they are or are not deciding this on time, but it is not an automatic installation. Thank you.
[Dubuque]: Because the pole like they have they still have the half of the old pole Attached to the new pole by a piece of wood with all of National Grid with all of their wires So I don't know how long that's gonna be like that either and it's really not too safe So I'm just kind of I just don't want to come home again and run into the same nightmare that I won't get into again.
[Falco]: So Point of information council on night
[Knight]: How are you?
[Knight]: Good to see you. I spoke with you the other night. I spoke with your husband as well. Relative to the debris that was left on the front lawn. And I left the city engineer's office on Wednesday evening with the assurances that there was going to be someone down there to clean it up.
[SPEAKER_13]: It was.
[Knight]: It was cleaned up. Excellent. Thank you. And it's my understanding that the pole was installed by National Grid. At that point in time, but they're installing it for future work So this the grid actually put the pole in right the work that's gonna happen is gonna be Verizon But I didn't want to follow up with that to make sure that that happened because when I spoke with your husband last They might have came out a little later in the day than earlier than he expected So that was just my concern I just didn't want to come home and have this I
[Dubuque]: on top of a telephone pole without any, so I'm just glad and thank you everybody, so I appreciate it. Thank you.
[Ducey]: This is Mariana Ducey, 2 North Street. I have some information about this pole business. I had attended the November meeting that was at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. Two weeks later, a contractor came to replace the pole two doors down from me. That's one of the poles where the 5G was going to go. So I asked him what he was doing. He said he didn't know. He was the contractor. OK, there was a second pole further up the street that was going to be another 5G. And they replaced that pole. The only two poles on the street that were replaced were the 5G poles. And the new poles were taller. So I called City Hall and they said that the poles belong to National Grid or whatever and they can replace the pole for any reason. That's maybe true. However, the poles were brand new. No, nothing wrong with the poles. The only change was that the new pole was taller. There's still, as that lady said, the half pole, the two poles are attached to each other. The old poles cut off at the bottom. So My concern at the time was, when I spoke to City Hall, I said, Verizon is coming here doing advanced work. They haven't even got the permit yet. They're replacing the poles. And he says, oh, no, no. I said, well, how come the only two poles on the whole street in front of number 10 and in front of number 90 are the two poles that are being replaced? So Verizon was doing some advanced work. I don't know if they hired the contractor or National Grid or however it worked, but there it is. Okay, the second thing I want to call to your attention, I also came to the meeting last week here, the informational meeting, and I asked Verizon, there was a table in the middle here, and I asked the man there, I said, tell me what the pros and the cons are about this 5G. He told me all about the pros, but on his table he had a whole packet of information here. And the last two handouts were the cons, which he didn't verbally talk about. When I got home, I read all this stuff. So Verizon is well aware that there are cons to this thing. But they're not making it public. I did talk to the table that was over here, the man that had the supposed to be the health hazards. He mentioned something about the high frequency radio signals may harm hearing. But that's about the only thing he said. So I have this packet. I don't know if you picked this up, Michael, when you were here. Did you pick up the whole packet? Well, I have a second packet. You can have it just in case you missed the cons here and all the pros or whatever. So there it is. Thank you. Thank you.
[Edmonds]: Hi. My name is Donna Edmonds. I live on Marion Street. And one of my concerns is the speed at which Verizon is going ahead with this because in November, every single, no less than five locations that were cited for the 5G Verizon came, they laid new cable. One of my neighbors went and asked them, chatted them up friendly, saying, oh, what's this all about? And he said, we're laying the cable for 5G. So I notified Brianna, and she got in touch with Verizon. And they said, no, no, Verizon does work all the time. But it was at the exact addresses where the 5G is going to be five places that I personally saw. And so obviously, they're just, as soon as they get it, they're planning on getting approval and putting them in immediately. So I just wanted you to be aware of that. Thank you. I took pictures of them doing that. I don't know. I just find it very concerning. I find it concerning the number of 5G equipment that they're planning to put right close to my house. My mother's 94. I do believe that. I mean, it's questionable whether or not it will cause problems, but I believe that my mom would be susceptible to that. So I just feel like it could happen anytime because they've already done it. They did have a one thing I wanted to ask is they had a police detail at each of these locations and do they have to have, do they have to say what it's for? Do they have to have a permit? Like why were the police there assisting them? That is something that I would like to know the answer to. And then lastly, I just want to thank everybody because this has been very helpful and I'm just very heartened to see it being approached so sensibly and intelligently.
[Falco]: Thank you. Thank you very much. The clerk did not get your name. Donna Edmonds. Donna Edmonds. Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Edmonds.
[Nagum]: Anita Nagum, 9 Norton Avenue. I have a lot of concerns with the process that Verizon is following or not following. I attended the permit hearing which was scheduled in November. That meeting was canceled before it started because at the last minute Tim McGivern, the city engineer, got some advice from Mark Rumley that The notification that Verizon sent out was deemed inadequate. Those vague letters, not signed, not addressed, with no location specified for anyone. It just said that a small cell facility will be placed on or near the right of way near your house. It's interesting that Verizon has contacted the city and told you you're in violation. I would definitely recommend that you get in touch with the city solicitor, and I would I'm not a legal expert, but I would push back against Verizon and tell them that they were not in compliance with the city regulations as far as notification. And also, I mean, I highly recommend either the city solicitor or outside legal counsel. The FCC put into place some regulations that are very restrictive about what communities can do to restrict 5G. A portion of those regulations was struck down in August by the D.C. Court of Appeals regarding, I believe, effect on historic and environmental, because of historic Environmental concerns or historic preservation in local communities. I'm sure that's going to be appealed. There's also another portion of that FCC rule, which is up in front of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which I believe is in San Francisco. That is still pending. But I would highly recommend that the city solicitor, someone who knows a lot more about it than I do, look into these things and see what is going on, what exactly the legal issues are in these cases. I do have a little bit of information which I can email you with more information, certainly on the opinion that was released in August, striking down a portion. Again, I'm sure these things are going to be appealed and this will go on, but I highly recommend the city push back against Verizon because I don't think their notification was adequate at all. Thank you.
[Navarre]: Hi there, William Navarre, 108 Medford Street, apartment 1B. At first when I heard about this issue, I thought that I heard there was no scientific evidence that this technology was dangerous. I looked it up on the internet, and it looks like there is some level of debate. But there is one concern I wanted to address, and that is there's some suspicion that the fact that it's near your home means that That comes across as strange to some folks. I just wanted to talk a little bit about that because when you have a shorter wavelength, also a higher frequency, that's going to lead to more attenuation over the same amount of distance. And just to give you an example, you guys, might be familiar with over the course of your lifetime, or our grandparents' lifetime, of different signals we've used. You might have heard of the VLF transmitter in Cutler, Maine. This is a massive antenna, and they use this to transmit all around the world to submarines, and it can transmit only one letter at a time, Morse code kind of thing. And you guys might be familiar with shortwave radios, which... Also have a fairly long wavelength and so those transmit a great distance. They reflect off the ionosphere. And you might be familiar with AM and FM technologies and how the AM signals we're used to hearing are pretty lousy but go a pretty far distance. FM go a shorter distance. You might think about how if your neighbor is playing a tuba, you're not gonna be able to drown out that sound easily by just putting on headphones, whereas if they're playing a flute, it's gonna be a lot easier because of the higher pitch. And so I just wanted to sort of explain that. I might have gotten a bit wrong with the short wave, now that I think about it. That might be specific to the ionosphere. Also, when there's an earthquake, there are two different kinds of waves that propagate throughout the world, and the ones with the shorter The higher frequency, meaning shorter wavelength, those are unable to go through the molten core of the Earth, whereas the others can. So I did want to address that concern. I think that that is, it seems scary because it's near your house, but the fact is, I believe the way that works is if you have a short wavelength, just a little bit of destructive interference, it's gonna erase the wave, right? Whereas if you have a big wavelength and it gets out of whack a little, you're still gonna be able to see the signal, you know? Sort of like that, whereas here it just covers itself up. I think that's more or less how it works. I tried to research on my phone just now. I wasn't able to get anything perfect. I got a signal, but to be honest with you, a lot of people on there, they write the same thing over. How does it work? Higher frequency, but doesn't go as far, but it never says why. I'm pretty sure that's how it works. I'm pretty sure if you have low wavelength, you get a little bit of interference with itself, boom, it's gone, whereas if it's bigger wavelength, you know what I mean? If it goes off a little, you still have basically a signal. That's a very weird diagram, but that's what I came up with. So that's my understanding of that, and that's why I'm not scared of the distance to my house, because I understand that's more or less the reason. And I also wanted to say that there are some benefits to having a second internet provider in town. If you're stuck with Comcast or I have Verizon Fios, which is actually not that bad, but I prefer choice. People do get upset with having to pay the monopoly internet companies, and this is one way to avoid that. I have seen on the computer or on my phone that there may be some debate that there could be health issues. I don't suspect that there are, but I respect if people do have that concern. But I do want to see that it's not just us versus the corporations. If this gets approved, there will be some benefits to the people of Bedford too. It won't all go to the corporations. Thanks.
[Devine]: I'll just add this little tidbit. And again, I'm gonna dig it out of my information and send it to you all. But apparently, somebody came across a Verizon internal memo where their lawyer said in very oblique language that if it is proven that there are adverse health effects to 5G transmission, they do not have the health coverage in place for their own Verizon workers. So to me that indicates that Verizon has concern about this technology.
[Ginnity]: Hi, my name is Eileen Ginnity, I live on Governor's Ave in Medford, and I just want to, first of all, thank Councilor Marks for researching and presenting this so thoroughly. My main concern prior to the meeting tonight was just, gee, could we have a more formal way other than, I think they were calling it an informational fair, Verizon called last week's meeting an informational fair, when you went from table to table, et cetera. So sort of that kind of thing, you kind of miss, you know, hits and misses in terms of what you pick up. But just hearing the overall presentation from Councilor Marks about the whole issue of local ordinances, FCC approval process, dates and deadlines, it's all really important information. So I appreciate that and I would very much support that however all those things and the research and the work and the legal, whatever, go together and fit together that whenever it's appropriate to do some sort of public hearing that that would be really helpful. A lot of people were probably here last week and You know, they had a few tables, one is the benefits of small cell technology, one is construction, one is site architecture and engineering, and then the three sites they had highlighted where they wanted to do location, Tufts, South Medford, and Glenwood neighborhoods, and then the whole RF safety. I didn't really even have time to get to the safety table, and I think that, so sort of, as people have talked, some kind of renewed public hearing that really is chock full of information and it would be real helpful to have as part of that someone representing the, in the public hearing, someone representing the small cell ad hoc subcommittee so we can just understand better about who those people are and how the process works. And hopefully it sounds like the date of yesterday having been the second deadline passed now that there is not sort of an automatic go ahead for Verizon from what people are saying. So that's good. Thank you very much. Thank you.
[Nazaro]: Mr. President city councilors my name is Joseph Nazaro and I have a host that it 98 Princeton Street in which my daughter lives I've moved to Winchester so I'm from one Dunham Street in Winchester. I was at the information meeting last week, and I'm sorry, ma'am, but you got my flyers that are discussing the adverse health effects of 5G. Make no question of it, 5G's deadly. It's very, very harmful. The American military have used microwave radiation since the 1970s. All of their reports indicate that it's deadly, and the federal government adopted military standards so that the military would be effective during the Cold War. The telecom companies wanted those exact same standards, and those were the standards that were adopted, the military standards. The United States and Canada currently have radiation standards that are 100 times those of the European Union. And those are the standards that Verizon wishes to install here in Medford and in Winchester and over the entire United States. I was at the information meeting here last week. I was quite insulted. I thought it was misleading and deceptive, and it was just, to me, I was embarrassed for the Verizon people. The information just was outrageous. It's a boondoggle. We all are very, very well served with copper wire and fiber optic cable, and they just want to install wireless for profits. They want us to dump fiber optic. They want us to dump copper so that they can charge us whatever they like because it's not regulated. Copper and fiber optic is regulated. So what they're trying to tell us with 5G is we can disconnect our cable. Well, we don't want to do that. It's slower. The 5G will be slower. It will be less secure. They can pry on us. It's actually a threat to the electric industry because they're going into the electric industry's wavelength, and it's an energy hog. It will create more global warming because it's very expensive to run 5G as opposed to the fiber optic cable. There has been a bill filed over three years ago to study the deleterious health effects of 5G in cell phone radiation. It's been in the state legislature for over three years. It's H2885. It's currently stuck in the telecom communication. I have these handouts for the select people, if they would, including H2885. It's in Mike Barrett of Lexington, Senator Mike Barrett of Lexington's Telecom Committee, where it has to be favorably passed, it has to move to Ways and Means by February 4th. So everyone should call the Telecom Committee to get favorable action on this bill so it gets financed. There are no studies that show that 5G is healthy. All the studies do show that microwave radiation causes atrial fibrillation and other heart conditions. It causes arrhythmias. It causes blood diseases. It causes psychological problems. It's the only thing that's known, that's not known, but causes autism in children. It causes learning difficulties. There's just loads of data and research on it. Once it's installed, it's over. Once they install these antennas in town, once they turn them on, the game's over for us. There's no turning the clock back with the technology. I was the president of For a Cleaner Environment in Woburn during the time of the Harvard Health Study. There were 21 kids with childhood leukemia in Woburn. There were three more in Winchester. 10 of them died. We called our federal senators and representatives, and Kennedy helped us. By the way, he died of a brain tumor caused by a cell phone. We called our state agencies that are meant to protect us. The Department of Public Health came and told us that the water was safe to drink. The city council didn't protect the people of Woburn. The last line of defense in this game is the city council here in Medford. I have called Kennedy, I mean, I've called Warren, I've called Markey, I've called my state senator, I've called my state rep. None of them will return a call on this. You people are the last line of defense now. There's really no help beyond you. And I do laud the work that you've done and the consideration you're giving, trying to hold up Verizon. And I don't think that's going to be an easy job. Thank you very much.
[Falco]: Thank you.
[Von Berg]: Hi, I'm Eric Von Berg, 369 High Street. I really appreciate all the work that you've done on the council for this and also all the comments from the people here tonight. I think that we really need to focus on the fact that the disease potential, the health potentials for this are unanswered at this point. And I want to read a few paragraphs from a Scientific American article about 5G. 5G will not replace 4G. It will accompany 4G for the near future and possibly over the long term if there are synergistic effects from simultaneous exposures to multiple types of RFR our overall risk of harm from the RFR may increase substantially. Cancer is not the only risk, as there is considerable evidence that RFR causes neurological disorders and reproductive harm, likely due to oxidative stress. As a society, should we invest hundreds of billions of dollars deploying 5G, a cellular technology that requires the installation of 800,000 or more new cell antenna sites in the U.S., close to where we live, work and play? Instead, we should support the recommendations of the 250 scientists and medical doctors who signed the 5G appeal that calls for an immediate moratorium on the deployment of 5G and demand that our government fund research needed to adopt biologically based exposure limits that protect our health and safety. And do we really want to allow these telecom giants to come into our city and install a system that could well be the next health crisis, where our city is not safe for its own residents due to radiation exposure from these towers. If this technology is found to be safe in the future, we can revisit it. But for now, its safety is completely unproven. And I think that we need to stop it in any way that we can. Thank you.
[Aire-Beckwith]: Okay. Jane Eyre Beckwith, 9 Walkland Court. I just want you all to know, how fast is fast enough?
[Falco]: Thank you. Okay, so there are a number of resolutions. So we have the main resolution, and then Councilor Marks offered three other resolutions. So we will take them individually. I actually want to let the board know that the overall strategy that you want
[Marks]: Do you prefer separate votes on these? I prefer separate just in case they all get sent, and then they all. Different directions.
[Falco]: Right. Yes, so there'll be D, C, and B papers. Right. So we take them individually.
[Marks]: Mr. President, I'm not sure if I've asked already, but I would request that this council have a public hearing, and invite a state delegation, the mayor of the city of Medford, the Medford Ad Hoc Small Cell Committee, Verizon, our city solicitor, and Congresswoman Clark. At a public hearing here, Mr. President, at the earliest that you can call for that and get all the parties together to discuss 5G.
[Falco]: So what we'll do is we'll make that an amendment to the main resolution, okay? Thank you. So the first paper we'll take up will be the D paper. And Councilman Marks, can you please, because the clerk does not have the language, can you please read the D paper, which would be the last resolution that you offer?
[Marks]: The last one? Yes. So the last one was that the state delegation proposed a joint resolution of the Senate and the House urging Congress to amend the Telecommunication Act of 1996 to account for health effects.
[Falco]: On that motion, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Roll call vote, Mr. President. Roll call vote has been requested. Clerk Hurtubise, could you please call the roll?
[Hurtubise]: On the D paper.
[Falco]: On the D paper.
[Hurtubise]: Yes. Vice President Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes. Next up would be the C paper.
[Marks]: C paper. So it would be that a state delegation proposed a bill which would establish a commission to study the environmental and health effects of 5G technology.
[Falco]: On that motion offered by Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, Clerk Hurtubise, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: On the C paper, Councilor Marks. I'm sorry, Councilor Bears. Yes. Vice President Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Marks. Yes. Councilor Morell. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes. 70 affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes. Councilor Marks, could you please read the B paper?
[Marks]: And the B paper is a resolution from this council. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council approve a resolution asking our state delegation, the Federal Communications Commission, and Congress to limit 5G technology deployment in Massachusetts until the health effects are fully understood.
[Falco]: On that motion offered by Councilor Mark, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, Clerk Hurtubise, could you please call the roll?
[Hurtubise]: On the B paper. Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello?
[SPEAKER_13]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli, President Falco.
[Falco]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion passes. On the main motion offered by Councilor Marks, be it resolved that the issue of Verizon 5G installations be discussed as amended by Councilor Scarpelli and Councilor Marks again. On that motion, Clerk Hurtubise's, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Clerk Hurtubise's, could you please call the roll?
[Marks]: And that's the creation of a public hearing? Correct.
[Scarpelli]: Yep.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. Point of information. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: You are? My dear friend, Mr. President, who would appear before this council as city solicitor, who has gone on to his retirement, would always come before this body and remind us that there is a difference between a public hearing and a public meeting.
[Dubuque]: You are correct.
[Knight]: And a public hearing would be something that is a creature of statute that is required by law versus a public meeting, which is something that we can call. So I would just like clarification from the council as to whether or not we're looking for a public hearing or a public meeting. I would assume it's a public meeting because the council doesn't really have a vote over whether or not these things can go into play.
[Falco]: Correct. That is correct.
[Marks]: That is correct, and I appreciate that clarification. It's a public meeting, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Correct, OK. So do you have that, clerk?
[Hurtubise]: On the main paper as amended by Councilor Marks and Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. OK. Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight?
[Navarre]: Yes.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes. 70 affirmative, zero in the negative. The motion passes. Thank you, everyone, for coming out tonight. We appreciate your input. Councilor Marks, thank you very much for bringing this forward. Thank you. 20-034, offered by Councilor Scarpelli. Be it resolved that the city administration inform the city council on any plans involving the very important process of the census count. Councilor Scarpelli.
[Scarpelli]: Thank you, President Falco. For those who might look at the census as just an irritant piece of mailing that almost every family gets, every household, and then disregarded and thrown away, I assure to spread the main issues with the census is making sure that Medford gets as due when it comes to funding from the federal government for education, police, fire, and so on. I think it's important that as the process is now getting underway, that we get an idea of what our plan for our city administration is to get the word out. Neighbor communities I'm seeing are starting a ground roots effort where if you see what the census is doing, they're now offering $28 an hour for workers knowing that it's important to get these issues and these numbers verified. And as you can see, Medford is now a very diverse community. And with that diverse community comes people of questionable residency. And one of the concerns we have are those numbers count. Those numbers are very important. And we've met and I've talked to different census bureau members that have talked to me about this being a federal law and how this cannot hold against anybody whether their documentation is updated or not. But it's something that we need to make sure that our administration has a plan in place that will reach all of our families. And we have an opportunity that it's being sent out in a variety of different ways. The important thing that I'm finding out is that the census now, seldom are we gonna see paper versions of the census. You can now do it on the telephone, you can do it online. There are so many different ways to get this information that's so needed in our community. So I'd like to know, I know that from what I've heard that Neil Osborne is going to be spearheading this, but I'd really like to know his plan and what we can do as a council to make sure that they're doing everything possible to get the word out and the comfort level to all the residents of this community that this information is vital. to make sure we get everything that's due to us and from the federal government. So thank you for hearing me out, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor LaNitte, during last Committee of the Whole, we did talk briefly about the census. And what we're going to do is we're actually going to invite Neil Osborne to a Committee of the Whole meeting where we can talk about the census. get the plan and just see what his plan is to roll out the census and whatnot. So we will be receiving an update on that. Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: Well, I was hoping a second, but Councilor Knight beat me to it. Thank you. And I was also hoping to catch some of the people leaving the room. If you know me, and this may speak strangely to my character, but two of my favorite things in the world are the post office and the census. And I just, to the people watching can't implore you enough to fill out your census form. It means we've done a census since 1800. It's one of the biggest things we do every 10 years. It's one of the biggest non-wartime mobilizations of people by the government that we do. And it goes into so much more. I mean, it goes into everything that Councilor Scarpelli said, which is incredibly important. It's also the foundation of basically all the statistics and facts that we have on the population of this country, most of the social science research that's done at the local, state, and federal level. And you may not have voted for me for this, but I'm incredibly passionate about the census, and I'd love to talk to Director Osborne about it. So I just want to remind everyone that April 1st is Census Day. Have your forms in by April 1st.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Bears. The clerk has told me the official date is 1790. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, I think it's also very important to point out that this is the year 10 of the census. This is also the census that will have an impact on the redistricting of our state house and congressional seats. So it's very important that we do complete the census and fill it out so that we give an accurate count to the people that are making up the districts. Because maybe then we can get a rep that represents all of Medford and not just a portion of it.
[Falco]: You are correct.
[Knight]: Thank you very much.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. On the motion of Councilor Scarpelli, seconded by Councilor Pearce. All those in favor? All those opposed? The motion passes. 20-035 offered by Councilor Marks. Vice President Caraviello and Council and I be it resolved that the Medford City Council congratulate Carol Clements on her retirement after more than 40 years working for the City of Medford, first at the Medford Police Department and then in the City Clerk's office. Be it further resolved that the Medford City Council thank Ms. Clements for her four decades of service to the residents of our community. Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I want to thank my colleagues, Vice President Caraviello and Councilor Knight for signing on to this. All of us that behind this reel, Mr. President, can appreciate the work. that Carol has done over four decades. And you couldn't meet a kinder, gentler person. Always has a smile on her face and willing to help. And anyone that could stay in this city service for 40 years deserves a recommendation, Mr. President, of great service, believe me. So I want to commend her and thank her personally for her many years of city service. And I think we should dedicate this meeting after Carol for all the years of service, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Marks. Thank you.
[Falco]: Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. I've gotten to know Carol over the last 10 years in being here. Though small in size, she was very large in stature in the community. Always with a smile, no matter if I saw her either in City Hall or outside. always says and I always had a nice smile always had a good thing to say and again Forty years at one job is a milestone and again she's to be commended For her years of service and I thank her for all she's done for our city Thank You councilor Caraviello Council appears I Have not been here long enough to say that I know Carol well from my many years of service but 40 years of
[Bears]: working for the city is an immense public service, and I thank Carol.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Pierce. Councilor Knight. Oh, one minute, Councilor Knight. I hit the wrong button.
[Knight]: Mr. President. Councilor Knight. Being someone who's 40 years of age and thinking back and saying that my whole entire life, since I've been on this earth, Carol was working in one way or another for the city of Medford is amazing when I think about that, because I feel old. I can just imagine how she feels after putting four decades in to the City of Medford, Mr. President. She was a great worker. She was someone who was pleasant to be around. Like Rick said, small in stature, but really someone that you knew had a presence in the office and had a presence in the room. Did a great job down in the clerk's office. That was the relationship that I was able to develop with her over the short period of time that I've been working here in City of Medford's government. but she will sadly be missed. You have a great team down there, Clerk Herterbeest, and she was a key player. As we see time pass and we see Dottie leave, now we see Carol leave, and we see the changing face of the clerk's office. Ed Finn leave and you come in. It's a very interesting time right now, and I just want to have the opportunity to thank Carol for all the work that she did down there and how she helped transform the office into what it is today.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Morell?
[Morell]: Thank You Mr. President like councillor bears I have not had the pleasure many of you had of working with Carol so many years, but I do thank her for her long service to the city and Being a stalwart and the many people like her as administration change as Councilors change Having those people that are in the office that are those warm faces that you can depend on and that really reflect the city of Medford I think they mean so much to people that come here one day they come here all the time so I thank her for her many years of service and hope she enjoys her retirement.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Morell. And if I may add really quick, I'd also like to thank Carol for many years of service, 40 years is a long time. You really don't hear these days people working 40 years for one company or a city or town and this is remarkable and I want to thank Carol for continuous commitment to our community throughout the years. I've only worked with her for four plus years, but she's always been extremely a joy to work with, a pleasure to work with. She's been very helpful and very kind, and I thank her for years of service as well. So on the motion of Councilor Marks, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? All those opposed? The motion passes. On the motion of Council of Knight, to take papers in the hands of the clerk, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Offered by Councilor Knight, 2-0-036. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council send a letter in support of HB 2881, which would require a five cent deposit on nip bottles to our state delegation. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an item that came up during the last legislative session in the State House and it was defeated. And then this council, if you recall last term, asked the licensing commission to examine a feasibility as to whether or not it would make sense to implement the NIP ban with the issuance of new licenses or the transfer of licenses among our package stores here in the community. That resolve was filed in direct response to the state legislature not being able to pass the expansion of the bottle bill to NIPS. This piece of legislation was refiled. It's coming up for a hearing right now in the Department of Telecommunications and Energy subcommittee, I do believe, Mr. President. But the intent of this resolution is to have this council go in support in extending the bottle bill to NIP bottles with the hope that that will result in proper disposal and recycling of these plastic bottles that we can find just about anywhere in our community. River Cleanup Day, if we go down there, you'll see thousands of them. You walk through the parking lot down at Anthony's Liquor Store, you see them all over the place. They're everywhere, Mr. President, and it's become an epidemic in our community, so much so that the council thought about taking action on it, and the state delegations thought about taking action on it, and the state legislatures thought about taking action on it. Well, it's time to take action, Mr. President. So I'm asking that this council request that the city clerk be authorized with the power to draft a letter supporting House Bill 2881 and send that to our state delegation and request that they vote in favor of it. and take whatever appropriate steps they can to get favorable recommendations out of subcommittee and make this come to a reality.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: I just want to add that if I'm on Facebook, Medford Square, Medford Politics, whichever group it might be, this might be the issue I see most. You know, there's things that come and go. This is a consistent issue. And we need to address it. We need our state delegation to address it. Thank you.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Councilor Bears. Councilor Caraviello. Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Knight. He was out in front of this last year on this issue. So I hope that our state delegation will support this. But, you know, there is, like he said, you know, there's not a place where you go and you don't find these little bottles all over. I come out of my own house every day. I see them. I don't know, people just dump them as they're driving by. But believe it or not, they're on. At the liquor store, they're one of the largest sellers at their, no matter what store you go into. I've talked to several different stores and some guys said they sell almost $1,000 a day, if not more. I don't know who's buying them. Obviously, people are buying them, and they're buying them quite frequently. So hopefully with this five cent deposit, similar to how people are picking up cans and bottles all over the street, hopefully people will start picking up these little small bottles too. So I wholeheartedly support this.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Morell.
[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. President. I thank Councilor Knight for bringing this up again. I know last session, everyone kind of went into the virtues of collecting these and the fact that any time you do a river cleanup, any cleanup in the city, you may as well have a separate bag for nymphs because that's pretty much what you're picking up the entire time. So really, anything we can do to get these, you know, off the streets off out of our waterways there it's obviously not just a medford problem and literally if they get thrown on the road in medford it's not just a medford problem because they're so light they go on the water they go on the drains they they blow around so anything we can do to um get all at least some of this plastic um out of our environment so i support this thank you consular morale consular beers i hate to speak twice um but i think
[Bears]: The other aspect of this, Councilor Caraviello, you made me think of it, is, you know, we've been talking about behavioral health and substance use disorder, and there's commission being proposed currently, and I think it might be worth, and I won't offer this as an amendment, I'll offer this as just a point of information, but I think it might be worth considering. what we could do around providing additional literature around addiction and substance use disorders, which I think we know, and I personally know of people in my life who are drinking nips because they have a substance use disorder.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Bears. And if I may conclude, Councilor Knight, thank you for bringing this forward tonight. You've been on top of this since day one, last session. So it's something that I wholeheartedly support as well. And thank you for your efforts with regard to this. On the motion of Councilor Knight, seconded by Councilor Caraviello, please call the roll.
[Hurtubise]: Councilor Bears? Yes. Vice President Caraviello? Yes. Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Marks? Yes. Councilor Morell? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? President Falco?
[Falco]: Yes, six in the affirmative, one absent, the motion passes. 2-0-039 offered by Councilor Bears. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council ask the DPW to repaint the crosswalk on City Hall Mall between Harvard Vanguard and the rear of Medford City Hall. Councilor Bears.
[Bears]: Thank you Mr. President. I got a message this week from a Medford resident who crosses regularly at the crosswalk that if I stood up I might be able to see from the window right here and it is pretty faded. It's you know this can be a pretty high speed area here on City Hall Mall. There's the merging traffic and then they're going back out and Harbour Vanguard's pretty high traffic. City Hall can be pretty high traffic and I just think It's important for that crosswalk to be visible for drivers. And I will also talk to the DPW about it myself as well this week.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Bears. On the motion of Councilor Bears, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. 20-038 offered by Consul-a-Night. Be it resolved that the Medford City Council extends its deep and sincere condolences to the family of Teresa Roberti on her recent passing. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. Today, Mrs. Roberti was laid to rest, a longtime resident of Leiden Ave. Her husband, Nick, is a very close friend of mine, and it's very sad to see her go. I first met her maybe nine or ten years ago at a community event, and her daughter, and she was just a very wonderful person, very nice lady. Her husband, Nicky, is a great guy as well, and we're really sad to see her go. She was a stalwart in the neighborhood. a friendly face that everybody could come up and say hello to and talk to. She was always willing to open her door and her home to any individual in the neighborhood. So with that being said, she will be sadly missed in the South Medford neighborhood of Lydon Avenue, Mr. President, as we all know, especially up that fire in South Medford and that stretch of South Medford that's a very close-knit community. And everybody down there knows each other, walks into each other's house without knocking the door, and so on and so forth. And this was no different for Mrs. Roberti. So she's certainly someone that will be sadly missed. She was an asset to this community and we're sad to see her go. I'd like to have my council colleagues join me in offering the deepest condolences to her family on her recent passing.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Offered by Councilor Marks, be it resolved at 2-0-040, be it resolved that a moment of silence be held for long-time resident Gerard Edouard on his recent passing. Chancellor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Gerard was a true family man that lived in this community for a number of years. Again, someone that always had a smile on his face and was willing to lend a hand if need be. He is also the father of our superintendent, Dr. Maurice Edouard Vincent. And he will surely be missed, Mr. President.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. At this time, I would ask everyone to please rise for a brief moment of silence, thoughts and prayers with their families. We have one more paper, Councilman. Vice President Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you. Offered by Councilor Knight and Councilor Falco, 20041. We resolve that the mayor issue an executive order prohibiting the boards and commissions from meeting prior to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday. Councilor Knight.
[Knight]: Mr. President, thank you very much. This is an issue that we've discussed as a council and a body for a number of years, and we were moving in the right direction. A lot of our meetings were being scheduled after 6 PM in the night for our boards and commissions. And we've been running into some circumstances with certain boards and commissions, a meeting. At a time of the day that's not conducive to doing business with residents of the general public, people that work for a living and have a concern in the neighborhood can't attend a meeting because they have other obligations. So back several years ago, we requested that Mayor Burke make changes to the meeting structure and the boards and commissions were all meeting after 5 p.m. at night. And that was all well and good for a period of time. And then as time passed, so did the stringency of those requirements, Mr. President. And certain boards and commissions are now meeting at a time that's not really conducive to conducting business in the government sphere for quality of life issues in the neighborhood, such as the traffic commission, for example. So with that being said, Mr. President, we had some discussions in our priority meeting about what direction the council should be going in over this next term. And one of the things that came up was the meeting times of boards and commissions. And while the boards and commissions don't fall under council purview and do have some autonomy, they also do fall under the branch of the executive. And the mayor does have the power and authority to issue an executive directive or an executive order that would say that they're not allowed to meet before 6 p.m. Monday through Friday so that people that live in this community, but also work for a living, will have the ability to come to these meetings and participate in their government. So that's the intent behind this proposal, Mr. President. It's something that Councilor Falco and I spoke about before the meeting this evening, and it's something that I hope my council colleagues will join me in supporting. Thank you. President Falco.
[Falco]: Thank you, President Caraviello. Of course, I'm in full support of this. This is something that many residents have called about. I think our goal is always to try to get more people involved in government in what's happening throughout the community. And a way of doing this is to actually have meetings that make sense for the majority of the population. Having meetings during the afternoon does not work for a lot of people. And for many people throughout our community, you know, having meetings at 2 o'clock in the afternoon. I think Councilor Marks, you mentioned it earlier with regard to the Verizon hearing. I mean, that doesn't make sense. It doesn't really make sense to have meetings at 2 o'clock in the afternoon if you want the general public to attend. Most people are working. They're picking up their kids from school. They might have other appointments as well. So I think, you know, having meetings anytime after 6 p.m. makes complete sense. Most of the general public can come to meetings at that time, and I think it's something that we need to make sure that this happens, to make sure that, you know, in the sense of transparency, in the sense of getting people involved in what's going on throughout the community, I think it'd be in the benefit of most people throughout this community, and the city in general, that we make sure that these meetings are held, you know, anytime after 6 p.m. So I thank you very much.
[Caraviello]: Thank you.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Knight, as well.
[Morell]: That's a morale. Thank you Mr. President. I want to thank Councilors Falco a night for bringing this forward. This is something I raised at our legislative meeting. The commission that I get the most questions about is is the traffic commission. That's the one at least the one that meets at a time that's really hard to me for people to get to. So I think it's important that we make these meetings accessible and it goes a long way. I think in goodwill and people understanding how to move things forward, how to get issues addressed that they face all the time moving throughout the city. So I fully support this resolution.
[Caraviello]: Thank you. Councilor Marks.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. I agree with the intent. I'm not quite sure an executive order, uh, would be the Avenue. Um, and the reason why I say that is traffic commission is set up by state statute and they're an autonomous, as the councilor mentioned, an autonomous body. And I'm not sure enough executive directive can change that. Um, but I think it's, worthy to ask, or maybe you can ask more of a general question, if the mayor would be willing to reach out to the different boards and commissions to see if she can get a buy-in. But either way, I support it. I believe strongly that, as my council colleagues mentioned, that these meetings should be open to everyone to attend, and during the day is just not adequate enough. So I support it.
[Caraviello]: Thank you. On the motion of Councilor Knight and Councilor Falco, seconded by Councilor Bears. All those in favor? Motion passes. Motion to revert back to regular business.
[Falco]: All those in favor? The motion passes. Reports of committees, 2-0-017, Committee of the Whole meeting report, Wednesday, January 15, 2020 at 6 p.m. in room 207, Council Office, Medford City Hall. We met last Wednesday as a Committee of the Whole to discuss the priorities for the Medford City Council for this year, 2020. We went through A number of items ranging from the basic city services and how to actually provide them more efficiently. We talked a little bit about headcount in each of the departments and hopefully increasing headcount. We talked about meetings, regular meetings with department heads ahead of the budget season. So if we have any questions we can ask them. before the budget is crafted for the upcoming year. We talked a little bit about strategic about a strategic master plan. We talked about meeting with the mayor and we will I'll be scheduling that soon. I'll be reaching out to the mayor's office to discuss our priorities with her so we can invite her to committee the whole meeting. We talked about housing, inclusionary zoning, We talked about the traffic commission meetings as well. We also talked about Let's see we talked about actually the city council Having a legal services line item so that the council can have its own legal counsel of various priorities including city ordinances in other Items, and I think that's something that the council agrees on would go a long way Especially the number of ordinances that we're trying to write at this point in time We talked about revenue priorities. We talked about various ordinances that we have to work on in the upcoming year and We talked about citywide technology, pedestrian safety. We talked about the behavioral health commission. We talked about breweries ordinance, food trucks. Talked a little bit about taxes. So the meeting wasn't limited to that, but we talked about a far-ranging number of issues and priorities for the upcoming year. And to say the least, it will be a very busy year, a lot of meetings, but I think there's a lot of work that needs to get done, and I know we can get it done together. So on the motion of Councilor Caraviello to approve the committee report, seconded by Councilor Knight. If I could? Yes, of course. Karl Marx.
[Marks]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you. There were a lot of great ideas and priorities brought up during this meeting. The one thing that I am grateful, and I believe you were the first to bring it up, were the pre-budget meetings. Thank you. Because for many years, we were, as a council, I believe, and I won't speak for everyone, but I think there was a sense of frustration once we got the budget. It was already in ink. And our only authority was really to cut from the bottom line and not to offer suggestions, like I think many of us have, on ways of improving how government operates. And I think it's very helpful that Mayor Lungo-Koehn now is talking about us looking at the budget and potentially April, which has never happened in my 18 years on the council. And I look forward to actually a preview of the budget where we can have some input before it goes into final status on obtaining some of the priorities and important measures that we see as a body. There's seven of us. You know, we're out in the streets, we're listening to constituents, we receive the same emails and phone calls, and what better advice or counsel to have than members of this council when you are putting together the budget. And that has never happened since I've been on this council. And I look forward under your leadership, along with this new mayor, to actually sit down around the table and discuss not only the mayor's priorities, but our priorities and how do we incorporate that in a budget process.
[Falco]: Thank you, Councilor Marks. I'm looking to, like I said, schedule a meeting soon with the mayor, and have the mayor come to Committee of the Whole so we can all talk together, and then we'll hopefully schedule some department head meetings after that to get working on those issues. At this point, I recognize Councilor Caraviello.
[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. We talked about the budget. I'll ask... We'll talk about the budget again. I'll ask you to convey this to the mayor, and it's something that's been a sore spot since the day I've been on this council, is that we have an actual budget. And we've had it for a couple of years, and then we didn't have it. So again, I don't wanna just see what's proposed. Again, like we had a couple of budgets ago, we saw what was spent in the past. So again, if we could have that again going forward, if we could relay that to the mayor before we get the budget, that we get an actual budget,
[Falco]: Not just spreadsheets.
[Caraviello]: Not just a spreadsheet, but a real budget.
[Falco]: Back a few years ago, when I first got on the council, that was one of my big priorities, was getting a budget with a narrative.
[Caraviello]: We did, we did have it for a couple of years, and then it got lost, I don't know where it went.
[Falco]: Correct, so we're hoping to continue forward with that, and I would think and hope that the mayor would as well.
[Caraviello]: That was something I asked for my first year on the council, when I got my first budget, was I kind of flabbergasted at what I saw.
[Falco]: Thank you. Thank you. Consulate Caraviello. Consulate Beers.
[Bears]: Very quickly. I just wanted to say I think the legal counsel issue is incredibly important and also that we get official city emails.
[Falco]: Thank you very much.
[Bears]: Thank you.
[Falco]: Thank you. Consulate Beers. Got a motion of Consulate Caraviello to approve the committee report. Seconded by Consulate Morell. All those in favor. All those opposed. The motion passes. Records, the records of the meeting of January 14, 2020 were passed to Councilor Marks. Councilor Marks, how did you find those records? I review the records, Mr. President, and find them to be in order and move approval. On the motion of Councilor Marks to approve the records, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? The motion passes. Okay on the motion of console and I to adjourn the meeting second seconded by console morale all those in favor all those opposed meeting adjourned
|
total time: 19.1 minutes total words: 2555  |
total time: 9.76 minutes total words: 1362  |
total time: 7.62 minutes total words: 1761  |
total time: 4.39 minutes total words: 844  |
|
total time: 25.25 minutes total words: 3477  |
total time: 2.93 minutes total words: 619  |
total time: 4.42 minutes total words: 646  |
|