AI-generated transcript of City Council 10-25-22

[Morell]: Regular meeting of the Medford City Council October 25 2022 is called to order Mr. Clerk, please call the role.

[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears.

[Knight]: Announcements accolades remembrances reports and suspend the rules to take a permit applications if we can do that, please.

[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Knight just spend the rules to take permit applications seconded by answers Garpelli all those in favor. I was opposed motion passes, moving to our permit applications, believe they begin on Um, do you want to, you want to start with the, um, two, two, five, three, eight, or before then five zero five. So we're starting with a granted location or all right. 22505 petition for grant of location National Grid of North Andover Massachusetts Metro Massachusetts city clerk's office, you are hereby notified that in order of the Metro City Council a public hearing will be held in the Howard Alden Memorial Chambers and via zoom at 7pm on Tuesday, October 11, 2022 and a petition of National Grid for permission to relocate gas lines including the necessary sustaining protecting fixtures as it may find necessary under and across the public way here and after name to be located substantially in accordance with the plan mark 060641-1060, Walnut Street, Medford, Massachusetts, July 20th, 2022. A Zoom link for this meeting will be provided no later than Friday, October 7th, 2022. Vice-President Bears.

[Bears]: Motion to waive the remainder of the reading in favor of a short presentation by the petitioner.

[Morell]: on the motion of our bears to wait the remainder of the reading. Second by Councilor Knight all those in favor. All those opposed motion passes. I do see we have Dana Cuddy on the call from National Grid. Dana name and address for the record please.

[Cunningham#]: Hi, good evening. My name is Diana Cuddy National Grid 40 Sylvan Road, Waltham, Massachusetts.

[Morell]: petition in front of us.

[Cunningham#]: Sure, yes, thank you. Um, so we were, we are in need of relocating or replacing some of our gas main on Walnut Street and Metcalfe Street to accommodate a new water project by the city of Medford. The exact location is all of Metcalfe Street and Walnut Street between Number 50 walnut and and South Street, and then there's two small tie ins on Emerson and Thomas to bring connect the system all together.

[Bears]: Thank you, Miss Cuddy, or over the public hearing any questions for Councilors by some bears, Madam President, could we have the city engineers with us could be described the conditions on the petition.

[Morell]: Yes.

[Bears]: I think he's here in person.

[Morell]: Oh, there you are. I didn't see you back there. Name and address for the record, please.

[Wartella]: My name is Owen Wartella, and my address is 34 Electric Avenue in Somerville. But I'm the city engineer, so.

[Morell]: Yeah, you can also, yeah. In the future, you can just give your city hall address.

[Wartella]: Okay, great.

[Morell]: Please proceed.

[Wartella]: So the conditions that I had were, this is something that I looked at back in July and June in a review, and Basically, the conditions of the road are currently in poor conditions, the sidewalks are in poor conditions, and this grant of location will be placing the new reinstalled main within the sidewalk. And they will be replacing the sidewalk in kind afterwards. The road work, we will probably do a spot. That's a permit access fee for work done because we're going to come in afterwards do water main work. So what we'll do is we'll acquire the money in the fund so then we'll be able to stretch tax dollars a little bit further. Thank you.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you for being here. Sure. Just a question on that. I know that some companies have reached out and residents reached out that just wanted to replace their water mains. And I know that Councilor Knight brought this forward with this project. That's why I'm bringing it up. Are we now having the companies now go curb to curb whenever they open the street?

[Wartella]: Yes and no. There's an engineering directive number three that was issued in July that gives an outline and we try to work with developers on a case-by-case basis to do the resurfacing within the road. Now this is a public utility company, so they kind of follow different rules. They don't necessarily need to repave from curb to curb unless it's a moratorium on the road. However, In their defense, National Grid does always go above and beyond. They usually do a full lane.

[Scarpelli]: I'll disagree with you there, just for the fact that what I did prior to your arrival, I had asked for a list back at least, I believe, two or three years on openings, approvals for openings, and who did those and who did the paving and did they do, a just partial or complete or just a block. And it was comical because when I got back, I got list of the addresses for the small businesses in the residential homes. So I use one example, Tufts is one of the biggest companies we use for residential. So you have Tufts paving or construction, whatever it's called, and then it says the address. And then, so you can understand when we wanted that to see if the paving was done to specs of what we were told was gonna be acceptable. But anything that had to do with our utilities, it was just basic. We didn't know the address, we didn't know, it was actually useless for us. And I think I'll ask that again down the line, because I think I'm gonna call for a special meeting for this for the fact that You know, personally, on my end, the reason why I brought this up, High Street, at 10 o'clock at night, we had a utility job that the public utility hired an outside company to come in and repave. Well, they came in at 10 o'clock at night on a school night and, you know, it was, they said they had permission from the entity. So I think that- Are you on a public way or a private way? I'm in a public way.

[Wartella]: So this is something that I'll bring up later, but I just wanted to make sure that- I think moving forward, the engineering directive that I issued should take care of a lot of those issues.

[Scarpelli]: I appreciate that. The answer you gave is just a little alarming that our utilities have gone above and beyond. I believe that's what you said. I don't think they've done that. As I said, it's a public utility company and they kind of have their own guidelines. I know, and what I'm saying is, those guidelines we have to find a way to change them because if you look at our roads a lot of it has to do with i'm not saying it's your fault this is not your fault this is years of of mismanagement of our roadway roadways that you know this is why these questions are coming up from council night that's why we appreciate you being here so thank you understand thank you very much any further questions for the council at this time

[Knight]: So just as I understand it, with the approval of this rental location, what's going to happen is we're going to move some water pipes from the street to the sidewalk. We're going to get a brand new sidewalk. The city is going to go in, replace all the underground infrastructure, and then they're going to resurface the street curb to curb.

[Wartella]: Yes, and we'll replace the lead lines that are within Walnut Street as well.

[Morell]: Great. So as this is a public hearing, I do need to open that up. So opening up the public hearing. Oh, it already opened up.

[Hurtubise]: OK. or do I need to, does the motion close it?

[Morell]: Okay, so on the motion and Councilor Knight, would you like that with the six day public comment period or? So on the motion of Councilor Knight to approve at the completion of the six day public comment period, seconded by Councilor Caraviello. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[Morell]: 22-508 city clerk's office notice of a public hearing the Medford City Council will hold a public hearing in the Howard Chambers 85 Howard F Alden 85 George B has a drive Medford and via zoom on Tuesday October 11 2022 at 7pm only to be posted no later than Friday. October 7, 2022 on a petition from Flex Drive Services LLC aka Lift Hub, Lily Jobson agent is petitioning for a special permit 616 Felsway operations and 80 station landing aka 15 presence landing parking Medford Mass 02155 Flex Drive aka Lift Hub petitioning for a special permit to park rental vehicles at 616 Felsway in accordance with Medford zoning table A-H-3 Motor Vehicle Related Uses. Petition and plan may be seen in the office of the city clerk, Medford City Hall, 85 George B. Hassett Drive, room 103, Medford, Massachusetts, 2155, call 781-393-2501 for any accommodations, slash HTDD, 781-393-2516. The city of Medford is an EEOAA 504 employer. By order of the city clerk, sign Adam L. Hurtubise, city clerk, advertised in the Medford transcript and the Somerville Journal, September 29th and October 6th. This was tabled last week as well. Do I have any questions from Councilors at this point?

[Scarpelli]: Councilor Merle?

[Morell]: Yes.

[Scarpelli]: If I can. Thank you. I propose a table this motion for the fact that in the past, just so the constituents know that especially people here in the chambers, when we have a question or concerns with legal background, city council usually has a city solicitor or assistant city solicitor that works with us to answer any questions that legally that we need to make sure that wherever we vote, we vote either as for or against that we are doing it with the proper form and not holding the city liable. I'll give you an example. This council voted on a gas station to exclude a gas station for BJ's about a year ago, and we didn't have council here. So the reason for it was illegal. So BJ's took us to court. and we were found to be in fault and it would have been a serious, it could have been if our acting solicitor at the time worked with BJ's to make sure that we had some language and understanding what the protocol was. So I tabled these, anything that you're gonna see with legal, I'll be honest with the city administration to all my constituents that anything with legal notification I don't feel comfortable. I'm not, I don't have a legal background. I want to make sure that I cross my T's and dot my I's when it comes to certain entities that we're not putting our decisions on putting a financial burden on our committee or community to fight a legal battle that we're going to lose because we weren't informed properly. So that's the reason that I asked because it's, you know, we asked a certain a few questions, one being that if there are 50 to 60 cars that are going to be housed in Medford, Who is going to, where are they going to be housed? Are they going to pay excise tax? At least will we get the tax revenue from that excise tax? I believe the answer was that we will from Lyft. I just want to make sure from our legal team, I wanted to ask that. There's some other questions, but I know that there was KP Law was supposed to be, is supposed to be here online tonight. I'd like to just, we can ask them some questions. I think that making sure that, you know, opening this up, I want to get some examples in the city that where this is similar to, so we can all understand on its basis, what it entails. So we don't put ourselves by allowing this and then later opening up an issue that because of past practice, we might be doing something that's going to harm our community later. If that's the question for our legal representation here.

[Morell]: We do have Attorney Jeffrey Blake from KP Law on the call right now. Would any Councilors like to speak or ask questions before we hear from Attorney Blake?

[Bears]: I was chairing last week, so I don't know if I made my view on this clear, but to be quite frank, I think that the business model here is incredibly exploitative and not the kind of business we should be encouraging here in Medford. So I'm not supportive of this petition. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, President Ferris. So Attorney Blake, sorry, Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell and thank you Attorney Blake for being here, my, and perhaps we'll get to this in your presentation but my concerns are similar to what Vice President Bears just expressed. And in the light of the example of BJS last year that Councilor Scarpelli alluded to I'm curious. Are there, with this type of permit application, are there permissible versus non-permissible reasons for denial that we need to know about before we take this vote? Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you, Councilor Collins. Attorney Blake, I do believe that's the main question before us. If there, as the special permit granting authority for this, are there permissible versus non-permissible reasons which the council may vote or individual Councilors may vote or the council may vote to deny the permit?

[SPEAKER_22]: Sure, sure. And thank you everyone for having me. My name is Jeff Blake, I'm with KP Law and I have reviewed your zoning ordinances and zoning ordinances are land use ordinances. So typically they are not, they don't allow you to go beyond the normal land use objectives. You have in your ordinances, a criteria for special permits that are granted in the city. The special permit granting authority you unless specified herein, otherwise herein only upon its written determination that the adverse effects of the proposed use will not weigh its beneficial impact to the city or neighborhood in view of the particular characteristics of the site and the proposal in relationship to that site. The determination shall include consideration of the following. social, economic, or community needs, which are served by the proposal. And I suggest that these have to have a land use type. Traffic flow and safety, including parking and loading, the adequacy of utilities and other public services, compatibility with the size, scale, and design of other structures in the neighborhood to the extent that this is actually a consideration with the current application before you. Impacts on the natural environment and the proposal's compatibility with the purposes of the city's comprehensive plan. So those are the criteria that that are outlined in your zoning ordinance and those are the permissible areas that you are allowed to number one in denying and or linking with conditions. So to answer your question, the earlier question I think was, or a comment was, I don't like the business model. I don't know that that has a sufficient tie to land use or use of the land such that it would be an it would allow you the ability to deny the special permit. Now, I think you're probably saying, well, you just gave me criteria. Number one is talks about social, economic, or community needs, which are served by the proposal. I suggest that that would be more toward looking at the particular use wherein a situation where you might want to grant a special permit for a use that has a particularly admirable, I keep going between screens, community need or economic or social need, rather than a objection to a possible business model.

[Morell]: So just to understand, and I think this is where it came up in BJ, so we would have to, if it were to be a vote to denial, we would have to cite a specific reason and that we as a body would have to agree upon that specific reason?

[Scarpelli]: You would, yes. Point of information.

[Morell]: Councilor Scarpelli.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. And this is, like I said, this is our concern as a council. In the past, I appreciate the council from KP Law coming in and stating our ordinance that We read also what our city solicitor used to do is work with us. and help us understand past practice, what we've done with past businesses and how that negatively affected our community with our decision or the impact on how we can present it that is legal. So again, I tabled it for the fact that we don't have a city solicitor that's working with us because I asked what I really wanted to know is to give us some examples that we as a council can, can see tangible comparisons that we've done in the past that have both helped and then crippled us in a sense. So when you look at this situation, I personally have a concern with traffic. You're talking about 50, 60 cars. If anybody's in that area, I know what the comment was from the company that we spoke with last week that said, oh no, they won't use the satellite program next to in the Fellsway Plaza, they're going to park over at a parking lot in a parking garage across the street. I don't know what the proper answer is and what the safe answer is as a city councilor that doesn't have a background in legal jargon. So again, I can't vote for this or support it for the fact that, leaving it to table, not to the fact that right now I don't have an answer for it, whether it's a yes or no for this permit. I don't have an answer because I don't have any support from a city solicitor that I have in the past worked with to help me make these decisions. So I apologize. I hope I'm making sense. I don't know where I'm going to go I'd like to hear from my fellow Councilors before we make some motions, but I appreciate it.

[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you.

[Collins]: Thank you President real I want to check my understanding here it sounds like from that. description from Attorney Blake that per our zoning ordinance, we can make special exceptions for non-conforming land uses in the case of an exceptional community benefit. But it sounds like the interpretation is in a case such as this, we can't deny a technically conforming land use for a reason that doesn't fit within those bullet points that you mentioned. And I just wanna first check that. My understanding is correct there.

[SPEAKER_22]: This is attorney Blake again. Your understanding is correct. And the bullet points are the criteria by which you can judge a special permit. I mean, permits land use or otherwise class two licenses to the extent that we'll take those up. You'll also hear that there are criteria for those. I mean, an applicant needs to be able to come in and understand the criteria that they have to meet. So to answer your question, yes. Those are the criteria that the council will have to identify an issue with the application. And if they identify an issue that can't be conditioned, then they can deny the permit. With respect to the earlier speaker, the Councilor who talked about having a, I think the issue was whether or not we could require them to park the cars in a parking garage across the street. That can certainly be a condition of any special permit.

[Morell]: Does that answer your question, Councilor Collins?

[Collins]: It does, thank you.

[Morell]: Any further questions from the Council at this time?

[Knight]: I just like to point out, this is an existing business in the community already. All right, they have about 50-60 employees here in this community that contribute to the circular flow of our local economy. The proposed use, in my opinion, is less detrimental than the current use. I don't think that it really makes a big difference in terms of the impact. in traffic or safety in the area. And that's supported through the statements of our chief of police and our chief of fire in the application. So when I look at this proposal that's before us, I see a business here that exists in our community, that's looking to expand in our community and invest in our community. And I think we should make it easy for them, not hard. So I will support this paper in the statement.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Vice Mayor Bears?

[Bears]: Yeah, thank you, Attorney Blake. So social economic benefits, or so only if there's an exceptional benefit, can we make an exception, not if we believe there's an exceptional cost?

[SPEAKER_22]: The determination shall include consideration of each of the following, the social economic or community needs that are served by the proposal. So yes, in my reading of it, You are correct.

[Bears]: Okay, and just from your reading of it on other points, I mean, it's not past it, so I assume we can't use it as justification now, but our comprehensive plan, I believe, has items in it that advocate for an increase in the number of good paying jobs in the community. If the council were to believe that these jobs were not good paying jobs, would that be a justification for the denial of a special permit?

[SPEAKER_22]: It could certainly be a basis, the proposals compatibility with the purposes of the city's comprehensive plan. That is a criteria for which you can judge the application.

[Bears]: Thank you, and then just last, I believe you mentioned environmental concerns. This lot is in proximity to a wetland, and it would also mean an increase in the number of vehicles and particulate emissions in our community. Would that be under the environmental section a justification for denial?

[SPEAKER_22]: In my opinion, it would be. Obviously, you would have to have, yes, in my opinion, it would be.

[Bears]: Okay, well, then I have a few reasons to deny it. Thank you.

[Knight]: Could one argue that this is a ride share program and ride shares are designed to take cars off the street and therefore they have an environmental impact that's positive.

[Morell]: I'm not sure they execute what they're designed to do.

[Scarpelli]: Again, if I wanted or not, these are great questions debate, sitting with a city solicitor. no offense to Attorney Blake, but this is what I'm saying. We're having an open debate about something that we should be talking about with our solicitor, making sure we get the questions answered correctly for the councils that have the opportunity to sit with former city solicitors. I do not forget what we've done. This is what I implore you to understand. This is not about you know, whether I want to hinder a business to prosper in our community. We definitely have questions, and I appreciate Attorney Blake coming and answering questions, but the questions are our ordinance that we know. Okay, so this isn't a strategy to understand for or against it. It's where we could understand with a city solicitor sitting in our community, working with us as a partner, figuring this out. Again, I'm going to say no disrespect to KP law, but I don't see them as a partner. They are an employee for administration. So again, thank you for time, Madam President.

[Morell]: Any further comments from the council at this time? Director Alicia Hunt.

[Hunt]: Madam President, thank you. Alicia Hunt, Director of Planning, Development and Sustainability for the city. I was not actually here for this, and I will tell you that I have not seen this file, so I can't speak of any opinion on the specific application, but other boards and commissions, when considering traffic impacts on the city, do request a traffic study, and then our Director of Traffic and Transportation reviews that, and gives us a written opinion on it. And it seems to me that if there are concerns specifically about traffic and impacts on parking and the roads, then it would be appropriate to ask for a traffic study. And also Director Blake will sometimes help with the scope of such a study in order to meet the needs of what the board needs to consider. So I just wanted to put that forward as a tool you might want to consider for this evening. If you have one, I apologize. We'd be happy to review the application if it's helpful.

[Knight]: We have a statement from the chief of police saying that there is no anticipated traffic impact.

[Hunt]: I just don't know what did he base that on number of vehicles coming and exiting. That's usually we get for traffic impacts we get a traffic study and the director of traffic reviews it. pop procedures where these go to the chief of police for traffic impacts predates the fact the existence of the position of director of traffic and transportation in the city as far as I'm aware.

[Morell]: Thank you. Any further questions of the council at this time I do have one person embarrassed. Attorney, Attorney Blake, could you speak to the timeframe so just hearing from what councils are saying, if the council were to move to table this again or to a date certain, what timeframe are we looking at that we must approve or deny this?

[SPEAKER_22]: Failure by the special permit granting authority to take final action within 90 days or extended time if applicable shall be deemed to be a grant of the special permit. The 90 days is after the conclusion of the public hearing, which we're having now, I have to assume that you began your hearing within the required 65 days. So if you were to continue this hearing for more information, I think you're still well within your timeframe and the 90 days wouldn't start ticking until the hearing had closed.

[Morell]: Okay. Thank you.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. It just sounds like the steps forward. the range of steps forward, obviously, I have a position on it, Councilor Knight has a position on it, Councilor Scarpelli has a larger position about it. General legal counsel, one would be to move forward tonight, which I think Councilor Knight seems to be of the mind. Well, I mean, I'm thinking, why don't we close the public hearing, we've got 90 days to figure it out, right? We've got three months to figure it out, and at that point, we have to take a vote on it. I think the other thing we could do is refer it to a committee of the whole to have the kind of discussions that Councilor Scarpelli has talked about having in the past, like we have had on other items where we could come to some sort of you know, could reach a consensus, maybe there's a majority that wants to move forward, maybe there's a majority that could agree to a reason to deny it. You know, I think those are two options. It also sounds like we could continue the public hearing and make that decision at a later time while we seek additional information such as traffic study.

[Knight]: Is failure to react within the 90 day window considered a constructive acceptance of the application?

[SPEAKER_22]: It is.

[Knight]: Thank you.

[Bears]: But the 90 day window doesn't start till we conclude the public hearing. Is that correct?

[Scarpelli]: So I appreciate Councilor Bears bringing it forward because, you know, with my hesitation, I would have tabled it, but if moving it toward a Committee of the Whole meeting where we have legal representation that if we had to adjourn in a confidential know, manner of like we have in the past with our city solicitor that I would feel more comfortable to understanding our process and that format. So, um, I know you have questions before me. Anybody else might have questions before I motion. I think that that's a good idea to send this community holds.

[Morell]: And I didn't, I'm sorry, Councilor Knight, what was your question earlier? I didn't catch the first part.

[Knight]: It was just whether or not failure to act within the specified timeframe under state law would constitute a constructive acceptance of the application. So it'd be like a yes vote, or if it would be that they'd have to sue us to do something, you know what I mean?

[Morell]: Okay, thank you.

[Knight]: I just wanna have the things that go to committee and then never come out, and then have us put in a position where it's acceptance by inaction versus taking a vote.

[Morell]: Thank you. So, Attorney Blake, just so I know, we're doing this the right way. If we were to move it to committee with that, we could continue the public hearing in committee or we would need to close it here. That would start the time clock.

[SPEAKER_22]: I think you could move it to the committee without closing the hearing. I think that it's legitimate to ask for a traffic study and I'm sure the applicant would probably grant you additional, an extension of time so that you could get a traffic study. and get the necessary information.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I'm sorry.

[Morell]: Any other my questions that satisfied this time.

[Bears]: I moved to continue the public hearing referred and refer the paper to a meeting of committee of the whole with legal counsel and traffic and transportation director Blake.

[Morell]: We'd like to request a traffic study or

[Hurtubise]: I'm happy to add to that motion to request a traffic study from Traffic and Transportation Director Blank. Thank you. Do you have that language, Mr. Clerk? So, back to me.

[Caraviello]: This is without the language. If the Chief has already signed off on this, why are we asking for another traffic study?

[Morell]: I think we just don't have the traffic study before us. We have the sign off of no anticipated impact, but we don't have the actual report out. I mean.

[Bears]: Just as cars will be parked. I think that's not entirely.

[Morell]: Yeah, I'm not sure. I don't know. I mean, if we want to adjust the language, like if a traffic study has not been completed to have it completed at this time.

[Caraviello]: I don't know if one is required for this either. That's another question that should be asked. What's the traffic study required?

[Morell]: You mean for the original permit?

[Caraviello]: Yes, for the original permit. I mean, for the permit, is one needed for this type of business? I don't know either. We can request it. I mean, I don't know if we can request it, but I don't know. Again, legally, I don't know if it's required for this type of business either. So that's another question that needs to be answered.

[Morell]: Well, Attorney Blake did say he believed it's within reason for us to request it, so.

[SPEAKER_22]: You could certainly request it.

[Hurtubise]: Mr. Parker, would you read back the motion to me? Yes, my only question is Is vice president bears amendment or is vice president bears motion. Does that include representatives lift of lift present or is that without public meeting?

[Bears]: Sure. Yeah. I mean, I'm taking comments there.

[Hurtubise]: So with them, you want that in the motion?

[Bears]: I don't think it's necessary, but feel free to include it.

[Hurtubise]: So Vice President Bears moved to continue the public hearing and refer to the Committee of the Whole with legal counsel, with Traffic and Transportation Director Blake, and with a request for a traffic study, and also including representatives from Lyft.

[Morell]: So on the motion of Vice President Bears, as seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, do we need a roll call for this, yes, or no? It's not approved, it's just moving through.

[Hurtubise]: It is your option. Let's go with a roll call. So we have it. President again, that's our last roll call.

[Caraviello]: President again, that's the roll call. I'll ask for the roll call. I'll ask for it.

[Hurtubise]: Thank you, Councilor. I'll ask for the roll call. Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Collins. Yes. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli. Yes. Councilor Tseng. Yes. Councilor Morell.

[Morell]: Yes. I'm gonna defer as the negative motion passes.

[Caraviello]: Madam President, before we move on, a question to the clerk. Mr. Clerk, why are we advertising in the Somerville Journal?

[Hurtubise]: It's a it's a mixed paper. The paper is the is now the Medford transcript at Somerville Journal. It's a it's a it's okay.

[Caraviello]: Okay.

[Hurtubise]: Thank you. The Medford transcript no longer exists as an independent newspaper. It's both. It's both papers. Okay.

[Caraviello]: Thank you.

[Hurtubise]: Yeah, we do have 22 538, which is the second part of this paper. So

[Morell]: Addition for class two dealer license rentals from flex drive services LLC, a lift hub at 616 Falls operations and 80 station landing, AKA 15 presidents landing parking. Do I have a motion for paper 22-53 and the motion to adopt the previous motion from councilor Knight. Seconded by.

[Bears]: Second.

[Morell]: Vice president affairs all those in favor.

[Hurtubise]: Aye.

[Morell]: All those opposed motion passes. 22-555 petition or common butlers license by prop hot power 34 Flint Street apartment one Somerville mass oh 2145 Versailles properties LLC doing business as pinkies famous pizza 165 Main Street, Medford mass. Oh 2155 over to the chair of our licensing. Yep. The petitioner can please come up and also turning over to the chair of our licensing commission.

[Hurtubise]: Let's take these famous people here.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Scarpelli. So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to approve, seconded by Vice-President Bears. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Congratulations. 22-556, petition for secondhand articles licensed by Thomas O'Leary, 60 Otis Street, Somerville, Mass. 02154 and Marybeth Coughlin, 82 Bromfield Road, Somerville Mass 02144 for Medford Jewelry Inc. doing business as Roland's Jewelers, 70 High Street, Medford, Massachusetts, 02155. Do we have the petitioner with us? Please come up and then turning over to Councilor Sparapelle once again.

[Hurtubise]: Great. To get into this on a similar basis, Roland's has been an absolute backbone business partner

[Scarpelli]: Turning, turning over new ownership and the business is going to stay the same. I was saying the same, same employees. Everybody's great. This is great because I know that we might, we found out that when we were closed, it, It was around Christmas time, I think, and it was devastating for us, because it's easy for a lazy husband to buy his jewelry at once, and the quality's phenomenal. So I appreciate your business, your respect to our community, and I see everything in order, Madam President, so I will move forward.

[Morell]: Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. 22-557 petition for secondhand articles licensed by Kamzen, Javado, 43 Gold Street, Boston, Massachusetts, 02132 for pro repair, 19 Salem Street, Medford, Massachusetts. Is the petitioner with us? Please come up and I will once again turn to Councilor Scarpelli.

[Scarpelli]: Again, thank you, Madam President. Thank you for being here this evening. Again, this is similar to the conversation I'm having with Lyft. This is a new business, correct? Yes. I do have some questions that I really needed to be answered by a city solicitor. So I think that this would fall in the same category if you, you know, if you persuade me differently but I just want you to be aware it's not personal. It's not I have questions but I don't have the person to answer them just yet so maybe we can add this to the, the, the.

[SPEAKER_19]: community of the whole meeting if that's appropriate but while you're here right now can you give us a description what this business is so so this business is about uh fixing smart devices including phones tablets ipads and laptops and also we're gonna sell uh phones too so that's what it's about okay president bears

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I noticed in here, this is 19 Salem Street. This used to be Medford Electronics, John Costa's location. I saw that was a transfer in here. So you're gonna be repairing small electronics and selling mobile devices and stuff like, is there, you know, I hadn't been in Medford Electronics for a while. Is that significantly different than what Mr. Costas was doing? Yeah, it's significantly different. With the sales?

[Scarpelli]: Yeah, well, Mr. Costas did a lot with audio.

[Caraviello]: This is not. This is the second store that he owns.

[Scarpelli]: Okay.

[Caraviello]: He owns two different properties there.

[Scarpelli]: Got it.

[Caraviello]: Okay.

[Scarpelli]: So I, again, so the questions I would have is, you know, moving forward, what can be sold as, you know, what's titled the, where is it? secondhand articles. I think that's, that's what the question that I need answered, then what is second. So if we grant this petition, and the business falls through, it would start with cell phones, then all of a sudden, no disrespect to you, then we have chainsaws and, and power tools. And so these are the questions that I have with our city solicitor, making sure that You know that it fits the neighborhood. And so I think that's important so I would, I would ask the table this and reference this again at the committee the whole meeting if that's okay. Okay. Thank you.

[Morell]: On the motion any further discussion on the council. the table and to move to that same committee, the whole Councilor Scarpelli?

[Scarpelli]: Yes, please. I don't want to make this. I don't want to drag this out. I just want to make sure that we have answered the questions. And if those questions are acceptable, that we move forward and have you open and prosper here in Medford. So I just want to make sure we do our due diligence. So please forgive me that I'm delaying this a little bit, but I want to make sure we have the right questions answered.

[Bears]: Councilor Scarpelli, if I may suggest, not go to the same meeting, because we may be waiting for a traffic study at this point.

[Scarpelli]: Okay, so maybe we could, you know, set a separate one maybe before the meeting next week. I know you have a busy schedule, Madam President, but I don't think this, it's just a few questions that we really need to solicit. That's why adding it there, it wouldn't take long. But if we can have a committee of the whole meeting just to answer some of these questions and give us some guidance as we move forward, maybe a separate meeting for that, that'd be great. Legal please, I think legal is important.

[Morell]: Yep, and that may, I appreciate that, and the timing may depend on availability of legal counsel. So we will, I will schedule with all due urgencies. It's just sometimes we cannot get legal counsel within a timeframe we'd like, but I will absolutely work to schedule as quickly as soon as this motion passes.

[Hurtubise]: Thank you.

[Morell]: Yes. Any further discussion from the council? So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to move this paper to a committee of the whole,

[Hurtubise]: Okay, so the motion to table and also move this paper to me the whole seconded by second Councilor Knight all those in favor.

[Morell]: All those opposed. Motion passes. 22-558, petition for class two auto dealer license by Tiago Sertori-Murciano, 132 Moore Street Revere, Massachusetts 02155 for Icon Motors Groups, Inc. 357 Mystic Avenue, Medford, Mass. 02155 is the petitioner here. Please come up, and then I'll also refer to Councilor Scarpelli.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. I see that Icon Motors is actually still, if we can, if Mr. Marciano can tell us that it's, the business is still staying the same. Yes. But it's just the ownership is, you're now gonna be the sole owner, I know it was Partners, correct?

[SPEAKER_17]: Yes, now it's Partners, and you'll be the sole owner, and it decides to have a new name.

[Scarpelli]: Right new corporation in order to have that I need to apply for the new license under the icon name Okay, and so just changing the icon to icon and I know that um, I know that hope the practices stay the same and your support to our community. I know you've been very active with our youth organizations and donating and being active as a member of our community. I know that a lot of people from Medford work for you and we appreciate that. But I know that there was one concern I think that I mentioned to you that the parking off street, I know that you have a big lot, but I think the concerns whenever, you know, that especially not as much on Mystic Ave, but as the parking of, vehicles on the street. Does that happen too often? Is it something that we're gonna make sure that we can keep an eye on that and make sure that it's under control and we're not taking advantage of that? So, all right. I think I see everything in order. It's another well-run, respectable entity here in this community and I would support to move forward.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, ma'am. How many employees you got at this? I see on the box it says unemployed, but there's no- 20 employees. I don't see a workman's comp policy. Workman's compensation policy.

[SPEAKER_17]: Yes, I put it on the file when I send an application. So if it's not there, I can provide one, two, three, because I do have it.

[Caraviello]: I don't see a workman's comp policy. I want to make sure that the employees are covered in the event of an accident or something.

[Morell]: It does say on the agenda that I know it's not here but it says that we do have it on file.

[Caraviello]: Yeah, if you can make sure that the clerk has one on file. Oh sure, that'd be great. So, so you can just put it with this.

[Bears]: Thank you. There's an affidavit and a policy number. Three pages. Yeah, four pages for the back and search your halfway guard.

[Hurtubise]: Second.

[Morell]: So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli. To approve. Seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor. Aye. All those opposed. Motion passes. Good luck.

[SPEAKER_17]: Thank you very much.

[Morell]: Thank you. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Motion while under suspension to take communications from the mayor.

[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Collins while under suspension to take communications from the mayor. Seconded by.

[Bears]: Second.

[Morell]: Vice Mayor Bears. All those in favor. Aye. All those opposed. Motion passes. 22-559 to President Morell and honorable members of the Medford City Council for Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn food truck permit for neighborhood produces five year anniversary celebration. On behalf of the below entity I respectfully submit the following requests for a food truck permit in the city of Medford in addition to city council approval vendors are required to adhere to health department food safety requirements. taco party food truck date and time saturday november 5 2022 12 to 5 p.m location neighborhood produce parking lot 649 boston ave medford event neighborhood produce is set five-year anniversary celebration about the event the anniversary celebration will be an outside event celebrating neighborhood produce's five-year anniversary and will take place in the motion of councilor night with remainder of the reading second by second All those in favor. All those opposed. Motion passes. On the motion of Councilor Knight to approve any. Councilor Caraviello, do we know what the food trucks going to be taco party they are, they are located in Somerville but they are well I believe they're based in Somerville they are very close to the location of which this taco party taco party.

[Hurtubise]: It's gonna be a taco.

[Caraviello]: That's why I wanted to hear everybody's first.

[Morell]: Does that address your questions doesn't touch his palate, but any further questions from the council. So on the motion of Council night to approve seconded by Councilor Collins all those in favor. All those opposed. Motion passes to do that 560 to President Romero and honorable members of the city council from Mayor. We have a motion from Councilor Knight to table. Second. On the motion of Councilor Knight to table, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Opposed. All right, do you want a roll call vote? Or, I mean, I can't tell by the... No, it sounds like it's a tie, it's a tie, so it fails. It sounded like a tie to me.

[Hurtubise]: I'm happy to if someone's a role. chairs and go.

[Morell]: Okay, I said it's to me it sounded like a tie.

[Caraviello]: So which chair is in doubt.

[Morell]: I'm not in doubt.

[Caraviello]: Okay, well, Council night says we've seen that with discriminable.

[Morell]: Yeah, it can't be a tie. Well, I didn't vote on roll call. So okay. I mean, I don't vote on voice votes.

[Bears]: I'll call for a roll call vote.

[Morell]: Thank you. Mr. Clerk, please call a roll call vote on the motion to table for 22-560.

[Hurtubise]: Vice President Paris. No. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Collins. No. Councilor Knight. Yes. Councilor Scarpelli.

[Scarpelli]: Yes.

[Hurtubise]: Councilor Tseng. No.

[Morell]: No, really affirmative for the negative the motion fails. Going back to 22-560 regarding the appropriation request for a new senior planner position day October 19 2022 respectfully request use of available funds in the amount of $55,267 and planning development and sustainability salaries account 0102975110 to establish the new position of senior planner or request is before you to add the senior planner position to cap 14 paper number 22-502. The appropriation funds the position for a total of 32.4 weeks in FY 23 with an expected higher date of November 15 2022. As discussed in the September 9 2022 memo from myself and PDS director Alicia Hunt explaining the cap amendment request, that position will be funded using the available salary for the land use planner position included in FY23 PDS budget, a petition that is currently vacant and which PDS will not fill that senior planner position is approved. Ms. Hunt is available to speak to this request as well as paper 22-502 and answer any questions you may have. Respectfully submitted, Breanna Lungo-Koehn, Mayor. Director Hunt.

[Hunt]: staff planner for quite a long time now. And we are looking to put a new position in the CAF system. We would keep the position of staff planner because we do have people who fill that role. And then we would create a new position called senior planner. The open vacant staff planner position would not be filled. And this position would be advertised. We have reason to believe that we can fill this position. I'm wondering if I should go on on that, but we've reason to believe that it would be filled in a very timely manner if it was posted as a senior planner position.

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

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Director Hunt for bringing this forward. I think something this council has been incredibly focused on is expanding our capacity when it comes to planning development and housing support. you know, on larger issues, but this seems to me to be an area where we need more staff support. I'm supportive of having a senior planner position. I think we need more people working in planning and economic development. And so I'm generally supportive of this. My main objections to how these were being proposed in the past was that they were not coming with an appropriation request. And that seemed to me to be in violation of Massachusetts general law. This has come to us with an appropriation request. So I am of the mind to approve it. But again, I think when we're talking about having a comprehensive plan, talking about having a new zoning ordinance, talking about the sheer volume of great things that are gonna happen to this community because of the work of this council when it comes to our zoning recodification, I think it makes a lot of sense that we have the staff in place and planning to make sure that all of that fruit and labor can come to fruition as quickly as possible. So that's why I'm in support of this tonight. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you.

[Scarpelli]: So this is 55,032 weeks. So what would be the full full salary for full year?

[Hunt]: Sorry, I Madam President, I do have that. So this is this position. So it's appropriate for me to say this is this position at CAF at step five of CAF 14. That is because we have somebody on staff who is currently at CAF 13, step five, who is highly qualified and has served this role in other communities, but she would not take the position at a reduction in salary. It's currently the staff planner position is CAF 12.

[Scarpelli]: She will not go from the 13 to a 12. What is the salary of that position for a full year?

[Hunt]: Sorry, it's here. Oh, I apologize, on my spreadsheet, I have the weekly salary, let me just multiply that.

[Scarpelli]: And then we still have that position that if that person moves up, they deserve that money, obviously, but I opposed and I tabled for the fact that This council has openly talked about what we've been saying, what have we been asking for, and we haven't getting it. So unfortunately, until we see some movement where we have our unions that are coming to us that haven't had a contract, and we have some caps that were approved that we're still waiting on answers that we never approved, and then asking for money papers that we've asked for, for, I don't know, Councilor, Councilor Mejia years. I'll get to that in my speech. So I'm waiting to see with this situation, I'm gonna stand strong. I understand, I respect Councilor Beaz's conversation with how important this is. And I agree, I think we need it. I don't think we don't need it, but right now, I don't think that, We keep saying yes to all what's asked for. We are just a rubber stamp. We need answers, questions answered for us, for this question, to give us strength. We keep voting yes, until they understand that no, we're not gonna vote on anything until we have a city solicitor. No, that we can't vote on money papers till there's respect for other unions or positions that haven't been filled yet. We have positions in the city hall that haven't been filled that are vital positions. This is adding another position that we already have a director and we have an assistant. So at least it's stable right now. We're voting on something and moving more money to an entity that at least is stable in our stable definition. So this is why I can't support it. Nothing personal, I know how you work and I know how your team is working. But again, this is fundamentally wrong to ask this until we have the entities in place that we can get answers, because we're not getting answers.

[Unidentified]: We're not.

[Hunt]: Madam President, if I just might, I've been involved in trying to hire for several of my peer positions. is extremely hard to hire for municipal positions right now. I personally am aware that Malden and Somerville are also hiring for city solicitors right now. It's a very difficult hiring situation. So we are trying to fill those positions. And while I can't speak on behalf of our chief of staff and our HR department, I've served on several of these hiring committee is trying to find qualified people to fill these positions as well, which we think is very important. And I will say this is one of the few places where you actually have the power to adjust something. We do have a position that has been open in my office for 16 months, and it's really putting a burden on the rest of the staff. We will be posting a full-time housing planner position and a full-time CPA position. The housing planner is a staff planner position, so that's on the CAF. And both of those are funded off the general fund budget. So as in one through CDBG and one through CPA. So that this will really help the burden on our staff at this time.

[Scarpelli]: So Madam President, I appreciate that, but not just city solicitor, but I'm talking about other empty directors positions that we've had in a long time here. That is some serious concerns. So I understand, I appreciate you sharing that with us with city solicitor, because I understand that as well. But like I said, there are other major needs that if we had to move, you know, CAF money around, I would rather move CAF money around to make sure we can bring in a qualified, you know, experienced city assessor or a qualified IT director. This is what I'm saying to my colleagues. If you need, if this is where we need to move some money to make sure we have it, this is where it should be needed. Right now, I don't think we have the stability. in other locations to be approving capital, approving $88,000. And we, you know, you want to talk about hurting, let's talk to those teachers that haven't gotten a contract. Let's talk about the fire and they're hurting. So thank you, Madam President.

[Hunt]: To be clear, this money is not being appropriated from free cash or any other. This is money that is actually already in our office's budget. Councilor Knight.

[Knight]: Our city is an absolute human resource nightmare. That's been clear, it's been well documented across many, many news media outlets, social media, and the like, right? I think we can all agree, human resources is a problem here in the city. And financially, financially this administration practices absolutely zero fiscal constraint. All right, zero fiscal constraint. For literal years, literal years, not weeks, not months, literal years, this council has been begging for quarterly reports from our auditor outlining the financial health and well-being of this community. The city council, which is responsible for the appropriation of funds, right? The Harry Truman function of government, the buck stops here, right? We've been asking for these documents for literal years. Meetings about the financial health and well-being of the city, and we can't get that. All right? We've been asking for copies of the monthly Warren articles, which are documents that show where our money's being spent. We can't get that. I get a response in my email today from our city auditor, our CFO, our finance director. Due to our current staffing levels and the backlog of conciliations, our reports would be based on unaudited and possibly incomplete data. Every effort is being made to bring this data up to date. This office cannot say that these desired reports would be accurate to any degree expected. Let's spend more money though. Let's go spend more money, create more jobs. A job, by the way, that it sounds like the position's already spoken for.

[Unidentified]: A job that doesn't exist, that's already spoken for.

[Knight]: With a report from our CFO that pretty much says, I'd love to give you an update on the financial well-being of this community, but if I did it, it's garbage in, garbage out. It's not gonna be based on accurate information.

[Unidentified]: But the administration has the audacity to come up to us and continue to ask us to spend. continue to ask us to spend.

[Knight]: The buck has to stop somewhere. I'm not saying this isn't a position that's a good position. I'm not saying it's a position that's warranted. I don't think it's as important as an assistant city solicitor to the Metro City Council. I don't think it's as important as a city assessor. I don't think it's as important as assistant city assessor. You know, we can only put cones up on every intersection around the city so many times, people are gonna run out of things to do. All right, so ultimately, I find this to be fiscally irresponsible. I mean, how can we as a body sit here and take vote after vote, multiple votes? I'm not talking one vote or two votes or three votes. We've taken dozens of votes on this. We've asked the city solicitor to come up with an ordinance mandating the administration to provide us with this information because they refuse to do it. But here we are being asked again to create a new job, to spend more money. I want us to all think back to that night. In late June, when we sat here, and the mayor was taking money out of the public utilities account to keep the lights on, to move money around, to provide this council with the demands that we made. And that was the only way we could do it, because there's no more money.

[Unidentified]: Count the number of appropriation requests that have come since that time. Let's be fiscal stewards. Let's be responsible.

[Knight]: I can't support this paper this evening.

[Hurtubise]: Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. Thank you, Alicia, for being here. I support this paper. I know that some of my councilors won't feel heard that I'm saying that, and I regret that. I do hear you on this issue in particular. I hear you about the buck has to stop somewhere. I hear you that we need to find what leverage we can to get the reports that we have been asking for, to get the level of accountability that we have been asking for. I hope you look at my past actions and know that I agree with you and that my metric for what I can support and what affects to our city departments I can condone just happened to be different and that is not personal. In this case, this is not an appropriation from Greek cash that makes a difference to me. It already exists within the OPDS budget. In addition, you know, I mean, I think that we'd all agree that the, you know, in many ways, the situation here in City Hall is not stable, as Councilor Knight alluded to. You know, I've spoken to staff in City Hall who, you know, despite their commitment to this community and to public service, they too are feeling the pull to leave, to go to the private sector, to find jobs in other municipalities, because they feel there is no future for them here. No opportunity for growth or promotion. We can't be creating additional reasons for the qualified staff that we do have to leave. you know, and just circling back to what I feel is the broader issue, you know, to me, the foundational issue, this is, you know, we're a community, putting the HR problems aside, we're going through growing pains. This is the type of work and role that will help us evolve thoughtfully and appropriately and intentionally and plan for the future that we want. I don't want to hold our future hostage to the problems that we as a body cannot solve on our own. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Vice Mayor Bears.

[Hurtubise]: Thank you, Madam President. A few things here.

[Bears]: When it comes to fiscal stewardship, when it comes to this council doing its work and holding the administration accountable, sure, we've taken some votes in the past since June 30th to appropriate certain funds. We've taken some votes not to, we've taken some votes to table things, we've taken some votes to approve things. In the totality of that, I think all seven of us have been incredibly clear about what we want from this administration and our demands for basic transparency and accountability. I think we've also been focused enough to take things on a case-by-case basis, look at the merits and the benefits and the costs of a specific case, and also factor that into our decision-making. There are a bunch of papers on here tonight where we're gonna have this conversation. Again, it's the next paper, it's the, maybe not the paper after that, but it's the, and then, you know, there's like three more papers in the next, you know, however long it takes us, but we're gonna continue to have this conversation about finances and about caps. The next one, even the mayor's own attorney says needs five votes. So that one's not happening tonight. If it seems, you know, I don't wanna call a vote before we've called it. So we're not just giving a blank check. We're not just saying yes to everything. This is actually an opportunity for us to help address the human resource nightmare that Councilor Knight is talking about. In a functioning government, this would be a no brainer. A mayor would come to the city council. Well, thanks Siri, probably Googling no brainer. a fully functioning, communicative, collaborative government, a mayor would come with this request to not appropriate new funds, not transfer funds from one department to another, but to adjust funding within an existing department to make sure that we can hire or keep a current staff member at a slightly higher position, a senior planner, and then hire someone to replace them in their current cap 12 role. That should be a no-brainer. We shouldn't even be having this argument. Now we know why we are having this argument, because it's not a no-brainer, because the collaboration's not there and the transparency's not there. I accept all of that. I think we're going to have that conversation I think there's going to be votes where we try to hold the administration accountable later in this meeting. But I think on this specific issue where this person will be doing the work of implementing the good work that we've done. where we're not appropriating new money, where we're basically saying, so we appropriated a land use planner at CAF 13. It turns out we're probably gonna be better off having a senior planner at CAF 14, and then someone at CAF 12. That's not not holding the administration accountable. It's not being a poor fiscal steward. The money's already been appropriated. No new money is going towards this. You know, this one to me is one that I'm okay with. There's plenty of other things that have happened that I'm not okay with, and I think in this case, the specific case facts of this issue merit approval. Maybe the next paper doesn't, but that doesn't mean we're not holding strong, that we're not trying to do whatever is within our power to make sure that this administration is accountable and that the people of Medford have the information that they need. So I would move to approve this paper as well as to, yeah, I would move to approve this paper.

[Morell]: Thank you. Go ahead, Councilor Sanders. Councilor Caraviello.

[Tseng]: Thank you, Madam President. I believe that there is a unanimous, there is a unanimous support behind the rails for financial accountability, for fiscal transparency, I am for increasing leverage and to make sure our city is making the right financial choices. But we also have to, in my opinion, realize the facts of the situation. I fear that in our debate about this specific issue, we've fallen for a red herring that equates a very absolutist definition of accountability with fiscal responsibility, which I believe in this case the money has already been appropriated to your department. We're not taking money out of free cash, you know, there's financially that's that's that's the reality of the situation. The other reality of the situation is as stable as things might currently be. We also know that municipalities around us are competing to hire more planners and I'm not saying this is what your office staff are thinking, right? But who's to say that in a few months or in a few years, they don't see a lack of opportunity to move forward in our community and they just leave for another community, right? We are also competitors in this market. for planners, for city planners. And I think that leads me to my ultimate question that I always ask. When I take votes like this, and I think really, when we think about how the question of accountability, how we're gonna hold the administration to account, I think this is the question that's gonna guide me from item to item, is if this is gonna tangibly improve the lives of our residents.

[Hunt]: Absolutely, it will to have an experienced senior planner doing the work of the senior plan that doing this planning work is absolutely going to improve the lives of our residents.

[Tseng]: And that is I think ultimately the goal, the unified goal of the city council, you know we've, we've, I think there's a lot of agreement that we need to move forward on housing production on sustainability on the climate plan on phase two of zoning. support like this in your office, right? To get our own priorities through. And so for that reason, I know others might disagree with me, but that's why I would vote yes on this paper tonight. Again, it's item by item. And I think we need to ask that question for everything before us. But in this specific case, I believe that it ticks my boxes.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Councilor Ferraro.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. I do want to support this tonight, because I think it's a valuable position. I think we do need it. I work, I don't think anybody calls your office more than me, as far as our development, but you know, we talked a few weeks ago about being a partner with the administration. Two weeks ago, we talked about that. but about being partners with him. I don't see no partnership. All I see is things coming our way, things coming our way to approve, and we're getting nothing in return. We send papers over, we make requests, and it's, I mean, I hate to say this, but this council is becoming a rubber stamp for the man. That's all it is. And this is a valuable position, There's gonna be a little give and take here with this administration. There's none. Everything just ask, ask, ask, ask, ask. And every time we ask for something in return, I don't see anything we're asking for coming back at us. So, and I gotta say, I mean, I probably will support this thing, you know, because, because I feel it's a real worthwhile position. I'm just, I'm just tired of, of, of no give and take with, with this, with these people here in this administration. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Carballo. Vice Senator Bears.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. I think Councilor Carballo's point is well taken. And that's when I, my point was earlier about a fully functioning administration, right? Again, this should be a no brainer. This should be procedural and it's not. And the reasons for that are myriad. I can say there's one office that does respond every time I call, and there's one office that has been coming down to our council meetings at Beck and call, you know, and it is the PDS office we've met on comp plan we've met on housing production plan we've met on climate plan I think we're working on the housing trust the housing stability ordinance so right, you know, I agree with you, city government and administration should work where it comes from the top down. This is working in spite of the failure. And that, you know, it sucks to say, but you know, that's a reason I can support this. This office is working well and apparently working well in spite of a lot of other issues. So I think this is gonna help us have the resources we need to continue the work that we wanna do when it comes to planning and development. And I'll leave it at that. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Bears.

[Bears]: Is the position spoken for?

[Hunt]: No position is ever final. It will be posted publicly and there will be applications and there will be interviews. I am aware that there is a staff person on staff who will be applying for this position. They are very qualified for this position. So take that as you will. I will interview if other, I have been advertising for the staff planner. We've advertised that in paid locations over the past 16 months. Yeah, I've interviewed four or five people and none of them have been qualified enough for us.

[Knight]: I'm going to invoke rule 20 from our city council rules, and this is a finance paper that's going to be laid on the table for one week's time, regardless of what happens tonight, because we have the right to do that as a Councilor. I was the first time I've seen this appropriation request on the council floor. And as such, I'm going to vote my rights under Rule 20. It's old Rule 20. I don't know what new rule is, but we leave them around. We never got copies of the rules after we approved them. I'll have them posted up on the website, I don't think. Oh, it is Rule 20. It's definitely Rule 20.

[Morell]: I do see Chief of... Thank you, Councilor. And I do just see Chief of Staff, Ms. Aaron. Did you have something you would like to add?

[Nina Nazarian]: Thank you, President Morell. At this point, I mean, I know that there's not debate on invoking that rule that Councilor Knight invoked. I appreciate the discussion and debate that's occurred this evening. I do want to add that, you know, there are, as I understand it, there's a number of resolutions that the city council passes that go before the mayor that get routed to the appropriate department and get responded to. Councilor Caraviello, just want to let you know in particular that I'm presently working on a resolution that you had proposed most recently with regard to the IT department. I expect you'll see that resolution response within the week, if not shortly thereafter. So I just want to mention that there is a collaborative attempt to respond to these resolutions that are passed. And I want to note that we're working hard on a number of things. Um, PDS director hunt with her comments with regard to the difficulty in hiring that it's not only with the city solicitor. It's with regard to a number of other positions. Councilor Scarapelli. Thank you for acknowledging that. I know you have that experience in your work. There's a lot. There's a lot going on in these number a number of different things, and I just wanted to provide some commentary. Thank you.

[Morell]: I wanted to offer you the opportunity on this paper, even though it was off motion to be tabled. We're gonna stop the debate on this now, but I would appreciate you keeping comments to the paper before us. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. And I thank you for working on the, I think that more important to me is for the last three years, I've asked for the legal bills of this community.

[Unidentified]: When am I gonna see that?

[Morell]: So we do have the motion from Councilor Knight to invoke rule 20, it might be 23 now, or?

[Hunt]: Madam President, may I just share like a clerical item? I would just like the council to know that in two weeks at your next meeting, I will actually be either on an airplane, depending on the timing, or have just landed. So if there's anything that people would like me to address this evening I'm here, I might be able to join via Zoom.

[Morell]: So our next regular meeting will be on the 15th because- That's the night that I'm traveling. Yeah, I just want to know that, okay.

[Hunt]: Yeah, I just want you to know that in case there's anything you wanted me to address I'm also happy to address anything in advance in writing, but I didn't want anybody to feel that I was being disrespectful by not being here, but I am gonna be on an airplane that evening. In the city, I do. In this building. My husband and my son believe I live here in the building.

[Morell]: Thank you so much. So on the motion of Councilor Naito to invoke rule 21 to lay the paper on the table for one week, the first time introducing a finance paper, it is undebatable and we don't need to vote on that because it's our rule to just automatically lay it on the table, correct? Great. Thank you, Director Hunt. Vice Chair Bears. We are still under communications from the mayor. Councilor Collins and motion to take all communications with the mayor. So, yeah. Yeah, we would all to do that 561 to present a formal and honorable members of the Medford City Council from Mayor Brad O'Connor regarding appropriation request for finance director. and respectfully request use of available funds in the amount of $1,205 in finance salaries account 010135510 to provide for a step increase for the finance director associated with the request before you to change the finance director position from a cap 20 to a cap 21. The finance director was hired at cap 20 step five and due to receive a step increase on the one year anniversary of his hire date, April 25, 2022. The appropriation request provides for an increase in the weekly salary for the position of cap 21 step five, starting April 23 2025, through the end of fiscal year 23 the appropriation will be funded using available funds and the finance salaries account that have accumulated due to vacancy in the assistant finance director budget manager position is there and is available to speak to this request 21. We have a motion from Councilor Knight to put forth rule 21. And this is not debatable as a council rule to lay the paper on the table for one week. Is it a finance paper that we're seeing for the first time? And I do just wanna know for those folks watching, our next meeting will be on, our next regular meeting is November 15th, because we will not be having a regular meeting on the eighth, because of election day, we will be having regular meetings on Tuesday, November 15th, as well as Tuesday, November 22nd. 22-562, to President Nicole Morell and honorable members of the Medford City Council, Mayor Breanna Lungo-Koehn, propose wage amendment for library union. I respectfully request and recommend that the City Council approve the following amendments to the revised ordinances, chapter 66, article two. City of Medford amendment to revised ordinances, chapter 66, article two, be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Medford in chapter 66, entitled personnel, article two, entitled reserve the city's classification and compensation plan formally included as article two, section 66-31 through 66-40. Amend the figures as they presently appear next to the following title by adjusting each to reflect the following percentage wage increases and effective date. Library, effective July 1st, 2022, increased the base salary of all library union titles by 2%. Effective July 1st, 2023, increased the base salary of all library union titles by 2%. Effective July 1st, 2024, increased the base salary of all library union titles by 2%. Respectfully submitted, Breanna Lungo-Koehn, Mayor.

[Hurtubise]: Motion to approve.

[Morell]: On the motion, is there any further discussion from the council? So on the motion of Vice Mayor McPherson to approve for first reading, seconded by Councilor Collins.

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

[Unidentified]: Mr. Vice Mayor McPherson. Yes.

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

[Morell]: Yes. So in the presence here in the negative, the motion passes, approved for first reading. 22-564, a resolution to file and accept grants with and from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs for the Land and Water Conservation Fund grant program for the car park renovation project, whereas car park is a community wide asset and the preservation and improvements to this facility RFC priority as evidence and the most recent open space and recreation plan and whereas car park is dedicated to park and recreation purposes under MGL chapter 45 section three, and Madam President motion to waive the reading and move approval ultimately this is to authorize the administration to apply for free money. And any questions from the council on the motion of Councilor Knight seconded by Councilor Scarpelli.

[Hurtubise]: We'll do a roll call vote please. Vice President Bears. Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Collins?

[Unidentified]: Yes.

[Hurtubise]: Councilor Knight? Yes. Councilor Scarpelli? Yes. Councilor Tseng? Brief, he's stepped out. President Morell?

[Morell]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, zero in the negative, one absent. The motion passes. 22-565, a resolution to file and accept grants with and from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs for the Parkland Acquisitions and Renovations for Communities Grant Program for the Gillis Park Accessibility Renovation Project.

[Knight]: Madam President, motion to waive the remainder of the reading and move for approval of the paper.

[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Knight to waive the remainder of the reading and move approval on the paper, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll when you're ready.

[Unidentified]: Vice President Bears. Yes.

[Hurtubise]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.

[Knight]: Yes.

[Morell]: on the motion of items in Paris to take 22-502 off the table and approval first reading. Did you want to speak on one of those papers?

[O'Keefe]: I just want to speak on the gillis park and the car park. I was the original applicant for the CPA. I just want to thank the administration. I may have one girl current for all the time they put in. I was hoping to hear uh talk about the time that she spent with regards to one gillis park as well as columbus park. These are going to be added values both to the community, as well as to the neighborhood. They're long overdue so I want to thank this Council for their support on this.

[Morell]: Thank you. If we could just name and address for the record.

[O'Keefe]: Yeah, my name is Bill O'Keefe, 18 Kilgore Pass School Committee member, attorney. Thank you, appreciate it.

[Morell]: Thank you, Bill.

[O'Keefe]: Bye.

[Morell]: So I have a motion from Vice Mayor Bears to take 22-502, correct? Yes. From the table. Do I have a second on Vice President Bears's motion to take 22-502 from the table? And was that a motion to approve as well, or? Approved for first reading. Approved for first reading. So on the motion of, do I have a second on Vice President Bears's motion? Councilor Collins. So on the motion of Vice President Bears's to take 22-502 from the table and approve for first reading, could you remind us the people before us, Vice President Bears's?

[Bears]: This is actually the change of the personal ordinance relative to the CAF 14 senior planner position. So the appropriation has been tabled, but this is the CAF. There's an appropriation on, it'll be for first reading. We could then consider it for final approval at the following up meeting when we have the financial paper currently tabled by rule 21.

[Morell]: Great, thank you, Vice President Bears. It's the, yes, the planner for the CAF. It's the CAF for the planner, senior planner. if you do have surprises too. So on the motion of Vice President Bears, I second by Councilor Collins to approve for first reading. Mr. Clerk, please call the roll.

[Hurtubise]: Vice President Bears. Yes. Councilor Caraviello. Yes. Councilor Collins. Yes. Councilor Knight. No. Councilor Scarpelli. No. Councilor Tseng. Yes. President Morell.

[Morell]: Yes. By the affirmative to and the negative, the motion passes for first reading. On the motion of council tonight to revert back to regular order of business seconded by Councilor Collins. All those in favor. Opposed motion passes. Announcements actually to remember his reports and records the records of the meeting of October 11 2022 were passed to Councilor Collins Councilor Collins, how did you find them.

[Collins]: I found them in order and I move approval.

[Morell]: Second motion of Councilor Collins seconded by my student affairs all those in favor. I suppose motion passes on the motion of Councilor Knight to adopt the committee reports, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli all those in favor. I suppose passes. 22-543 offered by Councilor Covey Oh, be it so resolved that the Metro City Council Senate deepest and sincere condolences to the family of Frank Mills on his recent passing at 101 years old. Frank was a resident of Medford for 72 years Frank was a veteran of the US Army, who served his country during World War Two in both Europe and Africa, Frank was bestowed for bronze stars, good conduct medal, and European African Middle Eastern Campaign Medal. Frank was also a CYO coach at St. Joseph's, coaching both basketball and baseball. Frank was always in attendance as many veterans events throughout the city. His presence in our community will sorely be missed. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. We have so few World War II veterans left in our country. Then Frank Mills was 101 years old and served this country with a pride and World War II, and not only did he serve his country, he served his community for many years. He was a resident here for 72 years. He was a coach at St. Joseph's in baseball and basketball. And anytime we had something down at the cemetery or something, Frank was always there. And I just wanted to thank him for his service to our country. And I also want to apologize to his family for the week he had to endure while waiting to get permission to be buried in our World War II cemetery. So again, that should have been an easy thing. And he should have just been buried in there without having to endure a week of wondering where he was gonna bury. So on behalf of myself, I apologize to his family for what they had to endure. and if we could have a moment of silence in this memory.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion from the council? On the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed?

[Hurtubise]: Motion passes. Please rise for a moment of silence.

[Morell]: 22-544 offered by Councilor Caraviello, be it so resolved that the Medford City Councilor Caraviello and Councilor Collins submitted a resolution for this as well. Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council send its deepest and sincere condolences to the family of long-time housing authority foreman Steve Dutero on his sudden passing. His presence in our community will be missed. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: He was the go-to guy at the housing. Anytime you did something at the housing authority, you went to Steve, it got done. 24 hours a day, Steve was always on call with them. Not only that, but he was just a good person, good man, good family person. And the housing authority is going to have some giant shoes to fill to make up his loss. So my condolences to his family.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Councilor Collins, then Councilor Knight.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell, I had the opportunity to meet Steve via the Solid Waste Task Force and I can say he's already very much missed on that body and elsewhere throughout the Metro community. So sending our deepest condolences to his family and many friends.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Councilor Knight.

[Knight]: Madam President, thank you very much. Steve was a dear friend of mine. One of the first people to ever come up and volunteer to work on my first campaign. back in 2013 and I met him through politics going back 20 years and he was always a gentleman that I held in high regard and someone who over that period of time I was able to develop a great friendship with. I just want to express my deep sincere condolences to the family, to Christine especially, on this sudden and tragic loss. Steve was a lot of things to a lot of people here in Medford and the Medford Housing Authority is evident by the number of residents that attended his memorial service. And he was a lot more than that, the people that he called family and friends. So with that being said, Medford is not better off today than it was yesterday with the loss of someone like Steve Gattaro. And if we could all be a little bit more like Steve Gattaro, I think Medford is moving in the right direction. So thank you very much.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. Thanks, Councilor Knight. I think you hit the nail on the head. Steve is just all I can say is that anytime you talk to Steve, even if you just pass Steve and walk past Steve and passing and driving by him, he had the most calming, peaceful, welcoming face that you can ever have. And he's someone that is definitely missed. He's truly one of the good guys in this community. condolences to his family, he will be missed.

[Morell]: Thank you. Any discussion from the council.

[Knight]: So on the motion of Councilor carb yellow, we could just dedicate tonight's meeting on Steve's memory, Madam President, based upon as he has a service to our community.

[Morell]: On the motion of tonight, second, my Councilor Scarpelli all those in favor, all those opposed motion passes. Motions, orders and resolutions 22-545, offered by Councilor Caraviello. Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council have the parking administration provide the cost of installing extra and removing the wrongly placed meter poles on High Street, along with the cost of purchasing extra meter heads. Be it further resolved that the parking administration explain to the council why meter poles have been placed on Boynton Road, which is a residential street away from the Medford Square Commercial District. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. This is something that keeps coming every meeting. Before they took these polls down, We spent money to install the poles, to buy the poles, to put meat and the meat heads. How much money do we spend on this for meat heads that we probably didn't need and installations of things that we didn't need, which is really disturbing to me that we even went that far. But now if you go down, we have meters on Boynton Road. which is a residential street, far away from the business district. Bad enough, I've been getting calls from people that go to the library saying that they now have to pay meters to go to the library. Boynton Road is where parents pick up children from school, people go to church on Sundays and Saturdays and they go to things there. No need to have meters on Boynton Road. Why don't we have meters on Forest Street? Why don't we have meters on Governor's Avenue? These are business districts. Boynton Road is not a business district. Those should be taken out immediately. Again, poor planning on our parking lot. And my one last thing is, I don't know if people are seeing these, our parking department is giving out paper visitor passes. that you write your own address on there. So all you gotta do is go to your local copy store and make a copy of the visitor pass, and you can have 10 for whatever house you want. Why aren't the visitor passes being limited to per household with a number and with an address issued by the city? Not just say, here, go fill this out yourself. Again, a department out of control, we've asked for them to take a step back and figure out where we're going with this department, mistake after mistake after mistake. It's not fair to these people, the people in this community that we're going through this. And like I said, now we're putting meters in residential streets. Shame on us.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion from the Council? Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. I just want to note for the record, the parking department is not self-governing any more than any other department in our city, in my view, not any more than the assessor's office, the DPW, or any other department. They've been under a lot of fire since they were established. And I'm glad that we're flagging resident concerns and that we're making sure that residents are being righted and made whole where appropriate. But I just want to make the point that no department is an island. The administration is responsible for creating the conditions for the parking department's success, same as any other department. These projects are being done at the administration's behest, and so I want to make sure that the administration is being held accountable for these issues that are affecting resident quality of life, and not just the people carrying them out. Thank you.

[Morell]: Hey, Councilor Collins. And to that point, I did reach out to the mayor asking about the ones in front of the library specifically. And she said she asked them to remove the last time I drove by they were there. I'm not sure why. Yeah, and I'm not sure. I mean, to Councilor Collins point why it's a surprise to the mayor that these things that one would assume she's shy and signed off on are there. So it's very confusing.

[Caraviello]: Thank God this council's on top of this, because they'd be in front of the churches right now.

[Morell]: Any further discussion?

[Bears]: just to your point, President Morell, that it's kind of, I don't think city government should work on a whim, right? It shouldn't be, oh, yeah, I'll get them out. It's just like, there should be a plan and the plan should be implemented and it should be reviewed and approved and corrected before it's, that's, I can't believe it.

[Morell]: Yeah. Thank you, Vice President Barros. Did you want to speak? Name and address for the record, please.

[SPEAKER_01]: Yes, my name is Rita Bartolomeo I live at 135 High Street across from St. Joseph school, and my house is one of the houses that were targeted with the meter in front of it. And I think it's really unfair and no citizen no taxpayer homeowner should have to have a meter in front of their house, you know, we pay our taxes and now we have to pay a meter. I'm very grateful to Councilman Caraviello that The issue got addressed and the meter is no longer in my in front of my house, however, you know, I know that we had tabled it from the last meeting to this meeting, and within a few days, the meters were being installed on Boynton Road and the heads were being put in. And, you know, I've lived at my house for 38 years I see the parents coming and going dropping their kids off to school. There's meters there's meters there in the afternoon to pick them up their social events at St. Joseph's during the week it's it's, it's just not right. I get it, you know, the city needs money in the business zones. But there aren't any meters as Mr. Caraviello said on hillside governors forest waiting is the only street that has the meters. And for me personally, when there is when the snow comes and we can't park and there's a parking man on high street. I'm a corner house we have to park on Boynton Road. And if there's meters there and you don't have your, your car shoveled out and out by a certain time, are we going to get ticketed? Cause our cars are there bad enough. Sometimes they told them. So it's sort of a, a double issue here that, you know, Boynton road is targeted, I think, you know, for the library and looking for extra funds for the city, but it's, it's just not a place we want people to come and enjoy the brand new library. And now we're asking for them to, to pay, to, to come there. And there again you know when we do have the snow we can pop on the main street. There's a lot of cars that need to get off that main street and waiting is one of the streets that we go to. So, again, I'm thankful that the meter is gone in front of my house. I hope I don't wake up one day and find it there again. I want to thank the council for addressing it and I hope we can resolve the meter situation.

[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. McFarland. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Madam President, so my question is, I would like an answer on the cost of installing these and not installing them. How much money are we wasting on this? When all this could have been done with just maybe a little thought and planning. Again, this program has been given the bum's rush to get it up and out without any thought.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. So on the motion of Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Scarpelli, all those in favor. All those opposed, motion passes. 22-546 offered by Councilor Collins and Councilor Tseng, be it so resolved that the Medford City Council support question four on the November ballot to preserve the Work and Family Mobility Act, which would allow all qualified residents to apply for a state driver's license regardless of immigration status and improve road safety outcomes for all communities in Massachusetts. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. So this is a ballot question that all voters get to vote on on the November ballot. It would uphold the Work and Family Mobility Act, which passed the legislature this spring. It would ensure that all drivers who can present proof of residency and pass a road test can get a driver's license. This ensures that all drivers are tested and licensed and insured, which it's demonstrated to make the road safer for everybody. This bill is also supported by a coalition of law enforcement professionals because it is demonstrated to reduce hit and run accidents by as much as 10% in the states where it's implemented. This is why I'm putting this forward. I believe that the passage of this ballot question would materially benefit people of Medford by making our roads safer. That's why I've been personally urging Medford voters to consider voting yes on four, and that's why I'm asking for my fellow councilors' consideration in endorsing this ballot question to make our roads safer for all vehicular drivers and pedestrians in our community. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Councilor Tseng.

[Tseng]: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you, Councilor Collins, for inviting me to co-sponsor this resolution. I think you've really hit the heart of what's at stake here, which is public safety. And, you know, our job as elected representatives of the city and it's a major branch of our city is to be the stewards of public safety. And, you know, when I'm on the road, I would, I would want all the drivers on the road to be tested insured and licensed. And I think that's, that's common sense, not just to prevent traffic accidents and to prevent situations where we might be driving on the road with people who aren't tested licensed or insured. God forbid, if God forbid something were to happen, we want that trust with our police to be there as well, so that we prevent hit and runs. And I think for that reason, as you've stated, a number of law enforcement officials across the state, including our chief police have endorsed and have supported question four, as we've put it. And this is also supported by relevant by our relevant delegation in the state government as well. So again, I thank you for putting this on the agenda. I think because this was added last minute onto the list of questions, a lot of voters don't know about this question yet. And I think that's a big reason why it's important to, at the very least, put this on the agenda so more people are aware that you can flip your ballot initiative ballot and make sure that you answer questions three and four. And if you live in Paul Donato, or I believe it's Paul Donato or Rep Barber's districts, there are two more questions as well. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you. Any further discussion from the council?

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. Not that I don't support the question. I don't think it's the city council's preview to be telling people how to vote. I do say in principle, I do support it. I just don't think it's our job to be telling people how to vote.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion from the Council? Councilor Collins, Councilor Tseng, if I could just request the language be tweaked. Right now it says, be it so resolved that the Medford City Council support question four. I would just, my suggestion would say express support of, just so it's not commanding anything it's saying. otherwise. Thank you, Councilor Collins. Would you like to make the amendment?

[Collins]: Be it so resolved that the Medford City Council express support of question four, dot, dot, dot.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Any further discussion from the council? I did see a hand up on Zoom, but then it went back down. Okay, we're back. Paul Geraghty, name and address for the record. Name and address for the record, please. Just asking you to unmute.

[Paul Garrity]: Hi, my name is Paul Geraghty, 40th Street Road, Medford. There seems to be controversy over the fact that the referendum didn't make it into the printed copy. I would suggest that perhaps the city clerk could put on the website that the citizens could look at voteinma.com click on 2022 valid questions and then click on go to and find question four so they can examine it themselves and have some time to look at it.

[Hurtubise]: Thank you for noting that. Any further discussion from the council?

[Knight]: Can you bring up the chief of police's support of this measure or not?

[Morell]: Okay, so on the motion of Councilor Collins, as amended by Councilor Collins, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favour? All those opposed? Motion passes.

[Hurtubise]: I'm sorry? Influencing people's individual ballot question rolls with the ballot box.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. 22-547 offered by Councilor Knight be it so resolved that the Medford City Council enact a spending moratorium until such time as the city administration response to council papers related to spending, warrant articles, and the city's financial health. Councilor Knight.

[Knight]: We're in a situation here in this community that's bordering on what I'd find to be a financial crisis. You know, when we talk about spending, we talk about the sharing of information, and more importantly, we talk about that letter that we received from the administration, October 25th at 1.40 p.m., which was today at 1.40 after several months of making requests. I think it's very troubling and scary that, you know, The city has a backlog of reconciliation reports. They haven't been audited. They're utilizing incomplete data. And they cannot say that they have accurately designed reports for financial reporting here in our community. And that's coming right from our CFO. That's troubling. That's very troubling, right? So the administration is spending and spending and spending, but I see no efforts being made to right the ship, especially with this body. And this body has extended multiple olive branches for a period of 36 months, trying to get to the bottom of this stuff and be a partner and we're not being brought to the table. Um, so, you know, as I stated a couple of weeks ago, when we talk about the financial health in this community, let's be real about it. Um, we had no treasurer collector from, January of 2020 to October 2020. We've had no budget director from July of 2020 to date. We've had no CFO from September of 2021 to March of 22. We've had no federal fund manager from 321 to 222. And we've had no assessor from 522 to the present. So when we sit down and we talk about our financial health in this community, we don't even have a finance team in place. We haven't had a finance team in place, but we're still being asked to spend. And when we ask for the information that we need to make informed decisions, we're not being provided it. which leads me to believe that they have something to hide. Councilor Caraviello has asked at least 30 times, how much money are we spending on outside legal counsel? The administration spent something ridiculous like $65,000 to follow around an employee and put GPS on his car to get a report that comes back absolutely unfounded. And the investigation starts off, I heard a rumor about a guy. I mean, that's what we're doing now. We're spending $80,000 in taxpayer money to chase down rumors. Come on, let's get real. So when I look at the circumstances in this community and what's going on, we need to stop the bleeding somehow. And I think that this is the best way to do it. So I'd ask that we put a spending moratorium on until such time as we get our quarterly report from our financial director. We get brought up to speed as to what's really going on in that finance office. The numbers don't add up. If the numbers don't add up, we can't just keep on spending and spending and spending. making assumptions off of inaccurate data and inaccurate estimations, how are we ever going to put the city in a position to succeed? You know, we have no tax assessors. We have nobody to levy taxes in this community. We finally have a treasurer collective out this whole time. But for the first 10 months of the administration, we didn't. We had some of those working part-time. Rumor has it the calls were getting wired to a house. They weren't even coming in the office. We have people that are getting paid now outside the budget in acting positions that are also working in other communities. All right, their vested interest and their loyalties don't lie here in the city of Medford any longer. All right, they're being paid for the city to comply with statute, not for any other reason. All right, so we need to do something. And this is my next best solution that I could come up with based upon the plethora of resolutions that we filed, the number of questions that we've asked, the number of promises that have been made, but not fulfilled through the administration. We still don't have a city assistant city solicitor for the council and the position hasn't been posted. So with that being said, I offer the paper. I don't anticipate it passing. I don't want to hold the city financially hostage. If good things are going to happen in this community, they should. They should. But at the same time, you can't ask us to keep spending money without telling us what the financial picture is, what our financial health and wellness is in this community.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Knight. Vice President Paris.

[Bears]: out there as my suggestion, I would propose a B paper to request that the finance director so part of the email that we sent us that the finance director feels like he could present a first quarter report in mid November, and that place warrant articles on the on the city council for based on the formal acceptance on a monthly basis based subject to their formal acceptance by the council their certification by the city clerk's office. So I would be paid propose a B paper to request that the finance director attend our November 22nd meeting to present a first quarter financial report and revenue comparison with prior fiscal year and revenue forecasting for fiscal year 2024. and further request that the finance director take whatever steps are necessary to place Warren articles on the council agenda for formal approval on a monthly basis beginning in November.

[Knight]: And if I could just add to that paper that the city council request the administration prepare an RFI for the city council to review relative to the hiring of an independent outside auditor. Council like would you mind repeating your men, please, the city administration produce an RFR an RF an RFR an RFP for the city council to review relative to the selection and hiring of an outside independent auditor.

[Unidentified]: Thank you.

[Caraviello]: Council, I think that was something I asked for months ago, but the outside independent. We just asked the guy to do the finance to give us reports. He's saying in his paper that he can't do reports because he doesn't have the staff and he doesn't, I say, just reading his letter here. He's got a backlog and how much more do we want this guy to do? He has no assistant working with him either now.

[Knight]: He's on the line for a raise. Let's get him down here.

[Caraviello]: say he's saying he can't get okay. He's saying that he doesn't have the staff or the time to give reports because he's overwhelmed on the job. And now we're asking him to do something that he's saying that he probably can't do.

[Morell]: Councilor Collins, I'm back to Vice President Bears.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. And I want to thank Councilor Knight for putting this forward. You know, I think we need to I don't know if this counts as outside of the box, but we need to think outside the box about how to resolve heretofore intractable problems. I think it's been frustrating for all of us to keep putting out requests for updates and requests that are simply germane to our responsibilities as councillors and not hear back and be kept in the dark. And that affects our ability to be accountable to the people who put us in office. And I think that that's something we all share. I'm also not against drawing a line in the sand to you know, continue to demonstrate to the administration that we are serious about being armed with the information that we need to forecast for this community's future and make responsible decisions. You know, I think sort of where my personal limits bump against that, I've demonstrated in some of my votes in the past. However, I think I'm willing to support this this evening. was the one other thing I was going to say. Second time tonight I've done that long day. Oh, in terms of what we're asking for from the finance department, I just think that it needs to be emphasized, you know, that it's It's not necessarily our best move to try to decrease what we're asking for. We're asking for reasonable things from the administration because of lapses in staff capacity. It's our responsibility to ask for the policies that we know are in service of our community. And sometimes, I mean, we see it all throughout the community every day. Those are not going to be enforced or implemented on the timetable that we'd like to see. That is a feature of our community. But that doesn't mean that we should not ask for and legislate for and advocate for the policies that our community deserves. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Vice President Paris.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. Councilor Collins said it incredibly well. I read this email, it says preliminary first quarter reports can be provided by mid-November. This office can also provide revenue comparisons with the prior fiscal year. Warrant articles pertaining to city funds can be provided on a monthly basis subject to their formal acceptance by the council and certification by the clerk's office. I say we take the guy up on his offer.

[Knight]: Right, well, I wouldn't mind going back to it.

[Bears]: Right. Well, I'm just saying that if he, if we want to go back to a regular system where we actually are voting, like this seems like the fiscal compliance that we would like to see. So let's take them up on their offer. If they can't meet it, then we pass the first resolution.

[Morell]: Any further discussion from the council?

[Hurtubise]: not get all of this. Um, I was gonna go back to the tape for some of it. But the B paper from Vice President Bears was a request that the finance director attend the November 22nd meeting to present the first quarter financial report and to take whatever steps necessary to place the warrant articles on the agenda for monthly approval on the, uh, on the 1st November meeting. But then there were there were some other actions take to be taken in the middle of that.

[Bears]: just after first quarter financial report, um, at revenue comparison with prior fiscal year and revenue forecasting for fiscal year 2024.

[Hurtubise]: Got it. And then there was a B paper. Uh, there was a B paper. Uh, well, that was your B paper. And then and then Council night had to be. Yeah, Council night had a B paper. Had it had a amendment to the B paper asking for the R five for the event of our otter are fire are far.

[Morell]: Is that address your questions, Councilor Tseng? Any further discussion from the council at this time?

[Hurtubise]: I appreciate the- I would welcome that because I would be, I'd be reluctant to vote for it.

[Morell]: I know my tenure on the council is shorter than some, but I've been on it long enough to know that sometimes voting in absolutes absolutely comes back to bite you, and I would be reluctant to vote for something so broad, although I do appreciate the intent of it. So we have a- So on the motion of Councilor Naito to sever the two papers and lay the A paper on the table for a time of 30 days as seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. And then taking the B- Councilor Knight to move approval on the paper seconded by vice president bears. Everyone feels comfortable with the language of the paper. 22-548 offered by vice president bears be it so resolved by the Medford city council that the city council encourages residents to attend the November 2 bus network redesign meeting where the MBTA will be presenting its revised map of bus changes for Medford and other communities. Be it further resolved that the city administration notify residents of the meeting particularly residents who communicated with the city or submitted comments regarding the bus network redesign using all available means. Event information can be found at mbta.com slash events slash 2022-11 dash 02 slash public dash meetings dash bus dash network dash redesign dash virtual you love to make me read a URL. Thank you.

[Bears]: Makes the whole meeting work. No, but thank you, Madam President, for reading that resolution. We've had a lot of conversation about the proposed bus network redesign. I can first say that I believe that Medford Hillside was the number one neighborhood in the entire MBTA catchment area in terms of comments. So for the anger and frustration of residents who are deeply opposed to changes, that is good news. I've also, I haven't seen a draft map. I have not seen any draft routes. I have heard rumblings that there will be improvements to the Medford map, which I think is a good thing. But it's definitely important that residents continue to stay actively engaged with the process. So please attend the November 2nd bus network redesign meeting via Zoom. And again, this does ask the city administration to notify residents about that meeting and especially communicate with all of the residents who submitted their contact information or comments or however else they communicated their issue to the city government. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Mr. Bears. And I do want to note that we did have residents that in Hillside that

[Tseng]: kind of the pavement to get comments from their neighbors so I just want to note that cancer say, um, I think President, President Raul really covered that point, I was I was just going to note that it is very substantial that medical side popped the top to the comment list. Again, I haven't seen anything but I've heard rumblings that there might be positive changes and I think If we do see those changes come about, it'll be because of the hard work of residents in our city and the hard work of our members of our city government, including my fellow colleagues for indulging in meetings about the bus network redesign as well. So thank you so much.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further discussion from the council? On the motion of Councilor Knight to approve, seconded by Councilor Tseng all those in favor. All those opposed motion passes to do dash 549 offered by by Susan bears. It's a result by the Metro City Council that the city administration updates policies and procedures regarding see click fix to ensure that items requiring the input of or decision by the traffic commission are properly referred to that body for their response and review by Susan affairs.

[Bears]: Thank you, Madam President. There have been a number of issues regarding see quick fix. I don't have to get into, but one of them has been that items that require the input of the traffic commission may not be being properly referred to the traffic commission. So people asking for signage or asking about specific conditions on a public way that needs to be updated or addressed. They may be going to the police department or to DPW. They really should be going to the traffic commission as it's in the traffic commission's jurisdiction to make those changes. It's basically a question of how they get marked as resolved on C-Click Fix. They're not getting marked as resolved and referred to traffic commission. They're just not really, they're just being marked as resolved or referred to a city department. And those departments don't actually have the final authority on those items. So it's just a request that the city administration update how they're referring items using C-Click Fix. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you Vice President Bears. Any further discussion? On the motion, seconded by Councilor Knight. All those in favor? Aye. All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-550 offered by Councilor Collins, the it's so resolved the Medford City Council remind residents of the statewide ban on mattress disposal going into effect on November 1 resources for recycling or donating mattresses and box prints can be found at mass.gov slash service dash details, slash mattress dash recycling. Councilor Collins, sorry for the tongue twister.

[Collins]: I just wanted to make sure that residents heard about this prior to November 1. This is a statewide ban going into effect because the majority of mattress or box spring materials are recyclable, which is why they are now required to be recycled and divert them from landfills. I also saw this update from the city just a couple days ago. A company called Hand Up is now offering mattress and box spring pickup in Medford. So residents can schedule a pickup by going to handupmattress.com. There is a charge for the service. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Councilor Caraviello.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Madam President. And I thank my Councilor for putting this on. I would like a copy of this be sent to Tufts University. for all the off-campus people, because we know what happens here at the end of school and the beginning of school, where there's mattresses all over the city. So I would ask that this be sent to them and ask them if they could send it to students living off campus. We're both moving in and moving out at the beginning of the year and the end of the year, because every year we get inundated with mattress calls.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion? On the motion of Councilor Collins as amended by Councilor Caraviello, seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. 22-551 offered by Councilor Collins. Be it so resolved that Medford City Council recommend that the administration advertise its open positions on the Mass Municipal Association's Municipal Marketplace Job Board in order to help spur more applications. Councilor Collins.

[Collins]: Thank you, President Morell. So I peruse this website a couple times a month just for general updates, and I was surprised to see a lot of open positions in the city of Medford not listed on the job board when I checked there last. I did actually hear from Director Osborne just earlier today and said that they do frequently use this service to advertise the jobs that we are trying to fill. It's just that they're taken down after 30 days, so I'm glad it's being used. And I hope that it's continued to be used consistently as, you know, obviously this is a place where people qualified for municipal work are looking around and we have a great and urgent need. Thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Collins. Any further discussion on the motion of Councilor Collins seconded by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor?

[Unidentified]: Aye.

[Morell]: All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-552 offered by Councilor Tseng. These are resolved City Council asked the Office of Planning, Development and Sustainability if their plans for method to connect to the Somerville community bike path along the Green Line extension.

[Tseng]: Councilor say, thank you, President Merle, this is a question that a lot of residents in our community have been asking, especially with the opening of the Green Line extension coming upon us very soon. more choices in terms of how to get to work in Cambridge Somerville in Boston, or just to travel to our neighboring municipalities. Currently, there is a plan for the Somerville community bike path will open alongside the a green line extension to moon square station and a lot of residents have been wondering more specifically about how we might be able to as a city connected that the office of planning development and sustainability and engineering department have been so gracious to give me a pretty thorough response about their plans so far. On this specific point about working to extend the GLX community path, there are no plans so far and part of the problem is that the right-of-way in between adjacent private properties on either side of the railway looks significantly narrower in the Medford section than in the Somerville section, which doesn't mean it's impossible to do but just means it's quite difficult to do. However, our city is taking a look at connecting to this community path via on-street bike facilities, and they'll put this in the new citywide bike plan that's coming out soon, or when they're ready, and they're going to suggest placing these bike facilities along that path, with one example being around Medford Street and Dexter Street. Another possibility for our city connecting to the community path is via an off-street path between the Mystic River Greenways and the GLX community path extension. This would be more towards Assembly Square and then up by the Mystic. A feasibility study was actually conducted two years ago, and there's quite a lot of detail for how we would implement this if our city deemed it to be the best path forward. Now, generally, residents might also be interested in bike path planning and power cities going about it. While our city is space constrained in many places, our city's approach, and the approach of the planning department and the engineering department so far. is to identify key routes that have the capacity for infrastructure and then to make design recommendations from a short-term perspective, so tackling what we can achieve with minimal changes and minimal resources and a long-term perspective where we look at things that we can build during larger roadway reconstruction projects. The city is also prioritizing continuity between municipalities that's something we've heard in our climate plan meeting, and the comprehensive plan meeting as well. And they're meeting, making special note of on and off street connections to Somerville Arlington Malden, etc. And to make sure that we align our plans with their plans as well. and the city is currently in the midst of developing a new bike, a citywide bike plan. They will, when that starts, they'll launch a public outreach process with opportunities to get feedback and get involved. I assume at that point, the city council would love to relay feedback and to look at these changes as well.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further discussion? On the motion of Councilor Tseng, it's seconded by Vice President Bears, all those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. 22-553 offered by Councilor Tseng, be it so resolved that the subcommittee on rules and ordinances meet to identify definitions within the code of ordinances for the roles of code enforcement officers and tree warden and report back on what definition exists and what updates need to be made for the tree ordinance. Councilor Tseng.

[Tseng]: Thank you, President Morell. This comes from a meeting of a subcommittee that we are on, the sustainability subcommittee, where we were looking at the tree protection ordinance. And there were two sections, one section on defining code enforcement officer and one defining tree warden that were in the ordinance that we thought between between the council, between city staff, and between legal advice we thought would be best to sever, and to let people with more know-how on this issue decide what to do with it, since it was outside our scope. And so the recommendation was that we send this to rules and ordinances and let that committee look at these definitions and decide whether we need to update our city or code of ordinances with them, since there is no definition currently, whether we need that for the tree ordinance and what the best path forward is.

[Hurtubise]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. In order to

[Morell]: So the paper, so this is asking specifically about the definitions of two positions. So I think, well, there are definitions that appear in other code enforcement officer appears throughout our ordinances. I mean, we can stay in the committee and we can figure out the definition that we want to. It's just one of those weird things that we go into our code of ordinances, nowhere defined is a code enforcement officer.

[Tseng]: Right. And the advice was that we shouldn't put it under the tree ordinance section of the code of ordinances. That'd be better placed under. Sure.

[Morell]: Yeah. Do we want to refer to legal counsel instead of an actual subcommittee? Just legal counsel definition of these two.

[Bears]: Yeah. Let's do that.

[Morell]: Yeah. Great. for the chair of the other subcommittee so um so you want to refer to legal counsel for definition so on the motion of councillor saying as amended by councillor saying seconded by vices and affairs all those in favor all those opposed motion passes two two dash five five four oh good another url offered by councillor saying be it so resolved to the city administration reach out to residents to apply for federal student loan debt relief before December 31st, 2022 at https://studentaid.gov slash debt dash relief slash application. Federal Pell Grant recipients may be eligible for up to 20,000 in debt relief and other federal student loan borrowers may be eligible for up to 10,000 in debt relief. The application is available in both English and Spanish. Councilor Tseng.

[Tseng]: Thank you, President Morell. I think this item is, this resolution is pretty self-explanatory. This is a monumental change to policy in our country. To have people who have student loan debt be able to apply for this relief really truly does make a difference in a lot of people's lives. The form is super short. It takes at most five minutes to fill out and is a way in which we can help residents and families throughout what might be a more difficult economic time. I like everything that's along these lines. I think it's important for our city administration to reach out to as many residents as possible. Again, a lot bigger picture, we need to work on better ways to communicate with residents, but at the very least, I want as many people to know that you have before December 31st to apply for this and that you can apply in Spanish as well.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Any further discussion from the council on the motion? Councilor Tseng?

[Tseng]: One other note is that it is currently in the court system right now, but it doesn't change the fact that you can apply for it.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Tseng. Vice President Bears?

[Bears]: Even Amy Coney Barrett didn't shoot it down, so we might have a chance on this one.

[Morell]: On the motion of Councilor Tseng, seconded by Vice President Bears. All those in favor? All those opposed, motion passes. Going to public participation. Ms. Bartholomew, you're on public participation. You spoke earlier. Would you like to speak again? For public participation, do you want to speak again? I know you spoke earlier. You're on the agenda. You're good, okay. I know we do have residents from Harvard Street here who also wanted to speak about no parking signs. So whoever would like to speak, please come up and just name and address for the record.

[SPEAKER_03]: Hi. Yeah, so my name is Sean Leonard I'm a resident at 180 Harvard Street. I just wanted to get. I don't know if this is the right form to bring this up but I just wanted to get clarification on the changes on the parking on Harvard Street I just, I don't, I'm speaking for myself and a couple other residents I don't think I got any notification about a change or why chance being made so I wanted to. There is on the back end, but there seems to be, I've lived there for years, but there's always street parking on one side of it. And there's currently signage up that's saying that's a tow zone now and not parking. And then farther down the street, it's permit only. It's never been a permit only street. It's not really a problem for me, but to not have any parking there is, I'm just wondering why that is or if anyone knows.

[Knight]: I mean, I'm not sure the answer either but I don't know if you're going to say something I was going to say attention to what's going on here all things back and have been a disaster. In terms of, you know, the media is that they're putting up on Boynton Road. Issues of tickets on streets that not permit streets and tickets that are going on guys that say they're on one street and they're on another street so In terms of our PACHA program and the application thereof, I don't think we're doing anybody a service. As the program continues to mature and develop, I'm seeing a lot more signage and a lot more meters go up across the community, but I'm not really seeing The data driven methodology as to why they're putting these in. I know that being common street with the development that's going to occur at Titan Gas Station at some point, the development that's going to occur up at Nathan Electric in the expansion of the Green Line, that area has been under particular scrutiny based upon what's going to happen when the Green Line comes active. But in terms of who has the overall authority to implement and initiate those changes. It's really the traffic commission. I'm not here in the city, but I know the city did something, because the end of Albion Street wasn't a mentioned project. It was a simple project, but it was invented.

[Bears]: That's actually in Somerville.

[Knight]: But the house is invented, but the street right in front of it.

[Bears]: Yeah, it's nuts.

[Knight]: I looked at the map. Because it's a disaster what they've done over there.

[Bears]: At Winchester. Yeah, I looked at the map.

[Hurtubise]: It's actually in Somerville. It's a disaster. So yeah, that's the best I got for it.

[Morell]: Do we still need to establish?

[Bears]: I was just gonna add, it is the traffic commission. The city adopted a law in like 1958 that all parking, signage, traffic related decisions are made by the traffic commission. You can access them through Alva Erickson at the police department. You can also go to the director of traffic and transportation, Todd Blake, and that information is on the city website. My guess is it's probably has a lot to do with what counts and I just said it also maybe is this the section of Harvard Street where folks are parking on the sidewalk. Oh yeah, it may be about that it may be a new update, relative to that, not being a practice that they want to encourage again I don't know, I wasn't at the meeting their minutes you should also be able to get traffic commission minutes to tell you when the decision was made and what the discussion was about.

[Morell]: And I do have your email. I can reach out to some of those folks tomorrow to see if they're able to just give us a short answer as to the why. I have, I think, Ellen, someone emailed on behalf, Ellen emailed on behalf of all of you. So I can reach out to, I'll probably reach out to Director Blake and probably Director Hunt as well, who also is on that, just to see if we can get a short answer. I'm sure there's a very long answer too, but if we can get a short answer to you guys.

[SPEAKER_03]: That would make sense. Yeah, I was just, I was just curious. I was also worried it was just gonna, I mean, all those people are gonna put cars somewhere. So where are they gonna go? Good mess of the businesses that are on Main Street down there. Yeah, that's also great. Yeah, exactly. Fantastic. It's a whole nother thing. But yeah, thanks. If you have information on that or something you can send us, that would be helpful. Thank you.

[Morell]: Anyone else who would like to speak for public participation? Is there anyone on Zoom?

[Hurtubise]: I'm sick of someone.

[SPEAKER_08]: OK. Similar to him, kind of on the same topic. I guess it was to my knowledge that this was done, kickstarted, I guess, by one person in the condos across the street. Shocking. Somehow, I guess she pulled this whole thing together. I don't know what she said or how she did it, but.

[Morell]: The council is familiar.

[SPEAKER_08]: What's that? Oh, they didn't say.

[Hurtubise]: Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

[SPEAKER_08]: Yeah, and that's okay. I mean, we're gonna have to.

[Bears]: Generally, just to that point, certainly individuals can kind of start or push for changes to be made. Something that is traffic commission policy is that if you could get 50% of the people on your street or on a certain section of your street to sign a petition, they will generally reconsider or at least look at reconsidering or look at making a change, a positive, you know, reconsidering a change they've made or looking at a different change. Again, I did bring up the sidewalk thing because it may be a safety thing and it may have been past practice to just let it go. And that may have changed, but traffic commission generally, and you'll want to talk to director Blake when Nicole connects, President Morell connects you with them. There is a petitioning process for the traffic commission where they generally will look at things like that.

[SPEAKER_08]: Maybe we can get like a resident permit only for that whole street.

[Bears]: That is actually how you get permit parking right now in the city. 50% of the residents on your street will sign a petition. I had to re-register my car, so yeah.

[Morell]: And if I could just get your name again for the record.

[SPEAKER_08]: Oh yeah, Peyton Mitchell, 168 Harwood Street. Aiden? Is that your first name?

[Hurtubise]: Peyton like Manning Manning and the last thing Mitchell Mitchell got it like Mitchell as Mitchell.

[Morell]: Thank you.

[Hurtubise]: Thanks.

[Morell]: Appreciate it. Anyone else would like to speak for public participation?

[SPEAKER_18]: I saw that question. Ellen Lonsdale 180 Harvard Street. So when they do they have to give any kind of public comment period? Or can they just make these decisions?

[Hurtubise]: no kind of oversight i do yeah okay gotcha

[Morell]: I figured as much, but I think they generally try not to make such impactful decisions in one meeting, but statutorily, I don't know.

[Bears]: I don't think there's a statutory requirement for notification.

[Scarpelli]: Obviously it's affected people, so I think going to that body, the traffic commission, and then you obviously have support that, like Councilor Behr said, is now This, unfortunately, it was done right, embedded, everybody has a voice now, it has to be turned and divide the community and say, hey, now it's us versus you because we weren't notified. So, unfortunately, and I apologize for that, but that's terrible. Sorry.

[Morell]: I appreciate your time. Thank you, yeah, I'll follow up on that email tomorrow morning. Anyone else for public participation?

[SPEAKER_08]: do this again. Say the, Oh no, you're good. Are they going to start what is there like a timeline of when they're gonna start enforcing this since we did work. Yeah, last week. They haven't yet. So broken on all it.

[Morell]: From what we've been told, enforcement is unpredictable, so plan on it being unpredictable.

[SPEAKER_08]: And especially the Yale Street lot in the winter, is that also very strict enforcement? Because last winter it wasn't.

[Bears]: There are specific rules for parking in public lots during snow emergencies. Outside of a snow emergency, I would say that follow the rules. I can't.

[Morell]: I can add that to my questions.

[Bears]: I'm just trying to park. No, I hear you.

[Morell]: I'll add that to my questions to Director Blake just so, while we have him.

[Bears]: Best advice is to follow the rules as posted. And that is a fair point.

[Morell]: Anyone else public participation either on zoom or in person. Seeing none, I do believe we have hands in the favor of the clerk, which is on me to read so moving on to hands in favor of the clerk under suspension 22-566 offered by Councilor Scarpelli be it so resolved the city council discuss the lack of communication dealing with school department issues and concerns Councilor Scarpelli.

[Scarpelli]: Thank you, Madam President. And again, I do not want to at any time disrespect our colleagues on the school committee side. But I think everybody has watched the news about the horrific attack on that young lady, a sophomore at Medford High School and the phone calls I've been getting and the conversation I've been having with Medford High School students. and not having the knowledge of what happened or how we can direct our young people for support. Uh, we have kids that we have students that have come to me and said that they're afraid. I mean, they're legitimately afraid. We're talking about going to school. I've I've talked to teachers that have involved in fights that are horrified and frightened to go to work. And when you see that, it's just another slap in the face and disrespect of this community that you have. You have a marine recruiter breaking up a fight. And, uh, which leads to, um, questions we had with the superintendent about security. They said they had security from now what I was told, you know, that the questions that is not being communicated correctly, and that's where the communication comes in place. I think that they're more like door monitors and, um, and something has to be done. I mean, this is you know, not only because I have a child here, but I talked to, I was at a recent school event that when I tell you former students and athletes that I've coached have come up to me and said, coach, we're scared, it's scary up here. And Smithford High School, that's a place to go where you're gonna be safe. And not having the understanding of what I could tell them, because in normal cases, situations when there is an issue this big. We're informed that anybody here was anybody else, maybe I missed it.

[Knight]: Did anybody, I actually I'm still waiting for the mayor to go yell at her superintendent like she yelled at Mr. Belson. because this issue right here is scary, all right? This isn't someone dropped something out of their pocket, it was found in the little theater by a custodian. This is a student got assaulted, stalked, assaulted, tracked down, five adults, six adults, seven adults, nine adults, 10 adults watching, no one intervening. I'm waiting for the mayor to go and treat her superintendent like she treated Roy Belson.

[Scarpelli]: Well, the situation is, and the resolution is, you know, How do we find a ground with this communication that when we get the phone calls from parents and students that are asking for assistance and help, where do we direct them to? Because they don't feel comfortable in what they're seeing and what paths that have happened so far and who they can reach out to. They feel alone and they're scared. And if anybody, if you didn't see the video, I wish you not look at the video because it's gonna change your life. It's disgusting. Thank you.

[Caraviello]: Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you, Councilor Scott. You know, it's great. When something like this horrific thing happens, there's 14 elected officials in the city of Medford. How hard is it to notify 14 people of something of this happening. So when we get the phone call, we know how to answer people. We know how to answer. I had to find out from two days later for people on the street asking me about, I'm saying, I don't even know what you're talking about. It's a shame that I say something of this nature happens. Call us, call us, make a phone call. There's not that many people that you have to call. Meanwhile, we get robocalls, we get all this other crap. For everything else in the city, if something of this importance happens, none of us know about it. And there isn't anything worse than being an elected official and a constituent comes up to you and asks you about it, and you're saying, geez, I have no idea what you're talking about. I mean, talk about looking like a fool in front of people. That's probably the worst feeling I get from people when they ask me questions and I have no idea what they're even talking about. It's really insane. There's only 14 elected officials in the state, no reason why people that this group and the school committee couldn't have notified us of this happening. So we're informed when people ask us questions. How would you like getting calls from out of state, friends, people you went to high school with, who don't live in the state anymore, that saw this on the national news? Councilor Knight is right 100%. Where's the mayor screaming at the superintendent the same way when the gun clip happened?

[Unidentified]: Nobody got hurt with a gun clip.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Caraviello. Any further discussion from the council?

[Knight]: I just, I mean, I'm thinking back to this whole situation where the mayor's at Fox 25 down in front of the school department over here. She called them herself talking about the gun clip, calls for a press conference. The school committee comes, they put Roy Belson on the stage in the little theater. And he sat there for four hours. And after 40 years of service to the city guard, his head beat it for hours and hours and hours. And the mayor led the charge. The mayor led the charge. She was like a raven lunatic. getting up out of the crowd, running up to the microphone, yelling and screaming at people. It was nuts. And now to have something like this happen under her watch and to not hold her own people accountable to the same level and same accord is shameful, in my opinion.

[Scarpelli]: If I can, Madam President, just I think more importantly, I know that the intent is really to have the understanding that the students are so custom to situations that have happened in the past, whether it was the issue last year. And now what happened with this situation. I think they're a little bit lost. So I'd like to know what the what this school administration is going to do to make the rest of the school feel like they're safe. You know, I know that I think that the communication to us, the most important pieces is from the school department to say, you know, this is what's going on, but asking, having an avenue that we can have the kids talk to the guidance councils or, you know, their, you know, teachers they feel comfortable with, because whenever they're, especially when I was on the school committee, the understanding that something big happened, the first thing we did is rallied around the students that were impacted. And this, for instance, is all of our students. And I asked if there was assemblies, how were the students notified? How are they feeling safe? They haven't been addressed. from what I've been told. Maybe it's different, but from what I've been told, they haven't been addressed. So I think we need to stop listening to our children, listen to our students, because they were frightened. So again, I don't wanna be a dead horse, but thank you.

[Morell]: Thank you, Councilor Falco. We have reached the end of our agenda. It's under suspension. because we took it up under suspension. Well, I mean, what's the motion? So on the motion of Councilor Scarpelli to receive in place on file. Second by Vice Mayor Bears. All those in favor? Opposed? Motion passes. On the motion of Councilor Knight to adjourn. Second by Councilor Tseng. All those in favor? All those opposed? Motion passes. Meeting is adjourned.

Morell total time: 32.92 minutes total words: 5471	Knight total time: 14.09 minutes total words: 2666	Bears total time: 15.81 minutes total words: 2956	Scarpelli total time: 23.57 minutes total words: 3733
Collins total time: 8.45 minutes total words: 1494	Caraviello total time: 10.64 minutes total words: 1786	Tseng total time: 11.0 minutes total words: 1689	O'Keefe total time: 0.51 minutes total words: 115